On May 1, 2009, at 10:22 AM, Jon Wright wrote:
Link,Todd M wrote:
... I did not find an equal web support page for Windows.
It just isn't needed. If there is a windows version of a program you
get to "download, install, run" and then get on with your life.
Similarly, since we could not
On May 2, 2009, at 6:46 PM, John Badger wrote:
I see a little bit of conflicting issues getting into the thread -
optimal OS for a
server or for development is a different question.
This depends on how you approach doing your science. For some people,
making their own tools to solve new pro
For MIFit downloads stats are 63% windows, 27% Linux (no fully functional
Mac port yet).
I have been doing crystallography on moderately high-end Windows laptops
for a few years now - mostly MIFit with CCP4 but SHELX, MOSFLM, d*TREK
etc are also fine. Performance is NOT a practical issue as far
On May 2, 2009, at 7:01 AM, Peter Schmidtke wrote:
We have both, OSX and Linux workstations in our lab,
but for computational needs you would have to buy a Mac Pro
workstation
that is expensive compared to the PC counterpart. Else on cheaper
iMacs you
can not do heavy calculations, the syst
This is the first time I see a discussion about this issue in science. To
Answer to Pete...KDE and Gnome are user friendly and ergonomic windowing
systems and nowadays major Linux Distributions make using these MUCH easier
than some years ago. We have both, OSX and Linux workstations in our lab,
bu
.. but OSX gives you Unix AND you can run Word /Powerpoint without
rebooting. And you get a user-friendly ergonomic windowing system that
kicks the out of XP/Vista/KDE/Gnome...
best wishes
Pete
On 2 May 2009, at 11:32, Nicholas M Glykos wrote:
Dear All,
We confuse scientific compu
Dear All,
We confuse scientific computing with the individual scientists' computing
needs: just because a scientist has to write a grant application using
word, does not make windows a platform suitable for scientific computing
(or anything else for that matter). Using computing machines for do
