*** For details on how to be removed from this list visit the *** *** CCP4 home page http://www.ccp4.ac.uk ***
Sergei, I have to say I have been very happy with OSX, and I have been able (even with very limited computer skills..) to install most crystallographic programs with little difficulty. This is made significantly easier by the wide availability of binaries, so you don't have to compile software if you don't want to. In comparison to Windows the system maintenance is much easier and less time consuming (at least for a non-professional like me), and the only 'general purpose' software that I have not been able to find for OSX is a multiple sequence alignment GUI; commercial software is rather widely available, as well as open source programs like gimp etc. IMHO the MS Office suite, especially PowerPoint, has never been optimised properly in the first place... Fortunately there is KeyNote, which is better and quite compatible with PowerPoint (apparently even the Windows version to some extent). I don't doubt that similar things could be achieved with Linux by a professional/dedicated individual, but OSX is at least an easy option. HTH Esko Quoting Sergei Strelkov <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: > *** For details on how to be removed from this list visit the *** > *** CCP4 home page http://www.ccp4.ac.uk *** > > > Dear All, > > like many other groups, we are currently facing the need > to move from an aging SGI/Alpha cluster to a more modern > computing environment. The obvious alternatives to choose from > are Linux, OSX or Windows. We are aiming at solving interesting > structures > rather than at developing software -- and yes, we only have a limited > support from IT professionals. > > 1. MS Windows: > While many people would probably exclude Windows right away, > I am especially interested in collecting opinions about this option. > > True, a Windows box can never be a full replacement for a Unix > workstation. However, many pieces of software (not least the CCP4/CCP4i) > are perfectly usable under Windows! The main advantage in our case, > and in most other places, probably, is that nearly all students use/own > PCs > (desktops or laptops) already. > > Do there happen to exist any web resources summarising the setup and > use of Windows for biocrystallography (something like the > awesome site by W. Scott on crystallography on OSX)? > > It does seem that there are no Windows versions of several important > crystallographic programs/packages but I may be not up to date -- > does anyone have a list of those that are available? > > With Windows, there exist ways and tools that provide > modalities typical for unix environments -- how usable are > all these? How usable is cygwin? > > 2. OSX: > Clearly, there has been much attention to this platform > lately, and most Xtallographic programs have been ported. > Hardware is generally good. The setup/maintenance > is generally easier than for Linux. > > One specific quiestion: is buying an Intel-based > Mac (and not a G5-based) is advisable at this stage > as much of the software is not yet optimised for Intels? > > The well-known problem with Macs is a lesser choice > of general-purpose software. One particular difficulty > is that the OSX version of MS Office (especially the Powerpoint) > has never been optimised properly (IMHO). > > 3. Linux: > Many advantages and one big concern: the difficulty of setting up. > > I would be very grateful for any feedback, please write either > to the BB or to me directly. I will post a summary of all replies. > > Best wishes, > Sergei. > > -- > *NEW* address and e-mail: > Prof. Sergei V. Strelkov, Protein Crystallography Group Coordinator > Laboratory for Analytical Chemistry and Medicinal Physicochemistry > Department of Pharmaceutical Sciences, O&N2 > Catholic University of Leuven > Herestraat 49 bus 822, B-3000 Leuven, Belgium > Phone(w): +32 16 33 08 45 Fax: +32 16 32 34 69 > Phone(p): +32 16 23 19 06 Mobile: +32 486 29 41 32 > E-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > Disclaimer: http://www.kuleuven.be/cwis/email_disclaimer.htm > >
