Nothing is new! Maybe We fell into a weird in-between where price point was a problem too, because we couldn't afford a pharma-scale solution but also needed something more developed than an academic solution?
Comments
Log in with your Bluesky account to leave a comment
There still seem to be the same problems that have been present since the '00s. No 2 labs use the same workflow, so any LIMS has to be very configurable: a lot of internal complexity & tricky configuration API. The small market also leads to high yearly fees (if you want to stay in business).
Right, I would say there likely have even been good LIMS solutions, but they couldn't hang on. @mattwfoster.bsky.social (I think) tells some story of this old software suite that had what sounds like an incredible MS LIMS... but totally defunct.
Maybe conflating two things. We are on our second LIMS system which can send out quotes, has a user- and staff-facing interface, is used for project management and billing. The story was about Rosetta Elucidator…
Same 'problem' that has plagued proteomics since Day 1 (i.e. ~1975)...no labs using same protocols or workflow. Explains so much of the situation we find ourselves in, not just with respect to LIMS.
Comments