Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Domains

Domain: osirix-viewer.com

Stories and comments across the archive that link to osirix-viewer.com.

Comments · 7

  1. Re:Who has the market share? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0 · on Windows XP Falls Below 25% Market Share, Windows 8 Drops Slightly

    At scientific conferences I've seen a lot of people with Apple laptops for the reason you outline. However for scientific computing Apple hardware is basically a non-starter. Apple used to have some servers but apparently didn't sell well enough. At any rate Apple does not have any hardware that can be put into racks anymore. So when you need 1000 CPUs or more Apple is not a contender. There are a few niches where Apple is doing well, for instance medical imaging thanks to Osirix, which is Apple only. Also there exist a lot of very well made non-Apple hardware. It's just not cheap.

  2. Re:Patents etc. by Muad'Dave · · Score: 1 · on New Algorithm Could Substantially Speed Up MRI Scans

    As commented elsewhere, dicom is an open format. I used Osirix on my Mac to view the MRI of my wife's spine.

  3. Re:Can you get Gnome to replace X? by Smurf · · Score: 1 · on Proposal For Gnome To Become Linux-Only

    Apple is a big fat loser when it comes to remote display. [...] I can see how people might criticize the features of remote performance of X when compared to Win7 RDP but this stuff is a disaster in MacOS.

    Mmmm.... care to elaborate? I use RDC, X, and MacOS X's screen sharing on a daily basis (CT related stuff on Windows systems, MRI on Linux, and cheap kick-ass visualizers on Mac). Even though the Mac screen sharing is clearly more sluggish than the other two (or said in another way, it's slightly sluggish) I find it perfectly usable and extremely useful.

    And things always display perfectly, unlike RDC where regardless of the client some windows come up with the colors screwed up one third of the time forcing me to re-launch the program and other windows always display pure gibberish. Other than that, RDC is my favorite Microsoft application, but I still love both X and the Mac's Screen Sharing.

  4. Re:What open source health technology systems? by drsmithy · · Score: 1 · on Open Source Study Included In US Stimulus Package

    Some of our Radiologists use (and love) Osirix.

  5. Props to Osirix... by jkrise · · Score: 4, Interesting · on Open Source Study Included In US Stimulus Package

    An excellent PACS viewer solution; unfortunately runs only on Macs; but is amazing. Developed by a set of dcotors who got fed up with Direct X and the quicksand that is WDDM and DRM nonsense.

    Fully Open Source.

    http://www.osirix-viewer.com/

  6. Re:stupid question but..... by 0100010001010011 · · Score: 1 · on Obama Proposes Digital Health Records

    There is a standard format for images: DICOM. When I had my last ACL done I was given a CD with all these .dcm images. On my Mac there is a free (as in beer) viewer OsirX. Searching SourceForge there are other free viewers out there.

  7. Re:Fill out a Form? by Sentry21 · · Score: 1 · on Ten Strangely Cruel Science Experiments

    The health care equipment market is full of proprietary lockins that prevent health care providers from interoperating equipment and software. For example, certain MRI results can only be viewed via expensive proprietary software.


    Radiology equipment built any time recently will conform to the DICOM standard for storing, transmitting, receiving, and printing radiological imaging data (Wikipedia reference). On the radiologist's end, you can use software that is sold by the various large-scale healthcare systems providers, such as McKesson, GE, Philips, and so on, you can use a third-party viewer such as eFilm, or you can even grab a copy of the open-source OsiriX viewer for your Mac. All of these, including the free option, will interoperate with any of the others. If you doubt the industry's demand for interoperability, check out the IHE Connectathon, and note that all the big names, and the little ones, do their best to attend, find, and fix bugs like crazy. Successfully passing all the tests is quite a badge of honor among the programmers that attend.

    Some implementations may have bugs, quirks, or might screw something up, or they might only implement part of the standard, but when hasn't that been the case? Still, to say that interoperability doesn't exist, or even to say that it's not a high-priority design goal (and huge selling feature) indicates a dramatic lack of understanding about the industry and the companies involved. When all you need to do diagnostic imaging from an MRI is a Macbook and an ethernet cable, you can't honestly say that proprietary software or lockin is an issue.