Re: Vantage SE or MoFlo?

From: Dom Fenoglio box 8118 314-362-2004 (fenoglio@pathbox.wustl.edu)
Date: Mon May 07 2001 - 09:45:48 EST


Don't forget to figure in time as a cost.  A faster sorter saves time and
to many clients this equals a savings in money

Dom Fenoglio


On Thu, 3 May 2001 ckuszyns@UNMC.EDU wrote:

> Date: Thu, 3 May 2001 16:20:14 -0500
> From: ckuszyns@UNMC.EDU
> To: Cytometry Mailing List <cytometry@flowcyt.cyto.purdue.edu>
> Subject: Re: Vantage SE or MoFlo?
>
>
>
> Just think about this question.  The reality is, that the sorter you choose
> is directly related to what your sort needs are.
>
>
>
>                     "geoff morgan
>                     (BI)"                   To:     Cytometry Mailing List
>                     <cytometry@flowcyt.cyto.purdue.edu>
>                     <geoff.morgan@bb        cc:
>                     src.ac.uk>              Subject:     Vantage SE or MoFlo?
>
>                     05/03/2001 05:52
>                     AM
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> Is a MoFlo significantly better than a Vantage SE? The question is really
> aimed at flowers who have used both in a research environment. Scientists
> here are considering the merits of a MoFlow although we already have a
> Vantage SE on site.In the end it will come down to whether the gains can be
> justified given the cost.
>
> Geoff Morgan             Babraham,Camdridge U.K.
>
>
>
>



This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Sun Jan 05 2003 - 19:01:17 EST