I recently posted a short review of the TechProse writing guidelines on my TechWriter blog, and am putting a plug in for it here.  While most of the comments I've posted here and on my other blogs have been oriented toward specific software tools or analysis methods, I plan to include some excellent links like the document in question. 

In the past few months I've dedicated myself to learning about some new or emerging molecular modeling and informatics resources out there that may be taking the place of the standard toolkit.   One area that has remained unchallenged for quite a while is the integrated graphical interface (think SYBYL, Discovery Studio, etc.) that gives you access to a molecular builder, basic molecular modeling tools (MM, MD, etc.) and a diverse array of visualization and analysis tools.  The thing that has remained common about all of the most popular tools is that they are fairly easy to use, cover a reasonably broad array of functionality, and cost lots of money to license.

Is this paradigm finally breaking?  I think so.  Finally there exists a freeware / open source tool that has the look and feel of the commercial interface product:  Avogadro (http://avogadro.openmolecules.net/) produced by OpenMolecules.  It does not yet have much more than a fraction of the functionality of the big commercial products, but it has a wonderful builder that I find more intuitive and efficient than any other tool (albeit with a few minorly clunky aspects here and there), decent visualization and a competent molecular mechanics optimizer.  I find it very useful, but the lack of a molecular dynamics solver is unfortunate.  For those people who need to manipulate and analyze molecules on a budget, though, it's a great find!

I've had a number of patent applications reach provisional stage, but until this one on prospective BRCA1-based breast cancer therapeutics, I hadn't had one reach approved, full patent stage.  It's not so much that the other ones were without merit; rather the attrition process is more related to the durability of an idea (the process is usually drawn out over a fair bit of time, which can test the commitment of the original authors) as well as institutional investment (the combination of filing fees and the cost of experts involved in helping to assemble the application can run well into $five figures$).  Anyway, I should give credit primarily to the coauthors on the application (their idea, I merely provided analysis to bolster it), but it's nonetheless satisfying to see resolution on a large-scale endeavor of this sort.