Sure, open-source is a good thing. I strongly support OSS and as much as possible run systems at work using FreeBSD, Linux, etc. I've worked in medical practic

Sure, open-source is a good thing. I strongly support OSS and as much as possible run systems at work using FreeBSD, Linux, etc. I've worked in medical practice (and research) for a long time. Considering the vital importance of transactional transparency in carrying out the mission of these fields, as useful as open source is generally, I think the impact in medicine is even greater. But open source is only part of it, open platform is at least as important. I guess I'm not a very trusting soul. Frankly, I don't believe Apple is going to do anything primarily for our good. Rather to my senses the announcement has the flavor of an attempt to gain a toehold or increase market share in the big money research domain. If Apple (or other player) truly wants to generously donate to the public cause, that's wonderful. Then why not support efforts to develop open source, cross-platform apps, assuring all medical research can benefit? Not directed only or in particular at Apple, it's an issue I've raised whenever I have the chance: open source/platform agnostic development can save money and produce more reliable and secure systems.