can someone explain affx's advantage over incyte, nanogen, and hyseq?
for gene differential expression analysis, i see the ink-jet printing
of ests as the most efficient/accurate approach. for profiling snps,
i believe nanogen's method is the most accurate. while affx can, in
principle, put more oligos on a chip, i fail to see the need to put, e.g. the entire genome on a single chip. in a way, affx doesn't really have
its own corner. let's not to forget that sequence by hybridization
WAS invented by hyseq, no matter what affx says.
i just hope that affx will not join those companies with a technology
that sounds great in theory, but can't translate into money in practice. |
