Dear Mr. Lenguaer,
I should thank you to give me the opportunity to discuss more
about one point : monopoly.
>8. I would not be happy with a unified database, with all the specific
>informations of all three databases. A market without competition, will reduce
>the quality, see Microsoft.
So you mean that you would be happy with several unified databases.
I agree with you. And certainly I would buy the cheapest if it is
complete. But you cannot actuelly speak of any competition
between PDF, ICSD, CSD and CRYSTMET. They are all
playing in a quite different part of the market. All of them
have a monopoly in their field.
This is why I recently suggested that China may well consider
to build its own databases, rather than to buy occidental ones.
The cost could be lower for the whole country. And if they
offer such products as alternative, Occident may well choose
chinese products, on a competitive market basis ;-), which
certainly does not exist now.
>4. It is up to everyones mind, to establish his own specific database. It is
the
>usual way to speed up the phase identification process in any routine
industrial
>application. But I think it is a waste of time to establish a second PDF
>database.
Well, this is in contradiction with your hope to see competition
on the market. PowBase is the only "competitor" of the future
PDF-3. But it contains no more than 5% of the full powder patterns
that will be "offered" in PDF-3, up to know. See how to add
your data in PowBase at : http://sdpd.univ-lemans.fr/powbase/
;-). I have not any intention to build a competitor to PDF-2.
About that possibility, nobody answer to my question about
the cost for CSD ans ICSD when they add a new entry : have
they some fees to pay to editors, or can they just copy the
data in litterature ?
I can understand that individual or laboratories prefer to let powder
patterns of unknown sleeping in a drawer, rather than to offer
the data to the public. Because this is recognizing failure in solving
a problem. Putting unindexed dobs and Iobs in PDF-2 was less
hurting, apparently. I would like to conclude the bethanechol
chloride story by asking a question. Do the full powder patterns
of this double grant-in-aid are already in PDF-3 ? My point is that
I think that no dobs/Iobs should be currently accepted by ICDD
without the full pattern. Simply because if you have dobs/Iobs,
then, you have a powder pattern, right ? I wanted to hear that
said by Prof. Ray Young in discussing exactly what is requested
now to those signing for a grant-in-aid. What is the ICDD policy ?
No obligation to furnish the full pattern ? Sorry to be crude
and without any diplomacy, but non-requesting the full powder
pattern IS STUPID, for the XXIth century.
Best,
Armel Le Bail - Universite du Maine, Laboratoire des Fluorures,
CNRS ESA 6010, Av. O. Messiaen, 72085 Le Mans Cedex 9, France
http://www.cristal.org/
