Umm… I can’t seem to find the answer to this question but I went to install the program for my dexcom on my Mac and it doesn’t work… Is there a Mac compatible program for the dexcom? Please tell me there is! I have an endo appointment in 5 days…
I have a MAc and I have a dexcom and no it is not MAC friendly! I can use it on my husband’s MAC because he has the PC application.
They really need to update their program!!
I just don’t want to have to buy a PC just to download my Dex. I already have my Ping program on my Mac and it’s gonna be a pain in the ■■■ to have to do two programs on two different computers… sigh.
Hopefully this will be an upgrade item in the future. Fortunately I have a PC at the office, but we only have Macs at home. I haven’t tried the Dex program on Parallels so don’t know if that is an option.
As noted before, the DexCom program is designed for the PC (Windows OS). However the newer MAC operating systems have a PC emulation mode which should work. MAC owners fail to realize that MACs represent only 10% of the personal computer market. There are huge amounts of software and hardware applications that do not run on MACs. The relatively small number of MACs is one deterent and the closed box is the other. MACs often do not provide a large enough market to justify the development costs. I started with an Apple IIe in 1984. It was an open box with slots for other cards that extended the use of their machine. I had a CPM card in my IIe which ran DOS and DOS applications in addition to the Apple operating system. If Apple had followed that pattern they would be the dominant supplier today. The first MAC closed off the box (eliminate the slots) and prevented use of other operating systems. Apple wanted to control it all i.e. hardware, operating system and applications. Apple was the proverbial “dog in the manger.” IBM, on the other hand had an open box and published specifications for others to follow to supplement the utility of their personal computers. The descision to close the first MAC box doomed the wide spread use of MACs. Even today the descision to buy a MAC severely limits the range of applications to those with the widest of possible audiences. Niche hardware and software developers continue to provide for the PC only. So while I understand your predicament, I see the other side of the story. From 1984 until my retirement in 2005, I ran a computer consulting business providing computers and networks to small businesses. In addition to having a “closed box” Apple charged a hefty premium for the priveledge of owning a MAC. I am not a doctrinaire type. I weigh the issues objectively. If I were able to provide more for my customers with Apple equipment, I would have done so. In the industrial setting, costs and functions determine sales. The esthetic nuances of the MACs do not balance the reduced utility and the higher costs.
AaronM
DM3 works without problems in a virtual machine environment under MacOS X. I use it with VMware Fusion on a Windows XP VM, and it works great. I am sure there would be no problems on Parallels too.
Sure, I’d love to have a native MacOS X Dexcom software, but there is no such thing at this time. It’s no surprise that Dexcom made their software available on the operating system which has the largest install base.
Ciao, Luca
It’s not just DM3. The CoPilot software that works with the Abbot meters and that I use with my OmniPod PDM only runs on Windows too.
No, I run VMWare fusion and run Windows 7 (32 bit) inside of that… it works fine that way. I don’t even own a PC anymore 
I know some people have bought Netbooks specifically for downloading various Diabetes devices… since a vast majority are not mac compatible. That seemed like overkill to me since I could get a Window’s 7 license for free from my DH’s MSDN subscription. If I had to pay for both VMWare and Windows, a netbook might have seemed like the better option, but as it is, I only had to buy VMWare.
When I bought VMWare I actually needed it for my son’s schoolwork (he was doing online school), so we we able to get it at the educational discount. If you are a student, it’s basically half price.
That’s what I do too, although I’m running XP Professional through VM Ware. The Windows licenses for home use are a benefit my hubby gets through his job so we don’t have to pay for the Windows license.
I have an Intel Mac but prefer not to use the dual boot.
Diana
I also use VMWare and XP. I tried using Parallels (my wife uses that, I use fusion) and wasn’t able to get it to work, though I’m sure it’s possible. I am much happier having all my info on the computer I actually use then having a separate one just for Dex (and XP is cheap on ebay).
Very well stated Aaron.
I have a Mac but have Parallels installed with Windows XP. The Dexcom software runs just fine on it. Only Leopard and Snow Leopard are compatible with Parallels, but if you have Tiger or even Panther, they both support Virtual PC. You can install Windows on Virtual PC, albeit it will be slower than if you have Parallels. However, if you are only using one program it should handle it just fine.
Another option is to run VirtualBox for the Mac similar to Parellels and VMWare… and its… (gasp) Free…
There are things that the others do better but its a really well done application…
You could also try Boot Camp. but its a bit trickier to install, esp if your not an extremely tech saavy mac user… You have to partition a hard disk to use it… and it really is dual boot, you are NOT in mac os unlinke the other virtualizers…
I run VirtualBox with Windows XP Home on my MacBook and it works great. Not to mention being free… I think the advantage of VirtualBox over Boot Camp is that you can have both operating systems running at the same time without rebooting your computer. VirtualBox just shows up like a browser window that you can minimize while you are doing other things on your computer. The only issue I have encountered is that you need to have as much RAM as possible on your computer to run multiple operating systems at the same time. I have 1G of RAM (with 512 Meg devoted to VirtualBox) and I sometimes find that my computer runs unbearably slowly when I have both operating systems open.
Good luck finding a solution that works for you!
This is well said and I agreed up until Mac went Intel and OS X. Now, I can do everything I need to with the reassurance that my hardware is fairly sturdy. I go through consumer grade windows machines like paper.
When I spected out my last machine, it was either an HP server or a Mac Pro - both same price. With the HP server, it would have been multiboot with 3 OSes, with the Mac, its just OS X with XP on VMware. Its pretty simple that way.
So, in the end I agree with you until about 2005. After that, Mac took the cake for me and the windows registry just keeps getting bigger and bigger. =^)
The whole Mac vs PC thing is a red herring. There are many options now for companies to produce a cross-platform software product. Dexcom went to the trouble to build this using .Net, when they could have just as easily written it in Java and had cross-platform from the get-go. Honestly, the best approach these days would be to put all this stuff on the web. Rich internet applications are the future, and having this diabetes information available from any computer at any time would be huge, not just for personal use, but in the doctors office, where you could pull up all your records, not just what the Dexcom has from the last 30 days.
Completely agree with you!
A simple plugin into the browser to allow communication between the hardware and the web-based application, and sooner than you think you can have platform independence. Or a small software providing the same link between the local device and the website.
Garmin took this route with their GPS, and it’s very easy to manage the data coming from their devices online. There is a small USB dongle with a little piece of software that handles the communication between the GPS (in case it’s a wireless device like my 405cx) and the Garmin Connect website, and then everything is done online.
The big issue I see with all this is data privacy, even more so since this is health-related data, very much under the HIPAA radar. And I smell a lot of liabilities there, so this will not be an easy thing to achieve. But it’s the future, without a doubt.
Ciao, Luca
This is presently ho MM does things. You receive a small dongle that your pump communicates to which uploads reading directly to the web via their secure portal. The only issue I have with it is the browser support then becomes the issue and OS depending on the platform (*nix is out of the question right now).
I actually had more problems with Minimed’s Carelink than I do desktop versions of software. Instead of making their web based software a universally based platform they tied it to Internet Explorer, an old version of Java and certain windows only operating systems. The nightmares I had downloading my pump were one of the main reasons I switched from Minimed to an Animas/Dex combination. With web based software you have little control. With desktop software you may be able to find a workaround.
Having a well done, universal, secure web based platform would definatly have some benefits. For me right now the Dex software works much much better and I have no complaints.
Diana
Using a cross compatible development layer only means the app is easier to build… the problem is the FDA will have to certify BOTH platform versions of the app, and its usually separate for each OS…
Plus you still have hardware driver issues relating to developing on the individual platforms…
Medtronic really was required to tie Carelink to IE because of the FDA… The FDA really doesnt like open ended devices and wants the specifications to be set for runninng. For instance it has to be certified to run on a particular browser … the problem with any browser (browser agnostic). is they would have to get certification FOR EACH BROWSER and PLATFORM they want to run the java app on…
The biggest user share for now is windows users… and they only support Windows XP for the most part officially…
The advantage of making it work with XP is it will run with most virtualization software “off label” so other os’s and machines can use it but they cant officially tell you that or the FDA would be riding their asses…
This is why you arent seeing Iphone/Ipod meters for sale yet… the concept is avalible… Also why you dont see a lot of bluetooth devices yet… How abott got around this was by using a “Keyed” Bluetooth device… meaning their software would only work with their IOGEAR BT dongle… They were able to say to the FDA…This BT adapter is how the Frestyle Navigator will connect to the computer, We arent supporting others and well have the software verify this is how the user wants to connect.
A lot of these software issues may have initially been propriatary, but as Iv been told by a few people in the industry the FDA basically wants devices to be closed. The approval process for updating software is horrid from what i gather, its close to writing the app from scratch and starting the entire QA process from the beiginning again.
If someone wants to find out more from the FDA directly and contradict me,id be happy, but it seems that multiple companies have more or less told me different versions of this same story…Don’t know how hard it really is but people are saying the same thing repeatedly, so i tend to beleve theres some basis of truth to it.