3 ms·

> To work with current Windows versions, the team would have to replace the whole microscope. The marginal potential gains aren’t yet worth the US$400,000 expen

by rob74 5y ago

> To work with current Windows versions, the team would have to replace the whole microscope. The marginal potential gains aren’t yet worth the US$400,000 expense, Cherr reasons. Unfortunately there is not much information given on this particular example, but that definitely sounds like throwing the baby out with the bathwater? If the Windows XP computers are just interfacing with the microscope, surely it would be cheaper to just reimplement this interface (of course, the alternative of leaving everything as it is is even cheaper, until you get a ransomware infestation)? Or are they talking about Windows XP Embedded directly controlling the microscope?

freeone3000 5y ago
They're talking about Windows XP, client, directly controlling the microscope -- usually through a 16-bit driver. Vista redid the driver stack and broke compatibility with these. The driver is provided by the device manufacturer, who has little interest in providing new software for old hardware.
op00to 5y ago
How do you know your reimplementation isn’t subtly changing data? All research must be reproducible, and that includes the instrument and software chain as well.
asciimov 5y ago
I've worked with similar microscopes. One of them, worked perfectly fine for the tasks it was assigned to, but the software would only work up to Windows XP. To make matters worse, the whole system was hostile to any changes or updates. We didn't have an installer for the program but disk images to restore the system with the controller software already installed. The computer also had a hardware key connected to validate its licenses. Finally due to some validation checks the software performs, the controller software can't be placed on a virtual machine. One way you can deal with this is by getting the longest service contract you can afford when you buy the equipment. We had a slightly newer microscope with a service contract that was still good when the XP to Win7 transition happened. It took some prodding of the vendor, but they eventually came down and replaced the controller PC free of charge. Eventually those service contracts run out, and you are left with a perfectly good microscope, and an aging computer.

by rob74 5y ago

freeone3000 5y ago

They're talking about Windows XP, client, directly controlling the microscope -- usually through a 16-bit driver. Vista redid the driver stack and broke compatibility with these. The driver is provided by the device manufacturer, who has little interest in providing new software for old hardware.

op00to 5y ago

How do you know your reimplementation isn’t subtly changing data? All research must be reproducible, and that includes the instrument and software chain as well.

asciimov 5y ago

I've worked with similar microscopes. One of them, worked perfectly fine for the tasks it was assigned to, but the software would only work up to Windows XP. To make matters worse, the whole system was hostile to any changes or updates. We didn't have an installer for the program but disk images to restore the system with the controller software already installed. The computer also had a hardware key connected to validate its licenses. Finally due to some validation checks the software performs, the controller software can't be placed on a virtual machine. One way you can deal with this is by getting the longest service contract you can afford when you buy the equipment. We had a slightly newer microscope with a service contract that was still good when the XP to Win7 transition happened. It took some prodding of the vendor, but they eventually came down and replaced the controller PC free of charge. Eventually those service contracts run out, and you are left with a perfectly good microscope, and an aging computer.