DNASTAR vs. GENECODES

Carl Lawyer clawyer at SIUMED.EDU
Fri Nov 18 20:20:05 EST 1994


At  3:49 PM 11/18/94 -0800, Steve Schramm wrote:
>REGARDING                DNASTAR vs. GENECODES
At  9:25 AM 11/8/94 +0000, Andy Law (Big Nose wrote:
>In article <9411040202.AA01443 at siumed.edu>, clawyer at SIUMED.EDU (Carl
>Lawyer) wrote:
>
>> > I have a lot of experience with the DNAStar programs on CD Lasergene for
>> >macintosh & they are excellent. Very user friendly.

> I have used other programs including:

MacVector (less userfriendly and less powerful than DNAStar; missing many
capabilities of DNAStar does have subsequence search which DNAStar lacks)

DNAsis (cumbersome less user friendly, missing some essential capabilities)

DNA Stridor (a toy)

Blast server (best of any for sequence homologies; has alu and promoter and
transcription factor databases; no multiple alignment or circular map or
shotgun seq alignment or protein analysis or abstract linkage)

entrez: super for abstracts and fast for homologies; cheap; unable to do
searching with your own query sequences

Geneworks (flawed, possibly because appears to have been designed by
programers, not biologists)
Oligo (good for primer design only)






More information about the Bio-soft mailing list