This is an archive of CompuServe forum messages from 1985 to 1995, as saved in transcripts by John Foust.
Search Results (9 messages)
I think you are very right, I find myself making these same arguments. Rather than focus on "friction" and "control" issues however (try to discuss these issues in strategy meetings with both ends of the argument present!) I tend to emphasize that there are substantial benefits to be had by…
I think such a two-tier system is where we'll end up with most users not bothering with large packages. In this regard I think the visualization tools become really important, In fact they may overwhelm the modeling aspect of the software. Electronic Drieding models (much more flexible and capable of…
I think our own interest is certainly driven by bench chemists, and you may see my other comments to Richard Hong and Tom Slee about the benefits I think are to be gained by moving modeling packages to the bench chemist. We've also seen the PC packages sneered at by…
By the way, PC Model is now available in a 386/387 version that I believe makes better use of PC resources.
I agree with a lot of what you say, which is why I'm really interested in what value is added by Hyperchem (particularly since the industrial price really pits the software against some software of good functionality (albeit they tend to run on platforms other than PC (RISC, primarily)). PC…
The support issue is an interesting one to us and I've always hoped that this was a "start-up" problem that would get ironed out in time. Just a little worried that there are too many intermediaries in the way before a technical person could be reached. Thanks for your offer…
Me again Richard, I agree with your comments, overall. But want to point out that in many instances (particularly the "small number of large firms") modeling solutions are usually available in some form (on workstations, mainframes, home-grown software etc.) i.e., the initial relatively large investment has already been made and…
Thanks for your quick reply. Actually it was fairly obvious that the minimizer was relying upon the atom type definition I was really trying to make sure that there was no workaround that I was missing. I think that MM2(85) fixed this problem. Is there a time schedule for updating…
#Minimizer Fault?
Message #18279
Has anyone tried minimizing a conjugated non-aromatic system? i.e., butadiene or an alpha,beta-unsaturated ketone? Using MM2 (the best of the given force fields for small molecules(?)) the minimized structure gives equal bond lengths for both the C1-C2 (or C3-C4) double bond and the C2-C3 single bond. What's going on here?…