comp.lang.idl-pvwave archive
Messages from Usenet group comp.lang.idl-pvwave, compiled by Paulo Penteado

Home » Public Forums » archive » Re: Anyone used FastDL?
Show: Today's Messages :: Show Polls :: Message Navigator
E-mail to friend 
Return to the default flat view Create a new topic Submit Reply
Re: Anyone used FastDL? [message #51962 is a reply to message #51952] Tue, 19 December 2006 02:35 Go to previous messageGo to previous message
Robbie is currently offline  Robbie
Messages: 165
Registered: February 2006
Senior Member
A few points I'd like to clarify:

I don't think that ITTVIS is setting the benchmark for these expensive
prices. The price of FastDL and IDL Analyst are more likely based on
the original prices that TechX and Visual Numerics charged. ITTVIS is
really just passing on the cost.

There are many ways to achieve clustered computing and none of them are
cheap so far as time or money is concerned. Most solutions involve
copious amounts of recoding. Even a simple batch processing script
(like you suggest) over several computers can end quickly in a train
wreck. I've done some preliminary work on network semaphores and I'm
hoping to find a solution to avoid colliding batch processes.

A better example of this kind of behavior is IDLffDICOMex,
IDLExportBridge and IDLDataMiner. My understanding is that these
products are wholly owned by ITTVIS. I think that releasing them as
pricey add ons stagnates the language. Customers are expected to recode
their DICOM applications when they upgrade from IDLffDICOM to
IDLffDICOMex. Customers are expected to fiddle with musical sav files
until IDLDataMiner becomes absolutely necessary. It's bad for the
customer and it's bad for the language.

Robbie
[Message index]
 
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Previous Topic: Re: Mapping Etopo2 in IDL?
Next Topic: Re: How to Get Started with the Z-Buffer

-=] Back to Top [=-
[ Syndicate this forum (XML) ] [ RSS ] [ PDF ]

Current Time: Wed Oct 08 18:03:46 PDT 2025

Total time taken to generate the page: 0.00180 seconds