I agree with Kevin. We have stereo on about half of our workstations, and no one has used them in about three years. We typically use "O".
Also, we have three large servers which are relatively fast. So the main purpose of a workstation is building, not computing here. That way you can easily work on multiple structures on a workstation at the same time, while you're refining and building them. We have a few people that use PC's and Coot as well. Bernie On Wed, June 20, 2007 11:45 am, P Hubbard wrote: > Hi, > > Thanks for the e-mail. The current results of the survey would certainly > put > you in the minority! Stereo graphics are not dead after all. > > I have used systems with and without stereo graphics. I personally prefer > them, and think they are great for helping newbies refine, and for > non-structural biologists and students to look at molecular architecture. > It > seems a lot of other people, for whatever reason, like them too. > > Paul > > >>From: Kevin Cowtan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >>Reply-To: Kevin Cowtan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >>To: CCP4BB@JISCMAIL.AC.UK >>Subject: Re: [ccp4bb] Survey on computer usage in crystallography >>Date: Wed, 20 Jun 2007 17:27:04 +0100 >> >>More likely the issue is that some of us do not find stereo to be >> necessary >>of beneficial for crystallographic model building. >> >>In which case, given the power of modern PCs and graphics cards, a basic >>off-the-shelf PC costing $1000/£500 is completely adaquate for typical >>structure solution and model building problems. >> >>I use coot a lot and I haven't even bothered installing the graphics >>drivers for my graphics card. All the 3D stuff gets gone in software, and >>most of the graphics hardware sits around doing nothing. If I needed the >>performance, it would be a 5 minute job to install the drivers, but I >>haven't needed it. >> >>Kevin >> >>P Hubbard wrote: >>>I am sorry you are unhappy with the questions, David. >>> >>>As I am sure you know, I half-decent system with stereo graphics doesn't >>>come cheap, and if you price things together to make something that >>>performs well I doubt you'll get much change out of $2000. >>> >>>I am aware of other 3D systems (such as those listed on >>> www.stereo3d.com). >>>However, the price of peripherals like a 3D LCD monitor are >>> prohibitively >>>expensive (and the quality of the images is supposed to be poor). Do you >>>know of a relatively inexpensive way of displaying 3D images on PCs? >>> >>>Any other comments would be greatly appreciated. >>> >>>Paul > > _________________________________________________________________ > Get a preview of Live Earth, the hottest event this summer - only on MSN > http://liveearth.msn.com?source=msntaglineliveearthhm >
