Mine is also on 24/7, with Boinc running in the background. My P2P is also on 24/7, whether I'm surfing the net, watching a movie, playing games or doing anything else. I don't waste a single cycle on my computer.

---

Boinc V7.2.42
Win7 i5 3.33G 4GB, GTX470

I'd leave mine on, but I wouldn't go out and buy new ones just to leave them running for no purpose.

How many of the PC's crunching BOINC projects would have to be left "on" 24/7 if they were not being used for distributed computing projects? Virtually none. That is why its appropriate to question the amount of resources expended on these projects. I would guess that the majority of computers being used for BOINC projects average only a couple hours a day of "regular" computer use - some more than others, but there are many machines out there that do nothing but DC. The only PC's that really have to be on 24/7 are servers and gateways...how many of you can say your computers would have to be "on" all the time if not for DC?

My on/off patterns would change very little. In fact that is why I started seti@home in the first place, it gives my computers something to do when I am not using them.

---

BOINC WIKI

BOINCing since 2002/12/8

How many of the PC's crunching BOINC projects would have to be left "on" 24/7 if they were not being used for distributed computing projects? Virtually none. That is why its appropriate to question the amount of resources expended on these projects. I would guess that the majority of computers being used for BOINC projects average only a couple hours a day of "regular" computer use - some more than others, but there are many machines out there that do nothing but DC. The only PC's that really have to be on 24/7 are servers and gateways...how many of you can say your computers would have to be "on" all the time if not for DC?

I think the more appropriate question is, how many of us care? I guess not too many since we all do it.

---

- cJ

How many of the PC's crunching BOINC projects would have to be left "on" 24/7 if they were not being used for distributed computing projects? Virtually none. That is why its appropriate to question the amount of resources expended on these projects. I would guess that the majority of computers being used for BOINC projects average only a couple hours a day of "regular" computer use - some more than others, but there are many machines out there that do nothing but DC. The only PC's that really have to be on 24/7 are servers and gateways...how many of you can say your computers would have to be "on" all the time if not for DC?

Me!!

---

I'd rather speak my mind because it hurts too much to bite my tongue.

American Spirit BBQ Proudly Serving those that courageously defend freedom.

How many of the PC's crunching BOINC projects would have to be left "on" 24/7 if they were not being used for distributed computing projects? Virtually none. That is why its appropriate to question the amount of resources expended on these projects. I would guess that the majority of computers being used for BOINC projects average only a couple hours a day of "regular" computer use - some more than others, but there are many machines out there that do nothing but DC. The only PC's that really have to be on 24/7 are servers and gateways...how many of you can say your computers would have to be "on" all the time if not for DC?

When Classic stopped accepting new accounts they had about 5.5 million users. What do you suppose was the total amount of energy used to crunch the 2 billion Classic work units that were done prior to last September? If the most beneficial results of that expense of non-renewable energy was a few "interesting" locations and results, I say it was a waste of valuable resources. I believe in the distributed computing concept, and have supported it myself with significant financial and time investment. But I have to question whether the cost vs benefit of the projects developed to date really justifies their continuation. I'm not trying to be confrontational, in fact I am really rather sad about reaching this conclusion regarding Seti@Home. I understand that finding verifiable signals was always a long shot.......both because the project was looking at very narrow regions of space and because we may have had our "radio" tuned in to the wrong "frequency" (I realize this is oversimplification but you know what I mean). With respect to S@H in particular, does this "long shot" really justify the expenditure of the very limited resources our earth posesses? And are we really meant to discover these extraterrestrial signals at all?

As it has said for years...SETI@home is about using resources that are already wasted by utilizing idle computer cycles from computers that would otherwise be on. A more appropriate question would be does the long shot justify the expenditure of additional resources (farm building, 24/7 dedicated SETI machines, etc.)?

When Classic stopped accepting new accounts they had about 5.5 million users. What do you suppose was the total amount of energy used to crunch the 2 billion Classic work units that were done prior to last September? If the most beneficial results of that expense of non-renewable energy was a few "interesting" locations and results, I say it was a waste of valuable resources. I believe in the distributed computing concept, and have supported it myself with significant financial and time investment. But I have to question whether the cost vs benefit of the projects developed to date really justifies their continuation. I'm not trying to be confrontational, in fact I am really rather sad about reaching this conclusion regarding Seti@Home. I understand that finding verifiable signals was always a long shot.......both because the project was looking at very narrow regions of space and because we may have had our "radio" tuned in to the wrong "frequency" (I realize this is oversimplification but you know what I mean). With respect to S@H in particular, does this "long shot" really justify the expenditure of the very limited resources our earth posesses? And are we really meant to discover these extraterrestrial signals at all?

Again, as new antennas come online, and as technology gets better, we will be processing more of the universe, and more singals. I am always in hope that we find something.

A lot of research went into what we have done so far. Berkeley is researching our data, their own data, and data of other places to make the best decisions on what and where to look.

If you think we do not need as much processing in Seti, then add on some other worthy projects. There are a few protein folding applications, maybe you can help find the cure for something. Climate predicting, Cern Magnent, etc. Many good projects. You machines can be very busy with some worthy projects.

I personally help out 4 different ones (as you can see in my signature). I think everyone should at least do 2 different ones, just for the ability to keep your machine busy incase one has an outage.

Also, as you see from all the responses here, everyone has been supportive of the software, the cause, and hoping you will stick around, at least in part.

It's all a matter of ones personal prespective, but with a giant universe out there, something new is discovered every day. Maybe you will be the one to help.

---

I understand that finding verifiable signals was always a long shot.......both because the project was looking at very narrow regions of space and because we may have had our "radio" tuned in to the wrong "frequency" (I realize this is oversimplification but you know what I mean). With respect to S@H in particular, does this "long shot" really justify the expenditure of the very limited resources our earch posesses? And are we really meant to discover these extraterrestrial signals at all?

But then K&L, we knew all these facts from the very beginning in 1999. We knew that the chances of finding ET were and are very little. But all this applies to both Seti versions and doesn't affect your topic "BOINC Popularity vs Classic SETI@Home".

When old Adenauer of Germany once was pointed to the fact that he contradicted himself, he said that it's not forbidden to become wiser. Perhaps you have become too wise to believe in Seti. I can understand that, but I prefer to stay dumb...

:-)= Greybeard

---

All about BOINC: BOINC-Wiki (by Paul D. Buck)

And are we really meant to discover these extraterrestrial signals at all?

The only way to find a needle in a hay stack when you can't afford the metal detector is to get a lot of hands in the pile. Eventually someone will get stuck!!

Is there some law that says we can't ry to find them?

---

I'd rather speak my mind because it hurts too much to bite my tongue.

American Spirit BBQ Proudly Serving those that courageously defend freedom.

When Classic stopped accepting new accounts they had about 5.5 million users. What do you suppose was the total amount of energy used to crunch the 2 billion Classic work units that were done prior to last September? If the most beneficial results of that expense of non-renewable energy was a few "interesting" locations and results, I say it was a waste of valuable resources. I believe in the distributed computing concept, and have supported it myself with significant financial and time investment. But I have to question whether the cost vs benefit of the projects developed to date really justifies their continuation. I'm not trying to be confrontational, in fact I am really rather sad about reaching this conclusion regarding Seti@Home. I understand that finding verifiable signals was always a long shot.......both because the project was looking at very narrow regions of space and because we may have had our "radio" tuned in to the wrong "frequency" (I realize this is oversimplification but you know what I mean). With respect to S@H in particular, does this "long shot" really justify the expenditure of the very limited resources our earch posesses? And are we really meant to discover these extraterrestrial signals at all?

Since Seti@Home, both Boinc and Classic are the largest distributed computing project, and have been since their inception, I would say that the majority of distributed computing hobbyists dissagree with you. These hobbyists must think it worthwhile or would not participate in the project!

---

Boinc....Boinc....Boinc....Boinc....

Credit: 153,267
RAC: 4,396

And Yet you crunch!!

These are not Classic values!!

---

I'd rather speak my mind because it hurts too much to bite my tongue.

American Spirit BBQ Proudly Serving those that courageously defend freedom.

When Classic stopped accepting new accounts they had about 5.5 million users. What do you suppose was the total amount of energy used to crunch the 2 billion Classic work units that were done prior to last September? If the most beneficial results of that expense of non-renewable energy was a few "interesting" locations and results, I say it was a waste of valuable resources. I believe in the distributed computing concept, and have supported it myself with significant financial and time investment. But I have to question whether the cost vs benefit of the projects developed to date really justifies their continuation. I'm not trying to be confrontational, in fact I am really rather sad about reaching this conclusion regarding Seti@Home. I understand that finding verifiable signals was always a long shot.......both because the project was looking at very narrow regions of space and because we may have had our "radio" tuned in to the wrong "frequency" (I realize this is oversimplification but you know what I mean). With respect to S@H in particular, does this "long shot" really justify the expenditure of the very limited resources our earth posesses? And are we really meant to discover these extraterrestrial signals at all?

Celtic Wolf:

KILOwatt hours?? Good lord I work for a CLEC and we don't use KILOwatt hours with our normal computer needs.

Of course you do; 125 watts for 8 hours is 1 kwh. and those are the units which electric meters in the US measure.

In my case, I've been leaving a cruncher running overnight for about 5 years which would otherwise have been turned off, so about 1800 kwh. have been dedicated to SAH crunching. At an average cost of about 12 cents per kwh. in my location, that adds up to US $216.

Well he did make it sound like he needed a Nuclear Power plant to run SETI..

I stand corrected!! $216.00 for 5 years is a whole lot of money!!! Can you afford that???

---

I'd rather speak my mind because it hurts too much to bite my tongue.

American Spirit BBQ Proudly Serving those that courageously defend freedom.

I pay with "budget" payments, about $300 a month. Now, Nancy says that is way too high but goes off on irrelevant tangents when I point out that we could save bunches if she would watch less television ...

I mean, why does she think that 8 computers has anything to do with the amount we spend on electricity. I know! It is that evil Wiki, sucking up my electrons ... :)

But to the original comment,

SETI Queue - allowed queuing, built into BOINC
SETI Driver - also queuing, still built into BOINC

Of course there was that "cherry-check" button to get "fast" work units ... but I maintained, that if you took what you got and did the work it all evened out, and the point was to do the science, not to build up credit.

The other tools I know for SETI@Home Classic have survived in a form in the BOINC world, or other programs have come out. The web site here has a page that I always have to hunt for to find ... Othe links are :BOINC Spy, BOINC Log-X, SETI@Home MapView, etc.

So, I am ALWAYS puzzled by this assertion that BOINC does not do as much as SETI@Home Classic. Even better, we have a dynamic community that has many volunteers doing a part to improve all aspects, one nut tries to write down everything there is to know about BOINC and the Science Applications. There are many Teams (just joined one myself the other day... blush). 4-5 sites that allow you to slice and dice your performance which was never available (at least that I know of) ...

I do grant that BOINC is a little harder. And there is more that appears wrong. But a lot of that is because so much more is visible. Before, all you knew, if you even knew that, was that you could not connect. Now, you know what parts of the server side are running, what is being split, how much work is "in flight" ... and you can even spend an evening curled up on the couch reading the Wiki by fire light ...

When ever I ask the question. What exactly is so much better. I see statements like yours (which as others have said you have every right to, and I have, and am accessing my right to disagree - politely), it says I liked the old queue. Um, ok, why? The point is to keep the comptuer busy. My computers run 24/7 and aside from occasional reboots, odd deaths, run continuously with plenty of work.

Third party support? We have that coming out of our ears. Tony answers quesions here, I write documentation, Willy and Zain, and others, do statistics, others write add on applications as the need appears. Volunteer developers like JM VII and Ingleside keep me straight (and make their own unique information adds to the Wiki), and do code work. Heck, I suggested a minor change (ahem, does that make me a developer too? :)), and the next day, more data for us. Oh, and lest I forget, the dedicated groups that have been bringing optimized applications to a thursty world. Mr.T, I cannot believe the care he brings to OUR world. He has been testing optimizations and HAND coding functions, testing what is fastest, finding BUGs, my word the subtle bugs in the science application he is finding (and if I read the tea leaves correctly, some of which have been in the code since classic days). We have so much third party support I KNOW I have missed some, oh, the migrators to "niche" platforms like Itanium, etc.

Anyway, if BOINC does not do if for you, run Classic till it closes. Because close it will. Then:

• either learn to like BOINC (or suffer quietly or not as your choice - though the loud sufferers mostly damage their standing in the community - no one likes a complainer/maryter),
  
• don't do any DC (a loss for us all),
  
• start doing non-BOINC DC, a lot of them out there ... all single project like SETI@Home Classic was
  
• pitch in and write new/replacement applications,
  
• read the code and suggest fixes (that is how we got the stats tab - some one out of UCB wrote it and sent it in)
  
• Write a BOINC Clone that has all of the virtues of Classic, and none of the flaws of BOINC
  

But, as a practical matter, for the life of me I still cannot see what is so bad about BOINC. I install it, attach projects to the computer, and then let it run. If I was into screen savers, heck running 3-4 projects with screen savers that vary over time, how much cooler is that than Classic (not to mention, I can do, or not do graphics or the screen saver without haveing the change applications).

So, I am truly interested in if this was just a rant, or are you trying to make BOINC work like Classic. And, since much of that is possible right out of the box, I am at a loss as why you cannot accomplish that. So, if you need help, this is the place. If you can tell us what BOINC does not do, that Classic does do, well, perhaps you can do it in BOINC too ...

Well, no, cheating is out ... but almost everything else is ... and Credit, I have a million cobblestones (and change), in classic I had 61,000 and change. Neither buys me a new Lexus. Neither can be compared to the other (though my standing percentage could ... in either case it is high enough to annoy most people).

Sorry to see you leave, if that is your choice ... but, there is no need to leave ...

---

Celtic Wolf:

KILOwatt hours?? Good lord I work for a CLEC and we don't use KILOwatt hours with our normal computer needs.

Of course you do; 125 watts for 8 hours is 1 kwh. and those are the units which electric meters in the US measure.

In my case, I've been leaving a cruncher running overnight for about 5 years which would otherwise have been turned off, so about 1800 kwh. have been dedicated to SAH crunching. At an average cost of about 12 cents per kwh. in my location, that adds up to US $216.

---

                                             Joe

You have upset poor Greybeard Shame on you!!!

LOL! Guess I deserved that :-)=
Wolf, you're a treasure.

:-)= Greybeard

---

All about BOINC: BOINC-Wiki (by Paul D. Buck)

K&L...

You are intitled to your opinion. You have the right to share it here.

I also have the right to say I don't agree with you.

While SETI might be a complete waste of time, as ET might not be out there, and if he/she/it is there, we might not be able to detect them, the effort that Berkeley have put into developing Boinc such that it, Boinc, can be used by other projects, is in my personal opinion a very good thing.

They have made a free set of utilities, so that you, I, or anyone else who wants to, can help some scientific group solve their problem without having to buy shed loads of CPU power.

If you do not wish to partake, thats your choice. Do well in what you do chose to do, assuming you actually do decide to do something at all......

---

Foamy is "Lord and Master".
(Oh, + some Classic WUs too.)

Having done both, I beleive the BOINC stucture to be much more predictable. Geting 1 credit for each result crunched, no matter what size it is or even if it's a bad result is unpredictable.

Plus, there is deeper scanning able to be done, newer antennas with different style data able to be looked at, giving us more sky to look at. Other scanning abilities (like Autopulse) to look for different things in the data. Not to mention all the other projects able to be worked on, beside SETI.

I see you have done a lot of work, already. You even used Optimized clients. So you see results in your credits. Not all people have fast machines, including yourself. Not all people have 24/7 connections, not all machines are running efficitently. So, there isn't an instant gratification on all results crunched. This to me adds a bit of excitement when things do get going.

SETI has been pretty stable for several weeks now, things are going good. I am anticipating the newer version(s) of software to come forward, and see how this stuff really blooms. I am even building a larger farm, because of the new software.

I know this may not change your mind, and alas some people will leave. It happens every day. But I beleive you are wrong in stating this new system is not creating worthwhile results, and I think it will grow beyond Classic.

Good luck in your future endevors.

---

After all these years of cruchning, all the energy and CPU cycles expended, it would be a stretch to say that ANY worthwhile results have been obtained from the project.

What exactly would you call a "worthwhile result" - short of first contact with an alien civilization? They have a whole list of several hundred (thousand?) "interesting" sky locations that warrant further investigation. They have also learned a LOT about how to manage and administer a distributed computing project. All that knowledge has gone into creating BOINC. From the very beginning of classic, they always said that the chances of finding anything were EXTERMELY slim and the project would most likely not find any verifiable signals. But the only way to make certain you don't find anything is to not look.

If you want immediate results, I would suggest you look at one of the other BOINC based projects. LHC is helping to fine-tune a high energy particle accelerator that is scheduled to be completed in the next couple of years. Various protein folding projects are studying how our cells work on a molecular level. CPDN is analyzing climate prediction models to study global warming. Take your pick or do them all. Or stay bitter and do none. Up to you I guess. But I suspect that BOINC will far surpass seti classic in popularity in the next couple of years.

---

A member of The Knights Who Say NI!
For rankings, history graphs and more, check out:
My BOINC stats site