Steve & Rowan Gardner steve at gardner.demon.co.uk
Mon Jun 6 14:39:10 EST 1994

> In article <2rqmhp$a9 at mserv1.dl.ac.uk> Guy Tremblay wrote:
> : Hi net fans!
> :         I would like to have some hints on the future of computing
> : related to biology. I am an undergraduate student at UQAM and I am
> : strongly interested in computer applications, but I am not sure of the
> : market's practical needs. Do you think that IBM PCs will overwhelm UNIX
> : hold on scientific applications? Where could I find some documentation?
> : Information on biocomputing graduate studies?
> :         Thanks in advance...
> :                                                

Personally I think its getting hard to tell PC and Unix systems apart.  The low-end Unix 
boxes look more and more like high end PCs and Macs, and I use both in my job at a 
computational biology software house.  Once DOS bites the dust as a development 
platform, there is going to be very little distinction indeed between the platforms.

The computational biology market has moved from an entrenched position where 
'serious science' such as bioinformatics, molecular modelling, phylogenetic analysis etc...
was done on Vax/VMS or Sun machines, through an expansion of the Mac/PC platforms
and is now converging on the level of cheap RISC based systems.  Whether that infers 
Silicon Graphics Indy to you or PowerPC/Mac, or whether you will hold out for the next
Intel offering is, I suspect, largely a matter of personal prejudice and whether you can
get the next latest and greatest application to run on it.  

Sorry I can't help with references - these are just my opinions, and apart from a report
by the Aberdeen Group on computational chemistry I couldn't really justify them further.

Steve Gardner

Disclaimer:  What's mine's mi own, and nobody elses !

More information about the Bio-soft mailing list

Send comments to us at biosci-help [At] net.bio.net