Archive for the ‘Data Storage’ Category
So, is it going to happen? Will we see a great change in the way medical records are handled now? Will various electronic medical systems be able to finally speak a common language?
These questions continue to be unanswered and yet a standard has to be developed and followed. Certainly the data can be stored and transmitted easily but the compatibility stops there. For one, the PACS (Picture Archiving Communication System) that many hospitals and clinics use are unique and have different Meta data formats. This makes it very difficult and expensive to adapt to a standard.
Secondly, the small doctor offices and clinics may not have the resources to purchase and manage a client side data capture system. If they can even figure out a common standard. It would seem like common sense to have a method of sharing information electronically between doctor and hospital but the development of the American health care system provided no 'electronic highway', no 'connecting the dots'. Just blobs of clay tossed onto the map. The gains in efficiency and cost management within the health care system can only happen if a common standard is accepted and soon. Throwing lots of money at the issue is not going to solve anything until this happens.
Comments Off
ISPs have been providing what is now called 'cloud computing' for years. AOL, CompuServe, Prodigy even the BBS were clouds in their own right. The idea that somehow the 'dumb terminal' is a new concept
is a frightening thought. The first mainframe computers used terminals and even today mainframes use terminals.
There has always been two camps on owning the software or 'renting' the software. This also reflects on the equipment one uses too. A cheap throwaway terminal (perhaps a netbook is a good example of this) compared to a full powered system that can run applications independent of the Internet or network. The 'sell' is the classic razor blade sales model. The person is given the razor holder and the cost of the razor blades is inflated to maximize profit. Data is held hostage by design or poor design depending on ones point of view. We have gone from 'ASP', for application service provider, to SaaS, or software as a service, to the newest coined phrase, 'cloud computing'. One can only hope they rename SaaS to something more appropriate like 'I hope the Internet keeps working computing' or 'the hare vs. the turtle computing'. Without the Internet connection the 'dumb book' is just that 'dumb'
I'm certainly aware of the marketing hype of how SaaS brought on a new age with web based applications. Really? Where is Al Gore when you need him to confirm his inventing the Internet. Web based applications have been around a lot longer then SaaS or ASP.
Free applications with advertising. It's no accident Google's earnings are 97% from advertising. Renting the software does not always require paying for it. It's a new spin on giving an application away for visiting my site or telling my friends about it. I'm not trying to sell you anything. Just free services that happen to have a lot of advertising. It is honestly an advertising distribution method and not for the greater good of mankind.
I certainly think that SaaS has it's place as well as 'cloud computing' in that it does provide massive computing power for solving very complex equations. However to try and sell it as a complete business solution when it can only operate with a Internet connection (and high speed at that) is just looking for trouble.
http://www.flickr.com/photos/wili/ / CC BY 2.0
No Comments »
As computers were a revolution in themselves, data storage and analysis will be the next revolution. I'm referencing Google's great book scanning project. It's mind boggling to consider the information that will be available (by reference) and then the implications to researching human written thought. The vision of the old great library of Alexandria that once contained all the ancient written knowledge. The somewhat mysterious end to the collection by first Julius Caesar and later by successions of burnings. Not everyone appreciated great learning it appears or highly careless in the case of Caesar.
This time around knowledge is being stored in the form of digital bytes instead of papyrus and the intent of some search engines is to make it all available via search on the Internet. This is not the current state of affairs with the Internet by far. There are millions of web sites with varying states of authority (trustworthiness determined by algorithms) giving the searcher some rough indication of source but the system continues to be exploited by a certain bred of advertisers to drive traffic to their lairs.
I was reading "Why We Buy" by Paco Underhill and Paco mentioned that one of drawbacks of the Internet is it has no organization to it. He skipped the major influence that search engines and directories have been trying to achieve. What's more he really skipped over the point of libraries in the first place, or closer to home for him: the brick and mortar store. We seek information and organization. Information does not exist in itself as a pure force. We seek information. Be it at a store, print or on the Internet. The game changer for the Internet is the concept of search. You can search for answers (or more questions then answers).
So this is where data storage is taking us. In order to realize the the full potential of search everything needs to be digitized and stored. Data centers are the new Alexandrian libraries spread across the United States, Europe and Asia. Companies and individuals store their data on-line or 'in the clouds'. Storage needs increase and data storage adds another terabyte or petabyte to the equation.
No Comments »
[caption id="attachment_201" align="alignright" width="180" caption="Healthcare"][/caption]
With all the excitement about the health care reform and climbing costs of the entire health care system it's amazing to consider that much of the health system still uses paper to administer patients records. The task is so monumental that it's difficult to see how an entire industry can be reformed so soon. Current medical data systems are very much proprietary and do not share well with others. In order for the data conversion to take place it needs to be simplified for the health care professionals.
This may appear simple but the requirements of a software package that is
secure
reliable
Can exchange data with other remote systems using high-level encryption
modular: so various software interfaces can be developed with medical digital equipment and analog.
Fast
modular data storage
Simplicity
Can be easily deployed in medical offices.
Software aside the data storage requirements would really need to be mapped out on a local health care provider level and a On-line database for medical records. Essentially the local doctors records are uploaded every so often to a national database (or regional). Records would need to be scanned in or manually entered into a database in order to keep local copies current and the larger backup database that provides coverage to all subscribing agencies. This would be a non-profit type operation.
There are some medical "PACS " currently available ( picture archiving and communication systems ) but there is no common image metadata platform. Meta data is the 'tag' that is often attached to a image that tells a wide range of information about the image. Data can also be added to the meta description to help identify the image changes. DICOM does not fully specify the 'metadata' tags stored with images to annotate and describe them, so integrators of medical imaging equipment have wide latitude to create DICOM-compliant files that differ in the meaning and representation of this metadata.
A feature common to most PACS is to read and store the metadata from all the images into a central database however the differences between integrators' DICOM implementations make this a difficult task. It really appears to be a daunting task to even get the industry to convert to a common metatag or be able to ignore non-compliant data.
With several studies showing only 22% of PACS in health care and many doctors completely in the dark about how to go about converting it's going to a be a task in line with building the pyramids.
Or building a superhighway for the health care of our nation.
http://medical.nema.org
Flickr image takomabibelot
No Comments »
With all the talk going around with new breakthroughs in optical technology including the news* from down under (Swinburne University of Technology in Australia) about 5D storage which is reported to hold 10 Terabytes, which is about 2,381 single layer DVD recordable or 280 dual sided DVD+R discs. It turns out it's those little nano-particles everyone has been talking about recently.
This should be a huge breakthrough that will get all the pesky tape back-up and hard drives out of the picture permanently?
Thus my point: Data storage size and cost per GB (or Terabyte) does not matter any more. We certainly know that the application for storage is significant (optical for archive, tape for capacity) but time and time again in both business storage and consumer based buying habits the 'value' is far beyond the 'storage capacity'. This is is the the dilemma facing Blu-ray right now. The perception of value placed on different formats was really blown away with the Apple iPod. Distribution (and convenience) over storage function. Really the game changer is the architecture of distribution and retention vs. per storage capability.
This makes sense as most of us do not walk around with data storage appliances strapped to our backs for maximum storage: we choose the most convenient package for our needs. The brilliance of the iPod is it took relatively small storage, a compression audio format that reduces the size 20x or more (MP3) , a network for distribution (iStore) and a Digital management console iTunes and created a sensation based around more, not better.
Now we hard core iPod fans would be offended by "not better" right? It effectively solves the users problem with discs or other types of storage like analog audio tape (we used to call them cassette tapes ;) ) in portability and transport. Although I listened to one person on the radio discussing the days of the "boom box" and the social buzz around one at the time. Now no one gathers around the box listening to the jams: it's all on-line.
With USB flash storing up to 64GB (or more) it certainly seems a winner in the portable world but what is USB flash? It's a connector (USB) which interfaces with a computer or other storage device. USB is not the technology that makes non-volatile or " flash" memory the game-changer (and the ability to erase in small sectors). It's all about the connection, the interface cable.
Consider the fact that Micro SD is a strong contender for replacing the optical disc. Consider how it interfaces with computers. It's focus is at cell phones, "smart phones" which don't easily and conveniently interface with USB without an adapter.
I wonder what can be done with nano-particles and flash non-volatile memory. That is use electricity to change the structure of the particles instead of laser light. How will that interface? will the 'drive' become obsolete?
Solid state memory does not spin and the media and "drive" are combined.
All it has to do is plug in to the device. Or a real Apple 'Nano' = nano-particles as in a couple of Terabytes of song and video storage.
*If you want to read the original news source for the new 5 dimensional storage Reuters
No Comments »
