Can DNAsis replace GCG package? Or almost??

Andy Law Big Nose lawa at bbsrc.ac.uk
Fri Oct 7 07:16:13 EST 1994


In article <17047852A.A428ENDE at VM1.SARA.NL>, A428ENDE at VM1.SARA.NL wrote:

> In article <36vkk9$gtq at mace.cc.purdue.edu>
> Although we bought DNAsis on a Mac, I still believe that we made the wrong 
> dessision. With a 586 (which is much cheaper than a PowerMac 8100) you can 
> indeed run linux and take advantage of all the software available in the Unix
> environment and you have a very fast PC with all the advantages and programs
> in this environment (there are also a lot of Public domain and Shareware
> available).

You can also access UNIX environments from a Mac. Just as easily (if not
easier). There is also a lot of Public/Shareware software available for
the Mac as well. Hell, you can even run PC software on the PowerMacs with
Softwindows, although not at any speed :)

The PowerMac 8100 is too pricy compared to the 7100. The increase in
performance that you get with the faster model is not worth the extra
money. If you decide to go down the Mac route, then I reckon the 7100 is
the best bet at the moment. Prices do tend to fluctuate rapidly though and
there are all sorts of rumours about new models kicking around.

As to MacDNAsis being buggy, well I can't comment on that because I
haven't seen it, but I get the general impression that most of the
micro-based DNA analysis software is crappy, difficult to use and full of
bugs. I also get the feeling that so many scientists are so used to having
to fight with monolithic mainframe programs that they just accept whatever
lands in front of them on their PC and assume that it is just the way
things are. THAT MAKES ME MAD!!!!

The only way that the software companies are ever going to produce decent
software that does the job and is easy to use is if we the users make
their lives miserable until they do so. If you find a program that is not
intuitive or which makes your job more difficult to do than it might be,
then tell them about it. And keep telling them about it until they change
it.

I'm sorry, I have digressed from the subject of the original posting. To
get back a bit more to the thread of things, DNASTAR is full of bugs and
dreadful to use and the ABI software is little better. So, it seems, is
MacDNAsis. Let's have a crusade against this stuff. Let the publishers
know what you think.

Andy Law

( Lawa @ bbsrc.ac.uk                     Big Nose in Edinburgh )
           --- Campaigning for usable software ---




More information about the Bio-soft mailing list