No Gimmicks. Medical requirements..

Discussion in 'OS X Mountain Lion (10.8)' started by tlinford, Feb 20, 2012.

  1. macrumors regular

    tlinford

    Joined:
    May 4, 2009
    Location:
    Edinburgh
    #1
    Contant updates, leaves some people behind.

    I am a diabetic person, who uses various electronic devices to help manage my diabetes. The most significant device I use is my Medtronic Insulin Pump.

    This in a little computer, which is attached to me 24/7, I have programmed it to deliver my Insulin.. One of the things I can do with this device, is to wirelessly upload data from the pump to my computer. This data is fed into a cloud based system called CareLink, which is strictly controlled. Every-time there is an major release of an OS we have to wait months for people like Medtronic to get there system approved for medical use. I(we) am (are) still waiting for this to happen with OSX Lion. I waited 3 months before upgrading to Lion for this, but game up because my MobileMe syncing would't work across Snow Leopard and iOS5.

    It has been hard enough to get medical companies to develop software for Mac. In the past it has been unheard of, only in the last couple of years have we seen some support. I love Lion, I just hate having to fire-up XP..

    I know that Apple release developer versions of software, but for people who are not desperate to spend extra money on Mac support, Apple could be more helpful here....

    I like the whistles and bells of Apple OSX Lion, I love using AirPlay from my iOS devices to my TV, and also to a more limited extent my Mac.. I think the OSX AirPlay mirroring, is going to be great! As will 'Messages'....

    But there is a downside to constant releases... some people needing serious software get left in the cold and I end up having to use the Virtual XP, just to access the CareLink Portal, it's the only thing I use XP for these days!
     
  2. macrumors Pentium

    KnightWRX

    Joined:
    Jan 28, 2009
    Location:
    Quebec, Canada
    #2
    Ok... what do you propose Apple do to help if Carelink won't stay up to date with their software ?
     
  3. macrumors Core

    miles01110

    Joined:
    Jul 24, 2006
    Location:
    The Ivory Tower (I'm not coming down)
    #3
    What is the point of this post? Yes, relying on third parties to deliver a service when there's a software update takes time. Duh?
     
  4. macrumors 68020

    Joined:
    May 1, 2009
    #4
    The point is Apple should slow down release cycles because otherwise some people with some very particular medical conditions won't be able to keep updated.
     
  5. macrumors member

    Joined:
    Dec 3, 2011
    #5
    I don't think Apple intended their machines to be medical equipment. No offence intended.
     
  6. macrumors Pentium

    KnightWRX

    Joined:
    Jan 28, 2009
    Location:
    Quebec, Canada
    #6
    Release cycles rarely have anything to do with software not working. Pretty much all my software that ran on Snow Leopard ran top notch on Lion without patches. As long as you stick to official APIs and frameworks, make sure to migrate away from stuff when it's marked "deprecated" instead of waiting for it to be removed and don't have deep requirements like kext's, you should be ok.

    Sounds to me like to OP's vendor doesn't follow these simple guidelines. Anyway, HP ships 2 releases of HP-UX per year and guess what, our SAP installation doesn't stop working because I upgrade the underlying servers.
     
  7. macrumors 68020

    Joined:
    May 1, 2009
    #7
    Why would I be offended? I guess my sarcasm didn't come through well in my post.
     
  8. pdjudd, Feb 21, 2012
    Last edited: Feb 21, 2012

    macrumors 601

    Joined:
    Jun 19, 2007
    Location:
    Plymouth, MN
    #8
    Not to mention software that inherently is subject to external situations like requiring external regulation that Apple has no part of.

    Apple slowing down development wouldn't do anything to help the OP out - Nothing Apple does would speed up the approval process out. What would help would be if the software maker would follow better guidelines, but that's the kind of thing that happens with specialty software - they don't tend to be developed for systems that get updated. If anything blame the developer or the approval process (not so much the approval process since it exists for a reason but they are probably the ones who are unrealistic about approval) but Apple cannot accommodate edge cases like the one the OP deals with.

    ETA: When you have requirements like the OP, upgrading to a new OS is not something you should be doing - his software isn't approved for Lion - given that SL was released back in '09 he needs to figure on at least a two year waiting period. But it needs to be pointed out that these are limits imposed on him by other entities. His case might be better suited to using XP on a VM - that's nobodies fault but the vendors and the approval entities. He is in a very unusual situation where upgrading is a process that isn't very accommodating.
     
  9. macrumors 6502a

    Joined:
    Sep 17, 2009
    #9
    OP: As someone else recommended, I would use XP in a VM, which would save you having to reboot.....It's a very handy way of doing things, kind of turns XP into an application that lets you run legacy stuff.

    I do get your concerns about more updates breaking things though and I personally don't like 1 year upgrade cycles.

    Best of luck getting it sorted out.
     
  10. macrumors 601

    Joined:
    Jun 19, 2007
    Location:
    Plymouth, MN
    #10
    As it has been pointed out - upgrading gets more complicated when you have to go through external processes. Apple has no more control over the approval process of third party software than you or I or the vendor does. They exist external to the process of upgrading.

    Of course for such a critical system like the one the OP has, I would put OS upgrades as low as possible - for him, compatibility and operation is going to have to be more important to him than having the latest OS. Such is the problem with mission critical things - having bugs due to an upgrade is not really an option. This is a situation where having a dedicated system that he can ensure works (like a VM) is the best option. He is in a boat where there aren't many options available to him. Unfortunatly there are choices being made for him that just aren't compatible with the way Apple wants to do things and that's not their problem.
     
  11. macrumors 6502

    Takuro

    Joined:
    Jun 15, 2009
    #11
    Do something proactive and voice your complaint to directly to CareLink, citing their slow turnaround time to support new versions of OS X. Otherwise, you always have the option of putting up with it and using a slightly-dated operating system for a few months until they roll out an update. I don't want to say "beggars can't be choosers" because it sounds harsh, but those are the options.
     
  12. macrumors regular

    Joined:
    Sep 1, 2008
    #12
    The question you should ask yourself is:

    Is the program for my insulin medication on my Mac more important

    OR

    Is the next version of OS X more important?

    That way you can decide, and in the meantime complain to Carelink about their lack of updates for their users. Simple


    EDIT: Or infact you could run the latest Mac OS X version and VM Snow Leopard or whatever version you need for the Carelink software
     
  13. macrumors 601

    cambookpro

    Joined:
    Feb 3, 2010
    Location:
    United Kingdom
    #13
    U guys. Srsly.

    I know you shouldn't read into voting too much, but why is this post on -6? It's obviously sarcastic?

    /No sarcasm.
    /Crap. Now that tag seems sarcastic.
    /SRSLY. No sarcasm.
     
  14. macrumors 601

    Joined:
    Jul 7, 2006
    #14
    I used to work at an engineer's office doing drafting and we had to use Windows 98 because the plotter we had and the total station we had wouldn't work on XP. Then vista came out and our printers and scanners wouldn't work on it. Then 7 came out and our software, printers, scanners, total station wouldn't work on it.

    So we had to continue to use Windows 98. It worked fine, and continues to work 14 years later. You don't have to upgrade. Upgrade when the things that you need all work with the new version. Sorry it's inconvenient for you, but the vast majority of people do not have problems like this. Innovation should not be stifled because of a very small minority of people who have devices made by unsupportive companies.
     
  15. macrumors 6502a

    Joined:
    Sep 17, 2009
    #15
    I sympathize with the OP because I'm in a similar position, albeit far less serious.

    I depend upon a plugin in my everyday, bread and butter 3D program which is broken in Lion. The developers of the plugin have no plans to update (it's about 5 years old and I think they've all moved on in their professional lives) so basically I'm stuck in between OS's. I know my life or health don't depend on it but nevertheless, something I need for earning a living is (in my eyes) needlessly broken by Apple deciding not to support certain frameworks and architecture anymore. The same plugin works flawlessly in Windows 7, merely because Microsoft have a better (and proven) track record for legacy support.

    It seems somewhat trite to just say "It's not Apple's problem" when loyal customers continue to chose Apple products. I get that Apple want to move on but we're talking about a company that has 100 billion dollars in the bank, because people like me and the OP buy their products....It would be nice if they looked after us like they used to by providing a mechanism to still run legacy applications.

    That said, the OP does have the option of running his software in a Windows XP VM which is what I would do.
     
  16. macrumors 65816

    Partron22

    Joined:
    Apr 13, 2011
    Location:
    Yes
    #16
    Halcyon days that never were

    Macs have been a battle ever since Jobs put deeply recessed torx fasteners on the first 128K Macintosh.

    Every Mac Gets Left Behind, sometimes painfully:
     
  17. macrumors 601

    Joined:
    Jun 19, 2007
    Location:
    Plymouth, MN
    #17
    Gmof,
    Unfortunately, what you describe is the exact reason why you never base your well-being and total means of support on one program or one system of doing things - especially when development on said system has ended. It’s just asking for trouble doing that. Always have options. What happens when support in Windows ends? Someday Microsoft could depreciate support for that API or framework - it can happen. That’s just the reality of things - they never last forever.

    ETA: If you want long term support, Apple isn’t your best choice (and pretty much never has been). MS operates it’s core business model on extreme long term support - but even then they sunset things and discontinue support.
     
  18. macrumors 6502

    Takuro

    Joined:
    Jun 15, 2009
    #18
    The issue here is that a company's main goal is to make profit. Microsoft makes profit mainly through software sales, so they're more than happy to support legacy machines if it gives them a large install base. Apple's revenue is derived mostly from hardware, and iOS hardware in particular such as iPads and iPhones, so they have no issue dropping support for products > 5 years old to keep up a rapid pace of technology.
     
  19. macrumors Pentium

    KnightWRX

    Joined:
    Jan 28, 2009
    Location:
    Quebec, Canada
    #19
    Some APIs and Frameworks have been in OS X since the days of 10.0. Vendors that chose transition technologies (Rosetta, Carbon) were just numbering the days their apps would work. Apple has never been more clear that Cocoa was the way forward. They have deprecated a few methods here or there in Cocoa, but again, that's plenty of time to update your code to newer methods.

    Some software developers are just bad. They choose the easy path to get a product out knowing full well that what they are using is going to end up causing problems down the road. Then down the road, they make sure to disappear and leave users stranded without source code or support.

    That's one of the pitfalls of proprietary software.
     
  20. macrumors 6502a

    Joined:
    Sep 17, 2009
    #20
    I must beg to differ to a degree, based on my experience with my Macs.

    My first Macbook pro was a 2006 model running Tiger. At the time I needed a new machine and was enticed by the fact that I could also run windows plus I liked the hardware (it was billed as the best PC laptop). OS X grew on me and I came to use it as my primary OS, booting less and less into Windows. Upgrades from Tiger > Leopard > Snow Leopard were painless and I had no issues with software compatibility. Then Lion came along and well, I've already described what happened next.

    So from my perspective, Apple did look after me for 5 years. In my view, removing support for Carbon and Rosetta reduces the functionality of OS X and I don't think it's too much to ask a company with 100 billion dollars in its pockets to cut its users some slack.

    ----------

    As I pointed out, I can use the same software and plugin in Windows without issue so I do have options. It's an inconvenience that I have to reboot but I'm currently avoiding that by remaining in Snow Leopard.....At least this way I can stay in the OS X environment which I prefer. Having said that, Windows 7 is actually pretty good for 3D these days and depending on what happens with Windows 8, I may end up switching back merely to avoid the hassle of needing to work in two different OS's.

    As for the suggestion that you should never depend on one program or system of doing things....I'm not sure about the wisdom of learning a new application "Just in case" support for the current one I use dies off either...I'm more of a "Cross that bridge when I come to it" kind of guy.
     
  21. macrumors 68000

    Confuzzzed

    Joined:
    Aug 7, 2011
    Location:
    Liverpool, UK
    #21
    Out with old, in with the new. That's what drives innovation and that's how Apple work. That and keeping their systems and OSs unclattered. Hence why they are so much more innovative than their competition.

    That been said, I do have some sympathy with the OP but there are work-arounds.
     
  22. macrumors 6502a

    Joined:
    Sep 17, 2009
    #22
    In my view, Snow Leopard isn't cluttered and is innovative.

    But if we're talking clutter....I'm not so sure I want iMessages popping up on my screen whilst I'm working really. But hey, that's not a problem in Mountain Lion because I won't be able to do any work :)
     
  23. macrumors 601

    Joined:
    Jun 19, 2007
    Location:
    Plymouth, MN
    #23
    That's good. I know that you can use Windows.

    My point was that you shouldn't have to learn a new system now, it was "you shouldn't put all your eggs in basket that might not last forever". In other words, you need to look at your options and make sure you have them. Someday that program is going to stop working in some fashion. Apple and MS are going to move on. Right now you have the option of using Windows, but that option might not always work - what happens when MS changes things and the program breaks?
     
  24. macrumors 6502a

    Joined:
    Sep 17, 2009
    #24
    Sorry, I'm confused. How many options are you suggesting I should ensure I have, and how can I determine which of those will last longer than the current solution I'm using....therefore being worth the investment of my time and money?
     
  25. macrumors 604

    chrono1081

    Joined:
    Jan 26, 2008
    Location:
    Isla Nublar
    #25
    No it didn't, you forgot to use this face :rolleyes:

    :p
     

Share This Page