MacResearch

after five full years of OS X that there are still people who depend on OS 9.

Now, don't get me wrong... I was one of the last to switch... I think I stuck with OS 9 almost up until 10.3 came out. However, the days of 9 are long gone.

The only reason I know of that anyone in my field (cognitive psychology/neurophysiology) still uses 9 is that the old version of the Psychophysics Toolbox for MATLAB was so good, is still so good, that we still use it on OS 9 on a couple of our experimental machines. Even so, the new OS X version of PsychToolbox is now pretty much up to snuff, so even then, the only reason not to switch is because people are lazy and don't want to recode their experiments.

----------------
Mac OS X; because giving Unix a user-friendly GUI was easier than fixing Microsoft Windows.

We still depend on CellQuest under OS 9. So far I read only horror stories from people who tried to acquire FACS data under OS X. Prices for software updates are beyond the sky and also do not really bring new features with them. So we don't change a running system...

Also, ImageQuant and Tools have not been released for OS X yet (and probably never will be).

Finally, I MacurveFit and QuickTTest. Simple programs, I know. But sometimes very useful.

Hi Markus,

thanks for all these links. However, WEASEL2 does not ACQUIRE data from a flow cytometer. Plot crashed within the first two minutes and I know no other stat program than QuickTTest that allows a t-test for two means with sem/stdev without entering all individual measurements. This is sometimes very handy. For all other statistical problems we use JMP.

The bottom line is, none of the programs you listed, can replace the applications I mentioned. Although PLOT may come close once it is more stable.

Well if you were in the Graphic Arts field and purchased thousands of dollars worth of programs such as Photoshop, Illustrator, Indesign, Quark, etc. You wouldn't want to purchase them all over again to run on a new computer.

Cricket Graph still runs under the Classic environment of OS X, but only on PPC Macs (i.e. Classic itself won't work on the new Intel Macs). So you should still be able to fire up a copy of Cricket Graph and read your old files, assuming you have Classic running on a PowerPC Mac.

Let me know where the stumbling block is for you, and I should be able to help.

From the Deltagraph FAQ page

CricketGraph data files can be imported to a DeltaGraph data sheet. To accomplish this, drag the CricketGraph file into a DeltaGraph data sheet. CricketGraph file import is not an option in the File Import dialog.

http://support.redrocksw.com/dgknowledge/question.php?qstId=219

There is a demo version here

Please let us know if this works

http://support.redrocksw.com/downloads/

Does anyone know of a document that describes the CricketGraph file format?
It might be possible to figure it out if I get a few files with known content.

David

I have over a decade of investment in FoxPro databases for my research. I've grown to depend on the built-in procedural programming capability that simplifies querying and then manipulating the results. I am in the process of shifting all my dBase files to mySQL under MacOS X (using the Navicat front-end) but I do not yet know how to replace the functionality of the procedural programming available in FoxPro. Typically, I want to query a database, shove the results into variables which I can then manipulate (basic arithmetic operations interlaced with logic branching). For example, get 1024 values of a time series, whack them into an fft and return the frequency space results.

Any recommendations for how to provide the computing flexibility under MacOS X? I was hoping to avoid having to create intermediary text files as input to FORTRAN code, but if that's what it takes to completely migrate to OS X then I guess I'll have to do it.