The Tundra is supposed to be aimed at the same audience as this microscope. It's Thermo's smaller, cheaper, easier to maintain microscope. They are essentially trying to close off the bottom of the market from their competitors (JEOL and Hitachi). They are rightfully concerned that if people start buying 100 kV JEOL and Hitachi microscopes to learn/screen with, they will start preferring those when they go for large data collections, and that will erode the cash king that is the Titan Krios 300 kV TEM.
It's quite new, and there are many many issues with it, from a value standpoint. First of all, its' really not much cheaper than their previous budget 200 kV Glacios, and it's not much cheaper than JEOL's 200 kV offering as well. But there are rather insane compromises that make no sense.
They are saying that you need less space for the microscope, and while that's true, you also need an additional "loading station" that is quite large and necessarily complicated, that you don't need for the 200 kV and 300 kV microscopes. As an example, the loading station is a large desk that needs its own liquid nitrogen source - not needed on other microscopes. It has a computer that loads clipped grids into an autoloading arm - not needed on other microscopes. It uses the same expensive 12-grid cassette, but you can only use I think 5 of the slots in it, and only one at a time - again, not needed on other microscopes, which can load all 12, at the same time.
The microscope needs manual nitrogen filling, you can't just hook up a tank to it. You need to manually open the microscope doors, and pour nitrogen in, which is an awful idea for new users and seriously limits its autonomy. You can't just queue things up an forget about it any longer.
So in terms of ease of use, they've added a ton of complexity, but they haven't really reduced costs all that much. It really seems like a double miss.
Where it gets insidious, though, and Thermo displays their true hand, is on the software side. This is somewhat esoteric to those not in the field, but basically Thermo has always (since they were Phillips, and later FEI), sold their microscopes with a scripting package that you can purchase. You can then use that scripting package to control basically every aspect of the microscope. That lead to the development of open source software such as SerialEM, and Leginon. Those software packages are single-handedly responsible for the automation of data collection that has enabled cryo-EM protein structures. It would not have been possible on Thermo scopes without it, and frankly, Thermo didn't have the foresight to design their software to be capable of the techniques those open source packages employ. i.e. the exploding field of cryo-EM that Thermo capitalizes on by selling many 5 million dollar Krios microscopes every year would never have existed to begin with, if it weren't for the scripting package. And every year, people come up with new, ingenious ways to use that scripting package to do new, innovative things.
Well, now with the Tundra, Thermo has gotten rid of the scripting package. You are stuck using their data collection software. You can't even manually align the microscope anymore - everything is "automated" for "ease of use". Additionally, they've introduced multiple new APIs, some of which you are required to buy separately, if you want access to specific features. Essentially, they are going for two things: artificial market segmentation, and trying to get users locked in on their software from the ground up. It has not been well received, and has severe limitations, and in my opinion, could really use an antitrust investigation.
Thanks for your comment and perspective. I wasn't aware JEOL and others had 100 kV competitors suitable for imaging biological samples under cryo conditions.
The situation with Thermo Scientific is certainly concerning, and one could imagine a scenario similar to where the large software companies reportedly hire workers in part just to starve the competition of talent. (In Europe, lack of engineer availability is a major complaint I've heard from CRYO ARM users, which could fit within this framework.) Thankfully the UK blocked Thermo's attempted acquisition of Gatan, and now with the Apollo there will at least still be competition in the market for detectors.
It sounds like the situation with EPU/SerialEM has some similarities to the situation in data processing for single-particle reconstructions with cryoSPARC vs the open academic software packages. Not just the use of open licenses for code, but decades of algorithm development and open discussion in the literature clash with the potential to use patents, closed formats, and general lack of interoperability to give a single provider an effective monopoly. Maybe simply having commercial funding for UI development and testing will be enough to drive most (new) users to the commercial platform. One positive development in this area was the recent release of software for motion correction and CTF estimation under permissive licenses (https://github.com/czimaginginstitute). However the trend, at least in PDB depositions, is decidedly in favour of closed-source commercial software.
> Thanks for your comment and perspective. I wasn't aware JEOL and others had 100 kV competitors suitable for imaging biological samples under cryo conditions.
Just to be clear, I think the Tundra's market ("entry level" or about 1.5 million) is actually relatively under-served. The bad behavior is Thermo coupling their entry level microscope with a bunch of software restrictions that will prevent adversarial interoperability with other vendors, something that has not been the case in the past. Their previous entry-level line, the Tecnai Spirit 120 kV, had a full scripting package and could run SerialEM/Leginon, etc, and use Gatan or TVIPS or AMT or any other camera package.
>It sounds like the situation with EPU/SerialEM has some similarities to the situation in data processing for single-particle reconstructions with cryoSPARC vs the open academic software packages. Not just the use of open licenses for code, but decades of algorithm development and open discussion in the literature clash with the potential to use patents, closed formats, and general lack of interoperability to give a single provider an effective monopoly. Maybe simply having commercial funding for UI development and testing will be enough to drive most (new) users to the commercial platform. One positive development in this area was the recent release of software for motion correction and CTF estimation under permissive licenses (https://github.com/czimaginginstitute). However the trend, at least in PDB depositions, is decidedly in favour of closed-source commercial software.
It was nice to see MotionCor and AreTomo go open source. Generally, I'm less concerned about the reconstruction side because the file formats are pretty well standardized (despite being awful), so there's no lockout. I love RELION and EMAN2 dearly, but, particularly RELION needs to throw a FTE at a UX designer. CryoSPARC is just so much easier to use, easier to manage, easier to onboard folks. RELION really is a nightmare of complexity for new users.
You seem like you have quite a bit of experience - I'm curious what your background is?
> I love RELION and EMAN2 dearly, but, particularly RELION needs to throw a FTE at a UX designer. CryoSPARC is just so much easier to use, easier to manage, easier to onboard folks.
I've heard that the CCP-EM is working on a new front-end for RELION. It's doubtful that it would reach the same ease-of-use as cryoSPARC, but it might be a step in the right direction.
> You seem like you have quite a bit of experience - I'm curious what your background is?
I'm a freshly minted postdoc. I studied biochemistry and somehow spent about half of my PhD processing single-particle cryoEM data.
It's quite new, and there are many many issues with it, from a value standpoint. First of all, its' really not much cheaper than their previous budget 200 kV Glacios, and it's not much cheaper than JEOL's 200 kV offering as well. But there are rather insane compromises that make no sense.
They are saying that you need less space for the microscope, and while that's true, you also need an additional "loading station" that is quite large and necessarily complicated, that you don't need for the 200 kV and 300 kV microscopes. As an example, the loading station is a large desk that needs its own liquid nitrogen source - not needed on other microscopes. It has a computer that loads clipped grids into an autoloading arm - not needed on other microscopes. It uses the same expensive 12-grid cassette, but you can only use I think 5 of the slots in it, and only one at a time - again, not needed on other microscopes, which can load all 12, at the same time.
The microscope needs manual nitrogen filling, you can't just hook up a tank to it. You need to manually open the microscope doors, and pour nitrogen in, which is an awful idea for new users and seriously limits its autonomy. You can't just queue things up an forget about it any longer.
So in terms of ease of use, they've added a ton of complexity, but they haven't really reduced costs all that much. It really seems like a double miss.
Where it gets insidious, though, and Thermo displays their true hand, is on the software side. This is somewhat esoteric to those not in the field, but basically Thermo has always (since they were Phillips, and later FEI), sold their microscopes with a scripting package that you can purchase. You can then use that scripting package to control basically every aspect of the microscope. That lead to the development of open source software such as SerialEM, and Leginon. Those software packages are single-handedly responsible for the automation of data collection that has enabled cryo-EM protein structures. It would not have been possible on Thermo scopes without it, and frankly, Thermo didn't have the foresight to design their software to be capable of the techniques those open source packages employ. i.e. the exploding field of cryo-EM that Thermo capitalizes on by selling many 5 million dollar Krios microscopes every year would never have existed to begin with, if it weren't for the scripting package. And every year, people come up with new, ingenious ways to use that scripting package to do new, innovative things.
Well, now with the Tundra, Thermo has gotten rid of the scripting package. You are stuck using their data collection software. You can't even manually align the microscope anymore - everything is "automated" for "ease of use". Additionally, they've introduced multiple new APIs, some of which you are required to buy separately, if you want access to specific features. Essentially, they are going for two things: artificial market segmentation, and trying to get users locked in on their software from the ground up. It has not been well received, and has severe limitations, and in my opinion, could really use an antitrust investigation.