Good afternoon! > And when we do have money for software, we chemistry folks want > new instruments and don't much care about the operating system or the > application vendor as long as the OS and applications can talk to the > instruments. > > One problem we face with Linux is lack of this specialty software. We > have to have some Windows boxes simply because the Linuc boxes we have > won't talk to the instruments. I was wondering when this point would rear it's head. Specialty software. Yes, specialty software can be a pig. And it is a joyous occasion when a vendor actually provides software that CAN talk to our hardware reliably, isn't it? It is a wonderful feeling to know that the vendor-supplied software isn't simply a beta for us to trouble-shoot before the vendor takes the hardware/software package out to sell to industry. However, the OP wasn't asking about vendor or specialty software. He was looking for set of "Desktop applications". > 2) The professoriate are also subject to "ego". I would argue that it is > > more important to the academic class to be seen using an expensive > > application (for show-value) instead of a cheaper (or free) application > > that might imply that their work/research grants don't merit a higher > > level of funding. And ego amongst our academics is as vital a force as > > peer pressure. > Unless you're talking about comp sci professors, that statement probably > doesn't carry much weight. We chemists, for instance, are more impressed > with a nice LC/MS setup than an expensive spreadsheet. :) > Oh, Dr. Taylor! Ouch! Somebody in comp sci gonna bite 'cha fer that! :) Rob ;)
