Chemstation ... ARGGG!!!

[zokitano]

Sorry...been seeing alot of posts from Karen01....and I am stepping into a land mine here but here it goes....

Funny thing is what you deam "limitations" some find familiarity.....a chemist taught on Chemstation can run any version from 20 years ago to today......IT IS the most popular Software in the world....why would Agilent want to replace it and leave thousands in the lurch.

[-- deleted by administrator --]

And yes I am an armchair Psychologist....

I completely agree with you. But the fact is: there is too much frustration in this world

[Karen01]

Sorry...been seeing alot of posts from Karen01....and I am stepping into a land mine here but here it goes....

Funny thing is what you deam "limitations" some find familiarity.....a chemist taught on Chemstation can run any version from 20 years ago to today......

And the design/software architecture under the hood is for computers from 20+ years ago... That would be very obvious to someone with modern programing experience/training.

That design is why you need separate on-line and off-line versions. The whole "register" approach is TODAY considered bad design that makes the system vulnerable to problems. Using such global variables for internal calculations AS WELL AS being read and written to by macros is simply bad programming practice. Things were done that way long ago because they had to be because of hardware (and programming language limitation in some cases) but that time passed long ago. That design makes it harder to maintain code and add new features etc, etc.

I think what Agilent is doing now with software shows they are starting to realize these issues.

IT IS the most popular Software in the world....why would Agilent want to replace it and leave thousands in the lurch.

The approach they are taking is to offer other choices in data systems for their hardware.

[-- deleted by administrator --]

Wish I had seen that!!!!

I understand people like what they are familiar with and have invested a lot of time learning and using... in that respect I am no different ...

But to understand the limitations with doing things one way , you often have to learn another . I 'grew-up' using using something else and am now learning Agilent's way... What I see SO FAR seems a lot less flexible, less safe (you can mess things up accidentally too easily) and while more simple to just run, less power user friendly. I also have not found anything I could not do in Empower.

- karen

[Csaba]

Hi all,

And the design/software architecture under the hood is for computers from 20+ years ago... That would be very obvious to someone with modern programing experience/training.

This is actually a problem also with Empower since it has hardly improved since the Millenium was launced some 15 years ago. Many problems with project names like Pß/3:4, sample names like S10-2345/4: 30 °C; 10 µL, methods names like 0.5 mL/min; @25 ºC and usernames like Märta Åsö. Has anyone used Excel and copy-pasted columns of data, how does it work in Empower? (I will come back with an Empower 3 evaluation in January.)

[Karen01]

Hi all,

And the design/software architecture under the hood is for computers from 20+ years ago... That would be very obvious to someone with modern programing experience/training.

This is actually a problem also with Empower since it has hardly improved since the Millenium was launced some 15 years ago.

Actually 15 years ago Millenium (and I was using it then) was a LOT buggier than Empower is now. It was pretty new, though the overall structure was similar tp the ExpertEase (860) software which ran on a VAX.

Many problems with project names like Pß/3:4, sample names like S10-2345/4: 30 °C; 10 µL, methods names like 0.5 mL/min; @25 ºC and usernames like Märta Åsö.

Lots of applications still have problems with text encodings (which is the issue here). Widespread support for text encoding of besides ASCII or "extended ASCII" is relatively recent .

While they should update that, as much as pain as that might be, it is essentially a cosmetic issue that does affect calculations, or data integrity.

I would guess that Waters has not touched their basic code for Empower for quite sometime as well.. But the basic design philosophy used seemed to be much more modern than Chemstation... Being built on top of the a database from the ground up (instead of being an add-on) resultedg in a cleaner more encapsulated/modern design

[/quote]
Has anyone used Excel and copy-pasted columns of data, how does it work in Empower? (I will come back with an Empower 3 evaluation in January.)[/quote]

I neve tried and never saw the point in trying to do that directly.

I did most of of calculation and reporting directly in Empower using custom calculations and fields when needed.

When that was not convenient I exported the data to Tab delimited text files from Empower (very fast/easy to set up) which were saved to our file server. We opened the files and pasted the into Excel templates (or I wrote custom application in some cases to digest the data) from our desks. I saw no point in having Excel on the Chromatography computers, as each one controlled 2-3 systems and were often used by more than one operator. No sense tying up the computer for things best done at one's desk

- Karen

[tom jupille]

Someone said that chromatography data systems are a lot like religions: the one you were born into usually seems to make the most sense.

At this point, I don't think any new converts will be made, so it may be time to take this discussion "off-line".

[mbicking]

My summary of ChemStation: "Easy to use but not intuitive to learn."

For R&D and small sample sets, ChemStation is much easier to use. (Try doing a single injection in Empower.)

However, reporting (and by this I mean anything more than printing reports) is a weak point for ChemStation. There are macros that will export the data to Excel, or you can always buy ChemStore, which is a relational database that works with ChemStation. However, it also has a steep learning curve, and doesn't always get good reviews from users. But it is Part 11 compliant and in the hands of a good operator I have seen some pretty nice demonstrations. Expensive, however.

Like many others, I am puzzled that Agilent has made little effort to improve the basic reporting capabilities; I guess they are opting for the more expensive add-on approach. However, there are some training options available, both on-site and on-line.

[varossf]

For the new and advanced reporting please check out the new Intelligent Reporter which is embedded in the new OpenLAB CDS ChemStation or the new OpenLAB CDS EZChrom.
We spent a lot of effort on the new reporting engine .

[Consumer Products Guy]

I'm a self-professed computer idiot and I can do very well on ChemStation, including automated Sequence Summary Reports and automated System Suitability Reports, as well as copying chromatograms very nicely into Word for my validation reports. So I like it, but note that I haven't tried others.

But when Windows won't print to the printer, I am much more lost !!! That's actually my current issue with home computer as well.....

[Karen01]

My summary of ChemStation: "Easy to use but not intuitive to learn."

Actually i found nothing easy about it... The all in one methods make doing some things much more convoluted than in Empower.

For R&D and small sample sets, ChemStation is much easier to use. (Try doing a single injection in Empower.)

I have. Never was an issue for me.

However, reporting (and by this I mean anything more than printing reports) is a weak point for ChemStation.

Compiling data in different ways is hard as it does not store results.
I think one can make it do a lot with macros but that means learning the macro language... In Empower you can do a lot more without going to that extreme.

There are macros that will export the data to Excel, or you can always buy ChemStore, which is a relational database that works with ChemStation. However, it also has a steep learning curve, and doesn't always get good reviews from users. But it is Part 11 compliant and in the hands of a good operator I have seen some pretty nice demonstrations. Expensive, however.

At my in last company, in my lab (we were R&D) we used Empower. The QC lab used ChemStation with Chemstore. Don't know how happy QC was with it but it always seemed bolted on rather than a single consistent product. If Fact it seems to me that ChemStation itself is a bit of a hodpodge with several legacies features with different philosophies that don't naturally hang together and make it hard to learn.

Like many others, I am puzzled that Agilent has made little effort to improve the basic reporting capabilities; I guess they are opting for the more expensive add-on approach.

That IMO is a mistake. The Empower standalone has all the features and sophistication you need for a small lab. When you need interconnectivity for lots of instruments and/or across labs you go client server which is more expensive, but the end users can already be power users of those Database type features and that helps the up sell as an organization grows.

I think Agilent needs to rethink it's bolt-on approach. Data centric work is much easier IMO with with the integrated database approach that starts with the single workstations and can be scaled to a central database when needed. It also make for fewer training issues in the long run IMO.

- karen

[Karen01]

I'm a self-professed computer idiot and I can do very well on ChemStation, including automated Sequence Summary Reports and automated System Suitability Reports, as well as copying chromatograms very nicely into Word for my validation reports. So I like it, but note that I haven't tried others.

Having your data and methods (and method versions) in a database gives you a lot of potential for streamlining a lot of stuff that needs to be done AFTER the chromatography is finshed.

BTW in another thread I asked about a certain type of summary report... As I did not want to take the time to learn the macro language, what i did was write a program in a language i know and I am almost finished with the first version.

I created a report layout in ChemStation that was both easily human readable (and had a chromatogram for each injection) but also easy to parse in code. I had ChemStation spit out the report to files as both Text and PDF. Unfortunately those files go into the individual injection data folders (Not exactly convenient for compiling and distributing them!!!)

My program finds the text file versions of the reports ACROSS sequences that it presents to me as a list in reverse chronological order that i select using checkboxes, and parses them to extract the relevant data.

It then presents me a list of injections from those sequences with columns for:

sample names
files names
date aquired
analyte results (usually amount Or area) for all analytes found in any injection in the set

It then lets me on the fly pick which injections i want to include in a 'printed' summary report. It also lets me pick which analytes to summarize results for in that final report.

Double clicking an injection also brings up the PDF version of the report for me to do a quickly review the "raw data" and chromatogram if I want.

Once I chose the injections it then creates a folder on the desktop, writes the summary report to it as graphic AND also as a tab delimited file that can be imported into excel. It then copies the individual PDF report files for those injection to that folder, renaming then with sample names (with stuff added to make them unique but easily human readable), Zips the folder and Emails it to the internal customer(s) I pick from a list.

It does a few more things as well. This will make my life a lot easier when I finish it! If there is a version 2 I think i'll put the data into a database, but that requires more thought/work.

- Karen

[unmgvar]

I wonder?
the time invested for you creating those reports, in order to work with an unfriendly software to you, could be quatified into wasted $ to your boss
and the wasted time for calcualting and reporting as well and all extra working procedures and time to get the filing right.

should be economical for your boss to simply buy empower is it not?
you've written 2 pages of very good points why empower kicks chemstation for you, why not present the case to uper management and find a budget for greater efficiency, streamlining, tima saving, money saving and etc...

maybe there is a second hand license even outhere in e-bay or other place for millenium or empower

[Karen01]

I wonder?
the time invested for you creating those reports, in order to work with an unfriendly software to you, could be quatified into wasted $ to your boss
and the wasted time for calculating and reporting as well and all extra working procedures and time to get the filing right.

I did convince my boss to go with Empower before I did it... But when I called my Water's sales rep, I found out Empower does not support the hardware models we have.

It was only after I found that out that I wrote the program, mostly on my own time. While it does not give Chemstation all the database related capabilities of Empower, for this particular work flow, the program makes getting the data out faster than with Empower alone.

- Karen

[gcguy]

Over the past 10 years or so, I have had a lot of people come through my team. Many of whom have used Empower and other CDS setups. Some have met our use of Chemstation with a degree of "Oh my God I have heard that Chemstation is rubbish" but within a few weeks have learned the ins and outs of it and found that for our requirements it is perfect. Yes it has limitations, yes it has some strange quirks but the point is that people have learned to use it within a few weeeks and actually start to wonder why they had concerns in the first place, perhaps paradigms have more influence than experience.
One comment I would make about it is that as it has been upgraded and changed over the years it has become more prone to issues. B.04.02 seems to have been issued to fix all the bugs that were present in B.04.01 which was in my opinion not as good as the A version.
If you look over the forum there is plenty of discussion on what type of instrument is best and which software is best...I think the answer is that none are the best...however some are better for what you want to achieve with them and what you need from them.

GCguy

[AICMM]

That's a great line Tom, perfectly stated. I'll have to remember it.

Best regards,

AICMM

[Karen01]

Over the past 10 years or so, I have had a lot of people come through my team. Many of whom have used Empower and other CDS setups. Some have met our use of Chemstation with a degree of "Oh my God I have heard that Chemstation is rubbish" but within a few weeks have learned the ins and outs of it and found that for our requirements it is perfect. Yes it has limitations, yes it has some strange quirks but the point is that people have learned to use it within a few weeeks and actually start to wonder why they had concerns in the first place, perhaps paradigms have more influence than experience.

I never said it was rubbish. It can do a lot of very useful things. It's just that the core design is from a different age of integration/User interface expectations and it does not have modern database and reporting capabilities built into the base package. You have to but expensive add-on's to get them... Which can be a hard sell to management at small companies.

What you "need" depends upon the workflows you set up, which tend to grow up around the CDS software to make life easiest using it. So of course if your workflow developed around using ChemStation, it means it is 'perfect' for that workflow. Same for Empower which is not perfect either and has it's own limitaions.

But with Empower, those that do not know how to take maximal advantage of the powerful database/reporting features of Empower (in my experience the majority of Empower users), don't realize how much those features can streamline workflow AFTER the injections/sequences are done.... but then again data handling is 'my thing'. That may seem like a little thing, but in my experience in the long run is a huge time savers.

That said by writing my program (and a 2nd web version which lets users see data/chromatograms from their desks for completed injections for during a sequence and download results) I have been able to fix to ChemStation's biggest bottleneck to my workflow post run, without having to buy an add-on package.


- karen