Another option is to use sbgrid's services to install every
crystallography/EM/NMR-related thing on your lab computers: linux, SGI,
powerpc or intel mac, and mixed labs are fine, so you are not restricted
to any OS. This has the advantage of never ever thinking about how to
compile anything ever again, so you can spend that valuable time trying
to get crystals and solve structures (and maybe not read 35 ccp4bb
messages about "Crystallographic computing platform recommendations?").
The only thing to do on your part is to set up an NFS mount of your
server computer around the lab, which is - as mentioned before - not
difficult at all, and very reliable.

The disadvantage is you give up the control of your software, so if you
need some tweaking, you are either out of luck, or can make a request to
sbgrid people (and they are very accommodating). You can obviously
still install whatever you want for that specific application you need,
but you don't worry about lab people running outdated or broken
software, again.

We have found dell boxes with a version of RHEL/CentOS/Fedora and Macs
to be two good choices, especially if you don't have time or patience to
build anything. Our lab runs on a healthy mixture of them, connected
via NFS.

Engin

*Not paid by SBGrid.

[log in to unmask] wrote:
> I completely agree with Marius. Our (my) constraints are not $500 in
> price difference, but the fact that I maintain a system for scientific
> computing AND an X-ray system AND I am expected to be a scientist who
> publishes and writes grants. Thus, our approach has been to automate
> and minimize my time and effort spent.
>
> We buy out-of-the-box Dell systems WITH support. This has already paid
> off once when (for hard to explain reasons) a motherboard went out. I
> diagnosed it, called India, and Dell sent someone out to replace the
> motherboard and with minimal effort we were back in business. Our Dell
> boxes came with standard NVIDIA quadro graphics cards. Hardware-wise
> our only real problem is the non-existance of CRTs that can do stereo
> and the exhorbitant prices for the flat screens.
>
> We run CentOS because (I think) RH is impossible to deal with, but I
> do like the stability. We have shared, network attached file storage
> (which backs up automagically and is RAIDed) and we authenticate off a
> Windows server via LDAP, so I do not need to maintain user records,
> someone else already does that and all I need to do is e-mail a note
> that person X (or Y , gender neutral) can have access to the Linux
> systems and voila work is done. The system creates everything needed.
>
> It took a LOT of effort to get where we are. We thought long and hard
> about what exactly we needed and why. The most difficult operation is
> currently to get data from synchrotrons to our system. All the
> firewalls (existing for good reasons, of course) make it so hard these
> days to do anything useful in data transfer. We use Rsync and then I
> manually archive raw image data away.
>
> We sometimes have dreams about distributed computing (not so much for
> crystallography but for small angle scattering). Not enough experience
> to tell you how it should be done well.
>
> Mark
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Mischa Machius <[log in to unmask]>
> To: [log in to unmask]
> Sent: Tue, 18 Nov 2008 8:01 am
> Subject: Re: [ccp4bb] Crystallographic computing platform recommendations?
>
> After having dealt, over the years, with several dozens of
> 'crystallographic computing platforms' and having setup and maintained
> quite a few myself, I would recommend to not be cheap. I would
> recommend to go with well supported hardware and OS. For linux, I
> would recommend a commercial solution, and the hardware could come
> from a vendor such as Dell. In our lab, we use Macs practically
> exclusively, except for a few legacy Linux boxes.
>
> I don't think it is worth saving a few hundred dollars when you end up
> spending/wasting so much time down the road assembling and fixing the
> machine as well as trying to keep up with the latest OS patches and
> drivers. I'd rather spend my time doing something else than being a
> computer support person. I realize I am not using the latest,
> greatest, pimped-out number-crunching monster, but a quad-core Mac is
> plenty sufficient. I like the fact that a refinement takes a few
> minutes longer, because that gives me time to fetch a cup of coffee or
> chat with a colleague.
>
> Just a thought.
>
> Best - MM
>
>
> >> Dear list,
> >> I haven't seen the "crystallographic computing platform" thread come
> >> up for a while, and I've got a chance to upgrade my desktop to a
> >> workstation, so I thought I'd ask the CCP4BB for advice on:
> >>
> >> 1. Mac vs. Linux (which flavor?) vs. Windows
> >> 2. Graphics cards
> >> 3. Displays
> >> 4. Processors - multiple processors, multiple cores? Speed?
> >>
> >> About half of what I do involves ~1.0 A X-ray structures - data
> >> processing, rebuilding in Coot, refinement, and so forth - so my
> >> current desktop (Optiplex GX745, Radeon X1300) machine drags on
> >> graphics sometimes. I don't seem to need stereo these days, for what
> >> it's worth.
> >>
> >> Anybody have suggestions or specs they'd like to share? Thanks in
> >> anticipation of your advice.
> >>
> >> Regards,
> >> Anna Gardberg
> >
>
> --------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> Mischa Machius, PhD
> Associate Professor
> Department of Biochemistry
> UT Southwestern Medical Center at Dallas
> 5323 Harry Hines Blvd.; ND10.214A
> Dallas, TX 75390-8816; U.S.A.
> Tel: +1 214 645 6381
> Fax: +1 214 645 6353
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
> Instant access to the latest & most popular FREE games while you
> browse with the Games Toolbar - Download Now!
> <http://pr.atwola.com/promoclk/100000075x1212904500x1200818240/aol?redir=http://toolbar.aol.com/games/download.html?ncid=emlweusdown00000004>
>