Please create an account to participate in the Slashdot moderation system


Forgot your password?
Medicine Transportation Apple

Apple Rumored To Be Exploring Medical Devices, Electric Cars To Reignite Growth 255

An anonymous reader writes "The Apple rumor mill is alive and well. This time around the tech giant is rumored to be looking into exploring medical sensor technology related to predicting heart attacks, and might even buy Tesla. 'Taken together, Apple's potential forays into automobiles and medical devices, two industries worlds away from consumer electronics, underscore the company's deep desire to move away from iPhones and iPads and take big risks. "Apple must increasingly rely on new products to reignite growth beyond the vision" of late founder Steve Jobs, said Bill Kreher, an analyst with Edward Jones Investments in St. Louis. "They need the next big thing."'"
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Apple Rumored To Be Exploring Medical Devices, Electric Cars To Reignite Growth

Comments Filter:
  • 17 Macbook Pro (Score:3, Interesting)

    by Tz Terri ( 2842239 ) on Monday February 17, 2014 @12:27PM (#46267515)
    I would be happy if Apple just started selling a 17" Macbook Pro again. Would be even happier if they started selling screens with matt displays again.
  • by CanHasDIY ( 1672858 ) on Monday February 17, 2014 @01:24PM (#46268129) Homepage Journal

    Keeping the cost of it high seems to be.

    That is a matter of incompetence and bad policy.

    Bad policy I can't disagree with (since good policy would probably fix a lot of these issues), but I've always been a believer in the concept that you should never attribute to incompetence that which can be explained by greed and avarice.

  • by Herder Of Code ( 2989779 ) on Monday February 17, 2014 @01:51PM (#46268487)
    I feel like a broken record but its an US thing. In Canada they just fix you up no matter what you have, they never cheap on the treatment because there's no bullshit like a max number of hearth surgeries of type X a year per hospital. If the hospital has to run a deficit to treat everyone they just will. Seriously, even for medicines we have free gov coverage and if you're employed, the employer has to provide a plan with no limit. The best part? Our economy STILL hasn't collapsed or is not in danger because of that. I never IN MY LIFE had to worry about being sick and not being able to get treatment. The only worry you have when you have to see a doc is: "Damn I'm going to have to wait 3-4 hours in a waiting room to see a doc, am I sick enough to want to wait that long.".
  • by cduffy ( 652 ) <> on Monday February 17, 2014 @06:08PM (#46270889)

    Every hospital in the United States is required to provide life saving treatment, regardless of whether you have insurance or not. That hasn't changed and it's not the issue here.

    What does the requirement to provide life-saving treatment have to do with anything? It helps people who are so broke that they have no assets, but it doesn't help anyone else.

    You have a heart attack, you get treated at a hospital which is required to do so; you're insured but not adequately, and you get a bill for $50,000 more than your insurance covers. Welcome to medical bankruptcy.

    Now, how exactly are you supposed to shop around, rather than just taking the first-available treatment? Sure, they're required to provide that treatment whether or not you can pay -- but if you can pay, they're going to do everything in their power to be sure that you will.

    In my wife's case, it wasn't a heart attack, but brain surgery -- and while she was in the hospital, her employer went out of business. Her insurance policy disappeared with them, and she was personally on the hook for follow-up care, wiping out years of savings.

"Conversion, fastidious Goddess, loves blood better than brick, and feasts most subtly on the human will." -- Virginia Woolf, "Mrs. Dalloway"