![]() |
|
![]() |
||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Ion Torrent vs MiSeq vs GS Junior | razibus | General | 39 | 11-08-2015 12:45 PM |
UPS (Uninterruptible Power Supply) with Ion Torrent | Liam_Gallagher | Ion Torrent | 8 | 01-03-2012 09:50 AM |
Ion Torrent/MiSeq Ordering | riegs | General | 3 | 12-28-2011 07:30 AM |
Reflecting on a Year of Ion Torrent -- Omics! Omics! | ECO | Ion Torrent | 2 | 12-18-2011 04:06 PM |
When Will Life Tech Get Serious About Grand Challenges -- Omics Omics Blog | ECO | Ion Torrent | 2 | 03-04-2011 08:49 PM |
![]() |
|
Thread Tools |
![]() |
#1 |
--Site Admin--
Location: SF Bay Area, CA, USA Join Date: Oct 2007
Posts: 1,358
|
![]()
Keith (krobison) wrote a great article about the battle for the benchtop...check it out here:
http://omicsomics.blogspot.com/2011/...ized-lead.html |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#2 | |
--Site Admin--
Location: SF Bay Area, CA, USA Join Date: Oct 2007
Posts: 1,358
|
![]()
From this (PDF warning) press release:
Quote:
|
|
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#3 |
Member
Location: Boston, MA Join Date: Aug 2009
Posts: 39
|
![]()
I tend to be more skeptical than KR on this one.
First, this is all vaporware until they a) have 318 chips in the field, which is half a year away; b) improve their sample prep time as they claim they will; and c) we get some idea of the real-world performance of their current system. Second, I am confused by their claim above that the 318 and 316 will be priced the same, as they previously indicated that there would be tiered pricing (I think $500, $900, and $1200 for the three chips). None of this is to say that they won't deliver (and of course I hope they do), just that this announcement comes across as marketing-driven more than anything else. -- The other thing I'd point out is that the "ideal" PGM scenario from Keith's post -- shallow sequencing from a number of samples on a semi-continuous basis -- is not really in line with the strengths of these devices. For that application, as long as you have a decent lead time, wouldn't you just multiplex onto a larger machine for much less $ and labor? To me, these machines need to be fire and forget. Have a sample and a couple hours to spare? Know all about it tomorrow. This is very empowering, but is a different set of applications from the big boys. |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#4 |
Senior Member
Location: Boston area Join Date: Nov 2007
Posts: 747
|
![]()
Thanks for the feedback (and I'll respond in the comments to some more tonight)!! I think it is fair to say I wrote yesterday in line with IT's confidence they can bring these improvements to market.
On the pricing ($500 for the 318, rather than a premium over the current price of $500 for the 314), this does seem to be a shift from the prior statements-- perhaps driven by the pressure from MiSeq. Of course, as is pointed out, until they are in the field it is all hypothetical. WRT sequencing scenarios, it's really going to depend on how time-sensitive your information is. I'd agree that for many projects, time isn't so critical and so you'd rather wait & pool. On the other hand, for a number of applications (biosurveillance, use in the clinic, rapid method prototyping & optimization, strain optimization) time will be critical and samples will come in at unpredictable rates. And, I see a number of companies which have been quite successful running high-volume on-demand Sanger sequencing. What I imagine (and would love to have access to), is a similar service leveraging either PGM or MiSeq. For a number of recent projects, submitting a pool of sequences for one of these platforms would have been just as easy as the collection of wells for Sanger. Still, a system more suited for mass crunching (such as PacBio or OxNano) with inherent multiple sample handling would clearly be preferable. |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#5 |
Junior Member
Location: Cambridge, MA Join Date: Aug 2010
Posts: 6
|
![]()
When "IT's confidence they can bring these improvements to market" depends on their receiving $350M, everything they say without data to back it up is suspect. This is the biggest conflict of interest I have seen in the genomics field.
The media should be reporting on published data, not treating their crafted press releases as gospel truth. Whether they get the $350M or not, I bet the reports come back to reality when real versus press release data is shown. What ever happened to peer review? "Over the past few years, Life Technologies (LIFE - Analyst Report) has been expanding its product portfolio through acquisitions; the latest being privately held Ion Torrent, a DNA sequencing company, for $375 million in cash and stock. In addition, Life is also liable to pay $350 million if certain milestones are met through 2012." |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#6 |
Guest
Posts: n/a
|
![]()
i can't think of any tech company that releases a product first, then advertises current specs. I see no reason this would change for a sequencing company. Of course, you have to judge a company by how often they really meet these projections. That takes effort.
|
![]() |
![]() |
Tags |
miseq pgm omics |
Thread Tools | |
|
|