Re: Open Microscopy Initiatives?

On Feb 11, 8:02 am, ezkcdude <e...@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
On Feb 11, 4:07 am, heini <buerg...@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
wrote:



Sorry, I got it wrong.
I thought you were looking for a new microscope at the first hand.
for a standardized interface I must admit that I am not a friend of
standards in R&D.
I rather prefer a broad palette of manufacturers and parts, even if
they are not always exchangeable.
You refer to HTML as a standard.
Well, the good thing about HTML is that most texts are readable even
if the people using it don't care about these standards. By the way,
you have alternatives like pdf, ghostscript, doc, rtf, odf, printed
books...
I srongly disagree with your idea, that any government, -especially
the US government- should control how to steer my microscope.
All good standards like DIN and later ISO come from the industry side.
(It was an american craftman's idea to standardize screws, if you
shouldn't know, and not the idea of any government). The good thing
about these standards is, that you get standard, when you buy, but you
needn't to buy standard.
So a standardizing initiative must come from users or from industry.
Now the first thing to do would be to define a standard.
Believe me, every enterprise building hardware has predefined
standards.
And standards can be subject to changes. (We have HTML version 3, by
the way...) This is what you can see, when an obsolete interface is
removed from a microscope.
These people even provide you with documentation? So they have
standards!
But I don't want microscopes standardized to the freeze as I don't
want standardized cars, because this is the best way to stop
development.
Remember the rules of evolution and keep in mind the diversity...
We have enough standards like NA, light intensity, coverslip thickness
is standardized by DIN, didn't you know? So all the things that have
to be interchangeable -the specimens- can be moved from one
microscope to another. Ther rest is "gusto" and competition and I hope
it will stay like this.

yours, heini

Heini, it still sounds to me like you think I want standardized
hardware. That is not the case. The standard would be a software
interface. To my knowledge, none of these manufacturers use their
proprietary software interface as a selling point for their
microscopes. All these SDK's perform essentially the same tasks (eg
move stage, open/close shutter, change filtersets, focus, etc, etc),
yet use different code, perhaps even different languages. I would
argue that there is not a single purchase made based on how a SDK
specifies the stage is moved or a shutter is opened. Purchases are
made based on optics and hardware features. Of course, the
manufacturers would still create their own software to control the
microscopes. That wouldn't change. Also, I did not propose that the US
government create the standard - I would argue against that as well. I
would suggest a working group be formed consisting of university and
NIH scientists and representative from the major manufacturers of
microscopes (Leica, Olympus, Nikon, Zeiss), cameras (Hamamatsu,
QImaging, etc), motorized stages (Ludl, Prior, ASI) to come to
agreement on a common standard.

I hope an open interface standard is done as rapidly as possible. An
interface standard is like having standardized measurements. That has
worked over the millenia and allows for new software to be written by
scientists. I can't tell you how many times I've gone and looked at
non-functioning equipment that could be easily fixed with the right
software but with out access to it there was no way to make it work.

Thanks,

Kevin Cunningham
SMS
.

Relevant Pages

  • Re: Open Microscopy Initiatives?
    ... I thought you were looking for a new microscope at the first hand. ... You refer to HTML as a standard. ... This is what you can see, when an obsolete interface is ... none of these manufacturers use their ...
    (sci.techniques.microscopy)
  • Re: Zeiss Jena Laboval good microscope
    ... get a Zeiss microscope, can I use Wild or Leitz accesories (eyepieces, ... the Zeiss or Leitz?. ... So I think the best choice of all would be a Zeiss Standard, ...
    (sci.techniques.microscopy)
  • Re: A C++ Whishlist
    ... > not a reasonable thing to expect from the standard library. ... of the ECMA Script standard you will learn that complexity doesn't stop ... > The simple separation of interface and implementation that header files ...
    (comp.lang.cpp)
  • Re: Connect-Disconnect Firewire interface "hot"?
    ... The standard says "hot-pluggable" or, if it doesn't exactly say it, at least suggests it strongly enough so that it's an advertised feature. ... And now it seems that manufacturers on both ends of the cable are saying that it doesn't work that way. ... Should equipment that doesn't comply be not allowed to use the "Firewire" or IEEE-1394" labels? ... They can't help what happens to the microphones but being a company dedicated to good customer service and generously extending warranties for failed components, they got tired of fixing mixers for free. ...
    (rec.audio.pro)
  • Re: Features that can only be provided by the implementation?
    ... specific behaviors of standard CL functions allow but not mandated ... such as an interface to sockets.) ... Built-in Functions ... Getopt Parameter lists ...
    (comp.lang.lisp)
Quantcast