Quote from the News home page:
"July 19, 2004
We have brought up an additional transitioner to try and cut through the backlog we have accrued. Since the beginning of the project we have already processed 2.7 million results. For comparison, the beta project had only processed 6 million through the whole life of that project to date."

BOINC has been live now for about 1 month. So this means approx 60 results x minute. This is not very impressive is it? I am affraid this is more in the domain of manual processing rather than computer processing.

Hydnum Repandum </br>
Open SETI Initiative

Heh, maybe you should quit complaining and upgrade / contribute more computers.

Who cares who its done buy, if they run out of WU, then neither will get WU.

>So this means approx 60 results x minute.

It maybe less than Classic thats because people are still doing classic :)

^ Click Here ^ ^ Click Here ^ ^ Click Here ^

SETI Classic is processing 2.7 million results in 2.5 days, not in a month! This is a lot better than BOINC, but still not spectacular compared to other commercial/scientific projects with equivalent load.

Hydnum Repandum </br>
Open SETI Initiative

Apples and oranges, my good person, apples and oranges, you that are a nay sayer must not have a clue as to the real world.....

Owner's manual

Website Owner's Manual


Bah!!! I am in it for the money.

Message from the Head ;o) of the
Horse Head Nebula Branch of Seti@Home,

Check is in the mail

Excuse me. This is not about which crunches more. There are obvious reasons for differences. You so blinded by bragging about the dinosaur that you fail to see that you are comparing apples to oranges. If you want to process on classic, GO FOR IT. If Classic had the verification process preventing workunits from being processed more times than necessary, then it would have churn out nowhere near those numbers. In fact, it probably would have run out of workunits long ago. BOINC eliminates a lot of unneeded redundancy.

I am curious though what other commercial or scientific projects have an equivelent load. SETI@Home is the largest distributed computing project in the world. It uses more processing power than any supercomputer. So really, I'm at a loss as to what you are talking about.



> SETI Classic is processing 2.7 million results in 2.5 days, not in a month!
> This is a lot better than BOINC, but still not spectacular compared to other
> commercial/scientific projects with equivalent load.
>

> Excuse me. This is not about which crunches more. There are obvious reasons
> for differences. You so blinded by bragging about the dinosaur that you fail
> to see that you are comparing apples to oranges. If you want to process on
> classic, GO FOR IT. If Classic had the verification process preventing
> workunits from being processed more times than necessary, then it would have
> churn out nowhere near those numbers. In fact, it probably would have run out
> of workunits long ago. BOINC eliminates a lot of unneeded redundancy.
>
> I am curious though what other commercial or scientific projects have an
> equivelent load. SETI@Home is the largest distributed computing project in the
> world. It uses more processing power than any supercomputer. So really, I'm at
> a loss as to what you are talking about.
>
>
>
> > SETI Classic is processing 2.7 million results in 2.5 days, not in a
> month!
> > This is a lot better than BOINC, but still not spectacular compared to
> other
> > commercial/scientific projects with equivalent load.
> >
>
>
He is a classic TROLL, spewing fiction as fact, his opinion as knowledge.....
Bah!!! I am in it for the money.

Message from the Head ;o) of the
Horse Head Nebula Branch of Seti@Home,

Check is in the mail