What I think TFA is trying to express is NOT limited to ICD. That's a "low hanging fruit" which doesn't include the other coding enhancements required for EHR conformance. ICD is a way of expressing complains and maladies via a coded system so that everyone can understand it if it appears as a part of your public medical record. In other words, everyone has to say code xxxx1 = "breast cancer" so that when you show up in an ER 6 months after a diagnosis, they can tell what's going on. The elephant in the room isn't the malady descriptions, its the coding of procedural treatment (SNOMED-CT), laboratory procedures (LOINC), RX allocations (RXNORM and the NDF), and how its billed back to insurance (CPT), and more importantly how they interconnect.
We make EMR systems targeted towards radiology, and I can say with conviction that the whole CCHIT process has thrown GE and Siemens (and their ilk) into absolute chaos. They are, today, faced with fixing their old systems to be modern/conformant, and then trying to keep them updated going forward on a MUCH more aggressive maintenance schedule than they are used to. Oh, and every month that they can't do it, their customers will see as lost revenue from govt. reimbursements. Unenviable is an understatement, it will be a financial disaster for GE if they start losing people en masse to Epic and other new players.
As someone who makes "meaningful use" based systems, I can tell you its no joke to implement. CCHIT certification alone encompasses 25k pages of standards that have to be followed to the letter and proven via testing for qualification.
In a way, it's a strange twist that the big players (GE/Siemens/Merge) lobbied to make the qualifications as hard as they currently are in order to limit new competition, and are now sinking into the pit they themselves dug. Sick, but hilarious simultaneously.
Every computer made has more than a TB, including the new windows tablets (which we happen to have prototypes of, since we are a development shop). And I deal with big data every day (medical images, among other things). So just to recap, I'm sitting in front of a windows tablet with a 1.5TB drive in it right now.
Oh, and it has audio in, not to mention my mixer has wireless support (granted, most people would plug their tables into a sound card, but that's not the point here).
So, again, Apple is selling last year as new, except they get to control its use?
Again, how about no.
The summary is very light on details, so I can understand you misinterpreting this. iCloud isn't the only place your data is stored, it is actually stored on the iPad, iPhone, iPod, and Mac. It is just that all files are seamlessly shared between your different devices. Buy a song on iTunes on your Mac, and it is automatically available from your iPad. Take a picture on your iPhone, and it is automatically in iPhoto on your Mac.
You are right to an extent - this is nothing new from a tech perspective. What is new though is how Apple is presenting this to the user. They don't tell the user "map this drive to this location...", it all just happens automatically. That is this trick of the iCloud - the user doesn't explicitly interact with iCloud. Rather, files are just always available. The user doesn't have to understand what the cloud is or how to access it. The cloud is the means, not the end.
Ok yeah that's cool and all, but it already exists. Last night, I was watching Top Gear on a phone, then I went inside and picked right back up in the middle of the episode on a PS3 using Netflix. It's not really The Cloud(TM), but it might as well be and works just as well. And it's hardly a revolution worth crowing about. It's kind of neat but they ain't the first to get there. Not even hardly.
What I really want is Silverlight, which won't ever happen because of strictly political reasons between MS and Apple. It's stupid, these companies get into pissing matches with each other and their customers suffer from it.
Software production is assumed to be a line function, but it is run like a staff function. -- Paul Licker