This issue is not going to just blow over, regardless of how much anyone wishes it would.

Yes it will. People will stay or people will leave, life will go on.

Someone want a link to some threads where people demanded that Classic was kept on running? Or in the least that the "New Seti" followed the "crediting" as per Classic?

---

Maybe I'm missing something, but aren't people using the optimized clients still getting through the WU's faster? And if they get through the units faster, then that means they crunch more per day. If tey crunch more per day, then they get more credit per day, yeah?

If you're still getting more credit per day using an optimized client than you would be using the standard core, then what is all the gnashing of teeth and cry-babying about?

As soon as everyones queues are depleted, there will be only enhanced units to work on and those who crunch them faster will still get more credit than those who are slower and they'll *still* get to brag about their massive crunching ability (and teh science will still get done).


...or am I missing something?

---

Main rig: AMD Opteron 165 Dual Core, 2Gb PC3200, 450Gb onboard + 1Tb RAID-5 NAS
HTPC1: P4 2.8E, 1.5Gb PC3200, 3x80Gb SATA, Fusion5Lite + PVR-250, Sony 50A10 50" HD-LCD
HTPC2: P4 2.8E, 1GB PC3200, 200Gb PATA, PVR-250, JVC 32" tube

Maybe I'm missing something, but aren't people using the optimized clients still getting through the WU's faster? And if they get through the units faster, then that means they crunch more per day. If tey crunch more per day, then they get more credit per day, yeah?

Yes, but even with an SE result, on an optimized client, it can still vary between 45 minutes and 17 hours. Depending on AR of the result. And that is something the credit mongers don't like. :)

They ran their hundreds of results per day in an almost standard time of less than 1 to 2 hours. Yet SE, even if optimized, doesn't do that anymore. And it doesn't credit as they "are used to". So they leave here and go to other places where they can still crunch 75 results a day, not just 2.

I wonder why they aren't all crunching HashClash. 10,000 results/day quota. All running in 2 minutes or less. Must be fun.

---

Yes, but even with an SE result, on an optimized client, it can still vary between 45 minutes and 17 hours. Depending on AR of the result. And that is something the credit mongers don't like. :)

Thats BS.. it's not that WU's take longer to crunch nor that it's now based on fpop counting... it's about credit has been cut down.

---

Join BOINC United now!

The following link is posted without additional comment:

A thought on WU quota

---

Yes, but even with an SE result, on an optimized client, it can still vary between 45 minutes and 17 hours. Depending on AR of the result. And that is something the credit mongers don't like. :)

Thats BS.. it's not that WU's take longer to crunch nor that it's now based on fpop counting... it's about credit has been cut down.

Read the threads, dear Crunch3r.

Most of the people using the optimized clients say they don't want to run long results.

Then there's the couple who say that the credits aren't right.

And there are only a minimum amount of people who say that the results run for too long and they don't get the credit they are used to.

I know you were asked why you'd released an optimized client at the start of SE being released. I know you said because you promised it. Maybe that for a next time you can promise to release a client when all the bugs have been taken out.
Yet even your client can't reduce an SE VLAR running time to 2 hours. You might also want to explain why this is to people.

---

Maybe that for a next time you can promise to release a client when all the bugs have been taken out.

Well the enhanced app. should not have been released in the first place because its to buggy... read the threads i stated that not only once ;)

Anyway regarding beeing a stable app. well the most stable is still the optimized app...

---

Join BOINC United now!

Well the enhanced app. should not have been released in the first place because its to buggy... read the threads i stated that not only once ;)

Anyway regarding beeing a stable app. well the most stable is still the optimized app...

Agreed

the enhanced app. should not have been released in the first place because its to buggy

At the time of release you knew 5.12 wasn't stable on Win9x/SE/ME systems, so why release an optimized client for it? It wasn't anything to do with the graphics, as yours has none. Eric had said it wasn't the stable client for Win9x systems and that he would still work on that, hence why we're at 5.15 in Beta.

Anyway regarding beeing a stable app. well the most stable is still the optimized app...

The normal application is stable as well on Non Win9x systems. Some results can be unstable, but even your app crashes on them.

---

The normal application is stable as well on Non Win9x systems. Some results can be unstable, but even your app crashes on them.

well it might happen that the app. crash but the official crashes X times more often and you know that.

---

Join BOINC United now!

The door is on your left. :)

Although English is not my native tonge, I am quite sure that "Moderator" means the one that cools down, not heats up discussions.

---

At the time of release you knew 5.12 wasn't stable on Win9x/SE/ME systems, so why release an optimized client for it? It wasn't anything to do with the graphics, as yours has none. Eric had said it wasn't the stable client for Win9x systems and that he would still work on that, hence why we're at 5.15 in Beta.

So they released an application that is NOT stable on Windows 98/ME, and then turn around and force all users, including those running Windows 98/ME systems, to only use the new Enhanced application?

Sort of gives you a clue what they think of the older more experienced users who were around helping out during early Seti@home days, and who know what to expect from Seti project management, and are willing to voice their objections.

I wonder why they aren't all crunching HashClash. 10,000 results/day quota. All running in 2 minutes or less. Must be fun.

Ageless,

They are not because you have misconstrued their motives.

When your model badly fails to predict the outcome, both common sense and science suggest that you question the model.

---

Although English is not my native tonge, I am quite sure that "Moderator" means the one that cools down, not heats up discussions.

I second that.

IMO we should try to keep up a friendly atmosphere in the fora.
I would expect the mods to be an example in this regard....

I have bitten my tongue more than once in the last days instead of posting flames.

Regards Hans

P.S: Every contribution to the science counts, even if it is a big one :o)

P.P.S Most of the stuff posted over in the cafe seems to make more sense than what I'm reading here.

---

IMO we should try to keep up a friendly atmosphere in the fora.
I would expect the mods to be an example in this regard....

Usually you don't see me posting things like that, but since the person I addressed made it clear that either Seti had to follow his rules, or he would leave, I gave him the option.

And there are many more here who just say the same thing: You Seti change things to our liking, or we go. What would your reaction be at any such time? No one is listening to anything the other person says. No matter what is explained, Seti Enhanced is a bad thing and as such it must go.

Well, Newsflash for everyone who missed it: 4.18 is no longer split.
The splitters are only splitting Seti Enhanced results. So you can only still get 4.18s if they are in the Ready to Send queue and after that you only have two choices:

1. You leave, as you said you would. Hence the door.
2. You bite back on your comments, actually run more than one result and read up about why SE was released, what the differences with 4.18 are and wait for the next version to come out.

There aren't really any other choices. Demanding that Seti follow your way didn't work when Classic was shut down, it won't work now there is a new application.

---

I for one welcome Enhanced, fpops counting and all. :)

---

I NEVER said ONCE that enhanced was BAD. I understand full well the need to analyze the signals in greater detail. What I AM protesting is the SUDDEN REDUCTION OF CREDIT between v5.11 and v5.12. All we are asking for is to be able to earn credits at the SAME RATE as we just were.

If the credits are so worthless, then why is it that the people who care about them the LEAST are so against credit earnings as the were. The only people who are benefiting from the reduced credits and actually getting more of them then they were before, are the ones who didn't optimize in the first place, because they didn't care about credit? The only ones getting more credit from this, are people who don't care about credit. How ironic. Yet all we are asking for is CANCELING the REDUCTION of the granted credit for enhanced. The credits are worthless to you, remember. I am thinking that the only reason to oppose this, is because those who claim not to care about credit are so green with ENVY at those of us that can afford to build and support very large farms, that they applaud ANY opportunity to cut us down to size. Kind of like "hey, I don't have the resources to do that, so let's make the top people feel as miserable as I do, THEN we'll be even!" I may be wrong, but it sure sounds like this is what is going on here, although no one will ever admit to it.

Do we, the power users, have to go on strike to prove our point? That would be very interesting if everyone who crunches for credit disabled their network access on their entire fleets at the same time for 48 hours. Then do a "study" to see how much work gets reported during the strike. Since Berkeley was the focal point of the "Free Speech" Movement back in the '60's, I'm sure this should be right up their alley.

As I said before, read Ayn Rand's Atlas Shrugged. To anyone who has, you'll know exactly why I feel the way I do.

Regards, Daniel.

I for one welcome Enhanced, fpops counting and all. :)

I welcome it too. Gets rid of some of the organized cheating with high claims and low ball claims from some systems that drag the granted credit down.

I don't like their accounting that assigns only twice the credit to six times the actual work (fpops) being done. Nor do I like long running WU's that vary greatly in run time, at least not with any option to specify if I want to run long or short ones.

I am here for the search and details of it progress. I can not say I am here for "The Science" as there has been none, other than "Nothing of interest has been found". There is no science information being returned to us or learned by us for our effort. And I doubt that we would even hear about it until the paper on it was published. At least Seti Classic had some results analysis information that was updated from time to time. All we have here is BOINC.

snip
What I AM protesting is the SUDDEN REDUCTION OF CREDIT between v5.11 and v5.12. All we are asking for is to be able to earn credits at the SAME RATE as we just were.
big snip

Version 5.11 was the first Seti-Enhanced optimized app released by Crunch3r under heavy pressure from the Boinc community for an optimized version. It was claiming 3 times more credit than the stock Berkeley app and was superceeded by version 5.12 a few days later. And you feel that the Boinc developers should embrace 5.11 as the official version? How can they do that? 5.11 is not an official Boinc release, it is Crunch3r's release!

---

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

Do we, the power users, have to go on strike to prove our point? That would be very interesting if everyone who crunches for credit disabled their network access on their entire fleets at the same time for 48 hours. Then do a "study" to see how much work gets reported during the strike. Since Berkeley was the focal point of the "Free Speech" Movement back in the '60's, I'm sure this should be right up their alley.

I don't consider myself to be a power user - I have no fleet, just an 800MHz notebook and a 3.2 GHz desktop crunching.

However, I too am very disappointed with the reduction in daily credit given with "enhanced". I have been running the optimized client and app with the previous software because I felt it was unfair that faster computers were not being granted credit equal to slower computers on average with the non-optimized app and client. Why should faster computers be penalized just because they are faster? Now, with enhanced, a lot of people are arguing that granted credit doesn't change as much if you were not running enhanced before and insinuating that those who ran optimized were somehow cheating to monger more credits. I totally disagree! We were just trying to get fair credit (avg 32 credits) per completed WU like the slower computers were claiming!

I am also disappointed, after having donated to SETI@Home during the funding drive this year, that these complaints are not being addressed in a more forthright manner.

Therefore, I fully support a 48 hour strike to help get the point across. And if that doesn't get the attention of the decision makers, I may consider leaving the project. It costs nothing to give us fair credit for the work we do for the project, but it will cost the project dearly if people start leaving.

---

http://www.setiusa.net