 |
 |
 |
 |
ULKYVM.LOUISVILLE.EDU unable to deliver following mail to recipient(s):
<paul@flowcyt.purdue.edu>
550 Host 'flowcyt.purdue.edu' Unknown
** Text of Mail follows **
Received: from ULKYVM.LOUISVILLE.EDU by ULKYVM.LOUISVILLE.EDU (IBM VM SMTP
V2R2)
with BSMTP id 0634; Thu, 26 Aug 93 09:06:01 EDT
Received: from ULKYVM (CAWORT01) by ULKYVM.LOUISVILLE.EDU (Mailer R2.08
R208004) with BSMTP id 5538; Thu, 26 Aug 93 09:06:00 EDT
Comments: Converted from PROFS to RFC822 format by PUMP V2.2X
Date: Thu, 26 Aug 93 09:05:43 EDT
From: "Christopher A. Worth" <CAWORT01@ULKYVM.LOUISVILLE.EDU>
Subject: Re: pathworks etc.
In-Reply-To: note of 08/26/93 08:53
To: <paul@flowcyt.purdue.edu>
Biomedical Engineer, BCC
Phone: (502)588-7191
Paul,
I did run into a coulter employee on one of the OS/2 forums and we emailed fro
m
time to time. coulter was/is looking at OS/2. They did look at windoze NT
and punted. A windoze interface would be too slow to collect data in the amoun
t
s that a cytometer generates, unless a move to a much faster CPU is made. sinc
e
it rides on top of DOS there just is another layer of crap that has to be pro
c
essed. an OS/2 cytometer would be the way to go. I could format backup tapes
,
collect data and create graphics during a sort when little workstation time i
s
needed. Also, there wouldn't be the limits on the memory that we have now.
I
hope coulter will get their act together, but like you said it isn't likely.
I
've use a FACSCAN a little bit and it is so unbelievably slow that If coulter
created a slicker program I think they could clobber BD.
gotta go,
chris
Avoid the Darkside, Use OS/2 2.1
These are my opinions, get your own. If I wanted your opinion
I would squeeze one out of your computer.
|
|
|
|