Dear All
Thank you all a lot for your answers, and sorry for the trouble that my
question has generated.
Gerard B. : Thanks a lot to you and your colleagues for releasing, in the
forthcoming time, an OSX version of BUSTER-TNT.
Best from LA
Jacques
2008/10/28 Pete Meyer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>
Gerard,
Thank you very much for clearing that up. It's always good to hear that
there's one less things I need to worry about.
Pete
Gerard Bricogne wrote:
> Dear Pete,
>
> Thank you for your message. I can confirm that you need not worry about
> this clause: it is meant to prohibit the ag
Hi Folks,
The idea of comparing different data reduction packages is an
interesting one. It is not however without challenges as alluded to by
Kay. As far as I can see there are two main challenges - the first is
that different users when given the same tools will do different things
- in challeng
Clemens Vonrhein schrieb:
...
A nice task would be to compare different integration/scaling packages
at various stages: for finding the sites e.g. in SHELXD and separately
(using known sites) for giving best phases e.g. in SHARP. there could
be differences.
Yes, maybe it is finally time to get
Dear Juergen,
On Mon, Oct 27, 2008 at 11:37:15AM -0700, Juergen Bosch wrote:
> we've been comparing various programs during our SGPP times (that was about
> 2 years ago) Sharp, Shelx, bp3, mlphare, SnB (BnP). If I remember it
> correctly at that time Sharp was the winner, although the site findi
Dear Pete,
Thank you for your message. I can confirm that you need not worry about
this clause: it is meant to prohibit the aggressive use of code decompilers
with the intention of stealing the content of the source code. What you have
described in your hypothetical example is nothing of the
>On a side note we also looked at HKL, Mosflm, XDS processing of data,
>we observed differences in the ability of e.g. Shelx to locate SeMet
>sites depending on the processing program you used. Of course perfect
>data was undistinguishable, but some datasets which were more tricky
>to process s
@all,
we've been comparing various programs during our SGPP times (that was
about 2 years ago) Sharp, Shelx, bp3, mlphare, SnB (BnP). If I
remember it correctly at that time Sharp was the winner, although the
site finding was the major bottleneck/problem. What we ended doing was
finding s
lletin board [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of
James Stroud
Sent: Monday, October 27, 2008 5:03 AM
To: CCP4BB@JISCMAIL.AC.UK
Subject: Re: [ccp4bb] buster-tnt on OSX ?
Yikes!
Apologies if that was over the top. I guess the chisanbop comment did
not properly convey the hyperbole, and hence humor,
Dear Pete,
just my personal view on this (so don't take this as a legal expertise
regarding our SHARP licence). I don't have any problems with people
comparing software programs - I do that all the time. I doubt this can
be seen as reverse engineering.
The tricky part comes when comparisons are b
Apologies for going slightly further off-topic...
Last time I had a free half-day to look into sharp, I noticed that the
academic license prohibits reverse-engineering. This seemed to put any
comparative testing into a slightly grey area. For example, if I find
that sharp does the best job refin
Dear Jacques-Philippe,
Sorry to have been distracted into responding to comments on your
question rather than answering your question itself.
We will shortly be announcing an academic release of a new version of
BUSTER-TNT, which contains several major improvements over the previous one
Dear James,
Thank you for your reply. Again, I invite you to share with us the
details of the problems you encountered, through the appropriate mailing
list at Global Phasing.
I failed, however, to see either humour or constructiveness in your
claim that we were "just trying to make a b
Yikes!
Apologies if that was over the top. I guess the chisanbop comment did
not properly convey the hyperbole, and hence humor, I was trying to
achieve. Hopefully my comments can still be taken as the constructive
criticism they were intended to be.
James
On Oct 26, 2008, at 4:57 PM, Ge
I would like to add my comments that Sharp & autoSharp are great
programs that produce excellent phases, and that installation isn't
too hard (even though the whole setup does seem unnecessarily
complicated :-) )
I would also like to say that the Global Phasing people, in particular
Cleme
Dear Bill,,
On Sun, Oct 26, 2008 at 07:18:05PM -0700, William G. Scott wrote:
> I'm actually one of those whom has struggled unsuccessfully to install
> Sharp. I can't even remember why, and I am certain it was entirely my
> fault, but this did get me wondering...
I guess this is often a more
I heartily agree with Ash and Gerald - Autosharp (which we routinely use for
experimental phasing) is free for academics and in my opinion is an outstanding
package. Further, we have always found the people at Global Phasing are always
extremely helpful with all sorts of phasing questions not
Dear Gerard et al:
I'm actually one of those whom has struggled unsuccessfully to install
Sharp. I can't even remember why, and I am certain it was entirely my
fault, but this did get me wondering...
mlphare and MIR/MAD phasing seems to me the weak point in the ccp4
distribution. (I've o
Having solved a few structures using AutoSHARP, I feel compelled to
comment on the CCP4BB that I really like the software, never had a
major problem installing or using it, feel extremely grateful to the
guys at Global Phasing for making this available to us all, and for
(in my case at le
@JISCMAIL.AC.UK
Subject: Re: [ccp4bb] buster-tnt on OSX ?
The info at
http://www.globalphasing.com/buster/installation/index.html#requirements
will give you some hints about whether it will be successful on OS X.
As per the Global Phasing modus operandi, any instruction involving
installation of
@JISCMAIL.AC.UK
Subject: Re: [ccp4bb] buster-tnt on OSX ?
The info at
http://www.globalphasing.com/buster/installation/index.html#requirements
will give you some hints about whether it will be successful on OS X.
As per the Global Phasing modus operandi, any instruction involving
installation of their
Dear James,
I am rather surprised and disappointed to find such an intemperate,
ill-judged and almost slanderous statement from you, especially in a posting
to a bulletin board that is intended for the sharing of experience and good
will and to which you have been such a regular and valued c
The info at
http://www.globalphasing.com/buster/installation/index.html#requirements
will give you some hints about whether it will be successful on OS X.
As per the Global Phasing modus operandi, any instruction involving
installation of their software is muddled in riddle and ambiguity.
Hi everydoby,
I`d like to know if there is a version of BUSTER-TNT available on
MacOSX ?
Anyone knows ?
*
Dr. Jacques-Philippe Colletier
UCLA / DOE Institute for Genomics and Proteomics
90095 Los Angeles, CA, USA
24 matches
Mail list logo
