I agree that this is something that a webmaster should deal with on his own site, individually. It's like printing company business cards with telephone numbers that don't exist on them, it gives an unprofessional feel to the whole site. However, on complex, dynamic and interactive user-based pages, this might not always be possible, unless multiple Webmasters are constantly monitoring the site. So I think that while a webmaster should be obliged to look after broken links - and other aspects of website care, in some cases tools like this will be beneficial.
Good post. Unfortunately, as I'm sure a lot of Slashdotters know, the I.T industry and related industries usually demand 16 hour+ days. Oh well. I guess lifting a rackmount server is quite staunch exercise and will be a fair replacement for free weights:-) (lift, up, down, lift that server). Or a 21" Sun monitor. Sheesh. I think the glass in the front must be at least 120lbs. The whole thing, slightly more.
Rock Paper Scissors was intially played amoung the ancient Celtic peoples, one of the key gambling games in their early history. It wasn't known as Rock Paper Scissors, though, it was known as "Ynuca" (Sorry about the spelling, History buffs). And the game was slightly different, but the object was the same: 3 different implements, each one suseptible to one of the others and able to take out one of the others. It wasn't until the Celtic tribes of Western Europe were invaded by the Romanic peoples of the South taht the game was introduced into "Mainstream culture". Ironically, it was lost in Northern and Western Europe and only resurfaced when the Roman Empire was crumbling - travellers from Rome revived the game while resettling in England, centuries of years later. From there on it was adapted and moulded into its current form, but the point is that initially, at least, it was an adult game and wasn't considered a "child's game" until at least the 1200s.
There doesn't appear to be a Tru64 version of the DivX codec installer. This renders it almost useless to me, at work. My workstation is a Tru64 machine.
Lad, you seem to be missing the point here. Do you think that widespread adoption is neccessary for success? It isn't. Most computer users don't know FreeBSD from a bar of soap, yet it plays a vital role in the Internet's running.
The point is, that while PNG might not have gained the widespread use of GIF, it certainly is a better format, as the feature lists demonstrate. Unless, for some reason, you think that Windows 95 and MS DOS are the best operating systems around, since they were the highest volume selling operating systems? That would be nonsense, of course. In the Bioinformatics arena, Windows 95 and MS DOS are not the optimal OS choices, therefore, in the Bioinformatics arena, Windows 95 and MS DOS were pretty much failures - not sucesses. Please stop posting nonsense, lad.
You're absolutely right about Biotech, it's a science that's progressing so rapidly that soon we'll see some advancements that will really need to be examined and tested thoroughly before being released publicly.
Certainly, some of them could be used for the better and some would argue that releasing them sooner rather than later would be the ideal. And it would, but the fact is that there are too many unknowns in this field. The technology is progressing faster than even scientests can deal with. This, I believe, is a result of technologisation. Let me explain. In the early days of science, scientests had a lot more control over their research than we do today. Mass production, computerization and high technology have enabled lightning fast research and development, but they've also speeded it up to a point where it's hard to keep track of.
Therein lies the danger. We need to put procedures in place for even more strict testing and analysis of new technologies before they hit the marketplace, or we may find ourselves in grave danger of catastrophe. A man I know well, Kevin Warwick, predicts that technology will be the end of humanity. This is extreme, but not laughable. We should be weary of new technology and use it wisely.
Lad, you assume that everyone does mundane things with their computers. We do leave our computers online 24/7 (most of the time), but they are doing staunch processing. If we switched over to "low power consumption" chips, it'd take 10 times as long to process the information. Which would be pretty useless, don't you think? Yes, the Alphas we use for our extensive analysis could cook an egg, but putting a low power chip in them to replace them wouldn't work. It'd take ages to get comparable results.
Lan parties and officework I can't really argue with, but looking at Windows 2000's resource swallowing, perhaps it'd be wiser not to skimp on powerful hardware for the sake of lower power consumption, unless you'd like to wait 20 minutes for Office 2002 or Quake XI to load up.
Does it have a solid FORTRAN compiler , though? IMO, that's more important in the industry, specifically in regard to the industry as it effects scientific fields, than anything else. Including a Java Virtual Machine. Today, Java is the flavour of the day, along with C/C++/etc. Fact is, though, when other "cooler" languages sweep the computing world, scientests like myself will still be using FORTRAN. And, admittedly it will never be a "mainstream" language again, like it was a few decades ago, but it will be a long lasting language, I can practically garantee you that.
The platform independence sounds interesting, but it's been beaten to death with Java already. Platform independence can be acheived in more practical ways: FORTRAN, C and C++. Sure, you'll have to edit code, but you'll benefit from *real* native speeds. I'm not doubting the Tao Engine will be brilliant with regard to speed if you take some of the alternative cross platform technologies, like Squeak and Java, but it seems to me that it'll end up being a longer way around than simpel code porting. What about openness? Will we ever see the code to this Tao engine, or are they trying to become Microsoftesque, and entrap their users?
Stephen, I don't think you're right about this. A lot of people (myself included) require very big processors to get daily work done. We installed 3 new Solaris boxes last week, and it was a major toss up between more e250s/450s and the cheaper Intel boxen. We settled for one e450 and 2 Intel boxen, 2-way Xeon PIII 700s. (Running Intel/Solaris). Sure, we could install on smaller machinery, but we really do need the power for our Bioinformatics Analysis Planning. (Actual Analysis happens on Compaq Alpha hardware).
Ok, lad. I know this is supposed to be a form of joke, but I'm going to reply to it anyway. First off, I don't think that the geeks you're talking about are really as common as you imply. Most geeks, if you want to call them that, don't confine themselves to one technology or set of technologies.
There are plenty of Radio geeks (HAM Radio operators), electronics geeks (Electronic equipment), and science geeks (Math, Physics, etc). The operating system choice of these people will depend firmly on their chosen field, NT or Windows XX will probably come into play during their careers, after all, a sysadmin needs to deal with users running non-*ix operating systems, for example.
When I was a lad way back in the old days, things were somewhat rough for me because of all the travelling my parents did. We literally didn't stay in one country for more than 3 years.
Primary school was a blur, I hopped around from school to school, country to country, but always managed to score excellently in my exams. As a teacher from a school I went to in Hawaii put it: "Cliffton is a brilliant, if somewhat distracted, child." It was true. I was distracted often and preferred reading my own books to paying attention to the class at hand. During my high school days I spent most of the time playing Hearts or Gin Rummy, for cash. I did poorly in most of my subjects, but managed to scrape through my scoring A's in my finals every year. During senior prelims, I scored 100% in my History exam and managed to scrape through the rest of my subjects, by then I was into horse racing, big time. I betted almost every day, and most of the time I didn't do very well, but I kept at it regardless. My high school finals saw a vast improvement though, and I was accepted into University comfortably.
To be honest, I wasn't all that interested in romance during my school years. The closest I got to intimacy with a girl was inviting her back to my bedroom lab and wiring her up with electrodes on her head. I was a nut for experimentation, even back then. The girls whom I did this to were disappointed when they realized that my fascination with them was limited to my bedroom lab, and soon left me.
My friends consisted of two close friends whom I'd known since the ages of 3 and 4 respectively, some colleagues from the various high schools I attended, who were also involved in Hearts and Gin Rummy, and a few book makers and punters I knew from the horse racing scene.
Now that I'm a well known scientest (at least in Bioinformatics circles), things are hectic and I have plenty of academic colleagues, some of whom have become very good friends. I was never beaten up while attending school, and teasing wasn't a problem, because during the card era at least, I could pay for kids to get beaten up. I paid a kid $1 for every tooth he brought me from a bully who picked on me one day (It was the closest to getting beaten up I ever came). He brought me 2 teeth wrapped in tissues.
So you see, your assumption that all geeks get beaten up, don't have friends, and only use Linux,is wrong.
p> The Mac OS is only good for play things, braindead people, and old grannies eh? Don't misquote me. I said "technically braindead". Not braindead. I'm sure there are a lot of smart people who use Macs because they think it's a really great system that utilizes hardware well. Poor them.
I guess you have never really used a Mac as a server for anything.
True. I have contacts who are ex-Mac developers though, right up until the 8.5 days.
I think you aren't half as smart as you say you are
Okay:-) Whatever. Have you read my bio, motormouth ?
I mean come on, if you think Solaris is a good implementation of UNIX you are seriously lost.
I didn't say it was good in my post. I just said that I use it, which I do. I was stating that I use it (and Tru64) often at work, thereby refuting the original poster's assumption that smart people only use Mac, Windows 2000 and BeOS.
Solaris has upsides and downsides. It's very scalable, but it's also quite slow. I never claimed it was a "good" implementation of UNIX, but it certainly isn't a bad one.
Excuse me, lad. If you don't believe I'm smart, just read my bio. I don't usually brag about it, but this is an insane comment. I don't use any of the operating systems you mention above at work. I do use Tru64 and Solaris.
Windows 2000 is the flavour of the day, it seems to me. Everyone is touting it's stability and speed - reminiscent of the Windows 95 hype. (Instability on PC's is a thing of the past and crashes will happen very rarely due to the new 32-bit nature of Windows 95 and the excellent system design implemented by Microsoft. Heh, sure, guys:) Windows NT was touted as a UNIX killer. 6 years down the line, UNIX is still around and NT is somewhat of a joke, at least in my field of work.
BeOS is way overhyped. I managed to crash it by typing in a URL in the Opera browser, and opening more than 10 windows (mp3's), which theoretically shouldn't create a problem due to the amazing RTOS kernel, slows the thing down to unusable levels (killall mp3 time, perhaps even rebooting if your terminal doesn't respond). No doubt, it's a sound idea and has useful applications - Video editing blah blah, but a lot of it's just hype.
MacOS. OS X sounds promising, but I'm not sure how much it will deliver. I'm guessing not as much as it's promising. MacOS 9 and below are sitting on a 15yr old feature set, still use cooperative multitasking, have goofy memory management and aren't very user friendly, after all. (where's/bin/sh!!??) It's good for play things, I guess, but that would indicate it's best suited to technically brain dead people, old grandmothers, and very little kids.So no, I don't use any of these "smart people's systems". If you read my bio, you'll see that I *am* in fact a smart person, though. Cheers,
Oh, right. Sorry. I'm an being an idiot today:) The "root" servers eh? RS/6000s:) Hehe. Sure, I guess it's worth a look, but I think the main reason we haven't had to explore other options is because Compaq's support is so good, the people on the Digital FORTRAN team are superb in the support department, and we generally have had a lot of success and a great relationship with them. I think a lot of people in the field were getting nervous around '98 when Digital was bought out, but Compaq has done brilliantly, IMO, and a lot of the scientific community out there seem to agree with me.
I'm not questioning the competency of PowerPC chips for a moment. What I do need is a good, solid FORTRAN compiler, though. A lot of our work is done in FORTRAN, and basically that's the main factor in choosing our hardware - FORTRAN compiler availability and quality, and raw performance. Of course, at one stage, one of the directors wanted to standardise on Compaq's new Fortran compiler for Win32, so we tested an NT 4 Server, SP 4, Dual PII Xeon 400 (if I recall correctly), and the damn thing didn't run near as well as the Alpha boxen we had, at that stage older ones - we have newer ones now - so that was basically the end of the discussion. I'm dissapointed by Microsoft's and Compaq's (in regard to mainstream comupting integration, that is, I'm not questioning their brilliance in Alpha/Digital/FORTRAN areas) dedication to the Scientific community - especially Microsoft. When asked to choose between Tru64 and NT, there's just no comparison at this stage. We're still being pressurized into migrating our stuff to NT, but I don't think the scientific community will stand for it. As for the G4/G3 from Apple, how good is MacOS? I've never used it. I've read about the new OS X, it sounds pretty neat, if it gets released soon and decent FORTRAN compilers become available for it, I'll certainly take a look at it.
Ya...unfortuantely, some of us don't have that option. I agree that the idea of lower consumption devices is a sound one and should be taken seriously, but unfortunately a lot of the existing infrastructure will be too expensive to replace easily.
For instance, where I work, we have 5 UltraSPARC-II 296Mhz pumping away at Data all day, as well as quite a few (28 in fact) Alpha 21264 machines running our FORTRAN simulations, a few scattered Intel MMX and Pentium boxes, and some Orca Auspex units for mass storage.
The work is time-critical and can't go down at all, and our storage must be available full time for the rest of our team to analyze and use. We don't - CAN'T - take chances with electricity, and besides having UPS's connected to all the major units, we have a diesel powered generator in the basement of the building, and 60 car batteries to back that up.
I'd have to say that although I agree that *eventually* things will have to change and either alternative fuel sources need to be optimized and improved, or current devices need to come down in power consumption requirements (preferably both), for the moment, a lot of companies don't have a choice when it comes to using staunch amounts of electricity.
The applications for this device seem more promising at first glance than if one really sits down to think about them. No doubt, there will be applications where superficial chemical properties need to be examined and a descision needs to be taken based on input derived from those properties, but in a chemical analysis situation, more detailed methods need to be implemented.
Slashdot Mirror
I agree that this is something that a webmaster should deal with on his own site, individually. It's like printing company business cards with telephone numbers that don't exist on them, it gives an unprofessional feel to the whole site. However, on complex, dynamic and interactive user-based pages, this might not always be possible, unless multiple Webmasters are constantly monitoring the site. So I think that while a webmaster should be obliged to look after broken links - and other aspects of website care, in some cases tools like this will be beneficial.
Good post. Unfortunately, as I'm sure a lot of Slashdotters know, the I.T industry and related industries usually demand 16 hour+ days. Oh well. I guess lifting a rackmount server is quite staunch exercise and will be a fair replacement for free weights :-) (lift, up, down, lift that server). Or a 21" Sun monitor. Sheesh. I think the glass in the front must be at least 120lbs. The whole thing, slightly more.
Rock Paper Scissors was intially played amoung the ancient Celtic peoples, one of the key gambling games in their early history. It wasn't known as Rock Paper Scissors, though, it was known as "Ynuca" (Sorry about the spelling, History buffs). And the game was slightly different, but the object was the same: 3 different implements, each one suseptible to one of the others and able to take out one of the others. It wasn't until the Celtic tribes of Western Europe were invaded by the Romanic peoples of the South taht the game was introduced into "Mainstream culture". Ironically, it was lost in Northern and Western Europe and only resurfaced when the Roman Empire was crumbling - travellers from Rome revived the game while resettling in England, centuries of years later. From there on it was adapted and moulded into its current form, but the point is that initially, at least, it was an adult game and wasn't considered a "child's game" until at least the 1200s.
There doesn't appear to be a Tru64 version of the DivX codec installer. This renders it almost useless to me, at work. My workstation is a Tru64 machine.
When will we see a Tru64 version?Lad, you seem to be missing the point here. Do you think that widespread adoption is neccessary for success? It isn't. Most computer users don't know FreeBSD from a bar of soap, yet it plays a vital role in the Internet's running.
The point is, that while PNG might not have gained the widespread use of GIF, it certainly is a better format, as the feature lists demonstrate. Unless, for some reason, you think that Windows 95 and MS DOS are the best operating systems around, since they were the highest volume selling operating systems? That would be nonsense, of course. In the Bioinformatics arena, Windows 95 and MS DOS are not the optimal OS choices, therefore, in the Bioinformatics arena, Windows 95 and MS DOS were pretty much failures - not sucesses. Please stop posting nonsense, lad.You're absolutely right about Biotech, it's a science that's progressing so rapidly that soon we'll see some advancements that will really need to be examined and tested thoroughly before being released publicly.
Certainly, some of them could be used for the better and some would argue that releasing them sooner rather than later would be the ideal. And it would, but the fact is that there are too many unknowns in this field. The technology is progressing faster than even scientests can deal with. This, I believe, is a result of technologisation. Let me explain. In the early days of science, scientests had a lot more control over their research than we do today. Mass production, computerization and high technology have enabled lightning fast research and development, but they've also speeded it up to a point where it's hard to keep track of.Therein lies the danger. We need to put procedures in place for even more strict testing and analysis of new technologies before they hit the marketplace, or we may find ourselves in grave danger of catastrophe. A man I know well, Kevin Warwick, predicts that technology will be the end of humanity. This is extreme, but not laughable. We should be weary of new technology and use it wisely.
Lad, you assume that everyone does mundane things with their computers. We do leave our computers online 24/7 (most of the time), but they are doing staunch processing. If we switched over to "low power consumption" chips, it'd take 10 times as long to process the information. Which would be pretty useless, don't you think? Yes, the Alphas we use for our extensive analysis could cook an egg, but putting a low power chip in them to replace them wouldn't work. It'd take ages to get comparable results.
Lan parties and officework I can't really argue with, but looking at Windows 2000's resource swallowing, perhaps it'd be wiser not to skimp on powerful hardware for the sake of lower power consumption, unless you'd like to wait 20 minutes for Office 2002 or Quake XI to load up.Does it have a solid FORTRAN compiler , though? IMO, that's more important in the industry, specifically in regard to the industry as it effects scientific fields, than anything else. Including a Java Virtual Machine. Today, Java is the flavour of the day, along with C/C++/etc. Fact is, though, when other "cooler" languages sweep the computing world, scientests like myself will still be using FORTRAN. And, admittedly it will never be a "mainstream" language again, like it was a few decades ago, but it will be a long lasting language, I can practically garantee you that.
The platform independence sounds interesting, but it's been beaten to death with Java already. Platform independence can be acheived in more practical ways: FORTRAN, C and C++. Sure, you'll have to edit code, but you'll benefit from *real* native speeds. I'm not doubting the Tao Engine will be brilliant with regard to speed if you take some of the alternative cross platform technologies, like Squeak and Java, but it seems to me that it'll end up being a longer way around than simpel code porting. What about openness? Will we ever see the code to this Tao engine, or are they trying to become Microsoftesque, and entrap their users?Stephen, I don't think you're right about this. A lot of people (myself included) require very big processors to get daily work done. We installed 3 new Solaris boxes last week, and it was a major toss up between more e250s/450s and the cheaper Intel boxen. We settled for one e450 and 2 Intel boxen, 2-way Xeon PIII 700s. (Running Intel/Solaris). Sure, we could install on smaller machinery, but we really do need the power for our Bioinformatics Analysis Planning. (Actual Analysis happens on Compaq Alpha hardware).
Ok, lad. I know this is supposed to be a form of joke, but I'm going to reply to it anyway. First off, I don't think that the geeks you're talking about are really as common as you imply. Most geeks, if you want to call them that, don't confine themselves to one technology or set of technologies.
There are plenty of Radio geeks (HAM Radio operators), electronics geeks (Electronic equipment), and science geeks (Math, Physics, etc). The operating system choice of these people will depend firmly on their chosen field, NT or Windows XX will probably come into play during their careers, after all, a sysadmin needs to deal with users running non-*ix operating systems, for example.When I was a lad way back in the old days, things were somewhat rough for me because of all the travelling my parents did. We literally didn't stay in one country for more than 3 years.
Primary school was a blur, I hopped around from school to school, country to country, but always managed to score excellently in my exams. As a teacher from a school I went to in Hawaii put it: "Cliffton is a brilliant, if somewhat distracted, child." It was true. I was distracted often and preferred reading my own books to paying attention to the class at hand. During my high school days I spent most of the time playing Hearts or Gin Rummy, for cash. I did poorly in most of my subjects, but managed to scrape through my scoring A's in my finals every year. During senior prelims, I scored 100% in my History exam and managed to scrape through the rest of my subjects, by then I was into horse racing, big time. I betted almost every day, and most of the time I didn't do very well, but I kept at it regardless. My high school finals saw a vast improvement though, and I was accepted into University comfortably.
To be honest, I wasn't all that interested in romance during my school years. The closest I got to intimacy with a girl was inviting her back to my bedroom lab and wiring her up with electrodes on her head. I was a nut for experimentation, even back then. The girls whom I did this to were disappointed when they realized that my fascination with them was limited to my bedroom lab, and soon left me.My friends consisted of two close friends whom I'd known since the ages of 3 and 4 respectively, some colleagues from the various high schools I attended, who were also involved in Hearts and Gin Rummy, and a few book makers and punters I knew from the horse racing scene.
Now that I'm a well known scientest (at least in Bioinformatics circles), things are hectic and I have plenty of academic colleagues, some of whom have become very good friends. I was never beaten up while attending school, and teasing wasn't a problem, because during the card era at least, I could pay for kids to get beaten up. I paid a kid $1 for every tooth he brought me from a bully who picked on me one day (It was the closest to getting beaten up I ever came). He brought me 2 teeth wrapped in tissues.So you see, your assumption that all geeks get beaten up, don't have friends, and only use Linux,is wrong.
I guess you have never really used a Mac as a server for anything.
True. I have contacts who are ex-Mac developers though, right up until the 8.5 days.I think you aren't half as smart as you say you are
OkayI mean come on, if you think Solaris is a good implementation of UNIX you are seriously lost.
I didn't say it was good in my post. I just said that I use it, which I do. I was stating that I use it (and Tru64) often at work, thereby refuting the original poster's assumption that smart people only use Mac, Windows 2000 and BeOS.Solaris has upsides and downsides. It's very scalable, but it's also quite slow. I never claimed it was a "good" implementation of UNIX, but it certainly isn't a bad one.
Excuse me, lad. If you don't believe I'm smart, just read my bio. I don't usually brag about it, but this is an insane comment. I don't use any of the operating systems you mention above at work. I do use Tru64 and Solaris.
Windows 2000 is the flavour of the day, it seems to me. Everyone is touting it's stability and speed - reminiscent of the Windows 95 hype. (Instability on PC's is a thing of the past and crashes will happen very rarely due to the new 32-bit nature of Windows 95 and the excellent system design implemented by Microsoft. Heh, sure, guys:) Windows NT was touted as a UNIX killer. 6 years down the line, UNIX is still around and NT is somewhat of a joke, at least in my field of work.BeOS is way overhyped. I managed to crash it by typing in a URL in the Opera browser, and opening more than 10 windows (mp3's), which theoretically shouldn't create a problem due to the amazing RTOS kernel, slows the thing down to unusable levels (killall mp3 time, perhaps even rebooting if your terminal doesn't respond). No doubt, it's a sound idea and has useful applications - Video editing blah blah, but a lot of it's just hype.
MacOS. OS X sounds promising, but I'm not sure how much it will deliver. I'm guessing not as much as it's promising. MacOS 9 and below are sitting on a 15yr old feature set, still use cooperative multitasking, have goofy memory management and aren't very user friendly, after all. (where'sOh, right. Sorry. I'm an being an idiot today :) The "root" servers eh? RS/6000s :) Hehe. Sure, I guess it's worth a look, but I think the main reason we haven't had to explore other options is because Compaq's support is so good, the people on the Digital FORTRAN team are superb in the support department, and we generally have had a lot of success and a great relationship with them. I think a lot of people in the field were getting nervous around '98 when Digital was bought out, but Compaq has done brilliantly, IMO, and a lot of the scientific community out there seem to agree with me.
I'm not questioning the competency of PowerPC chips for a moment. What I do need is a good, solid FORTRAN compiler, though. A lot of our work is done in FORTRAN, and basically that's the main factor in choosing our hardware - FORTRAN compiler availability and quality, and raw performance. Of course, at one stage, one of the directors wanted to standardise on Compaq's new Fortran compiler for Win32, so we tested an NT 4 Server, SP 4, Dual PII Xeon 400 (if I recall correctly), and the damn thing didn't run near as well as the Alpha boxen we had, at that stage older ones - we have newer ones now - so that was basically the end of the discussion. I'm dissapointed by Microsoft's and Compaq's (in regard to mainstream comupting integration, that is, I'm not questioning their brilliance in Alpha/Digital/FORTRAN areas) dedication to the Scientific community - especially Microsoft. When asked to choose between Tru64 and NT, there's just no comparison at this stage. We're still being pressurized into migrating our stuff to NT, but I don't think the scientific community will stand for it. As for the G4/G3 from Apple, how good is MacOS? I've never used it. I've read about the new OS X, it sounds pretty neat, if it gets released soon and decent FORTRAN compilers become available for it, I'll certainly take a look at it.
Ya...unfortuantely, some of us don't have that option. I agree that the idea of lower consumption devices is a sound one and should be taken seriously, but unfortunately a lot of the existing infrastructure will be too expensive to replace easily.
For instance, where I work, we have 5 UltraSPARC-II 296Mhz pumping away at Data all day, as well as quite a few (28 in fact) Alpha 21264 machines running our FORTRAN simulations, a few scattered Intel MMX and Pentium boxes, and some Orca Auspex units for mass storage.The work is time-critical and can't go down at all, and our storage must be available full time for the rest of our team to analyze and use. We don't - CAN'T - take chances with electricity, and besides having UPS's connected to all the major units, we have a diesel powered generator in the basement of the building, and 60 car batteries to back that up.
I'd have to say that although I agree that *eventually* things will have to change and either alternative fuel sources need to be optimized and improved, or current devices need to come down in power consumption requirements (preferably both), for the moment, a lot of companies don't have a choice when it comes to using staunch amounts of electricity.
The applications for this device seem more promising at first glance than if one really sits down to think about them. No doubt, there will be applications where superficial chemical properties need to be examined and a descision needs to be taken based on input derived from those properties, but in a chemical analysis situation, more detailed methods need to be implemented.