Old BOINC clients re-re-revisited.

Message boards : Number crunching : Old BOINC clients re-re-revisited.
Message board moderation

To post messages, you must log in.

Previous · 1 · 2

AuthorMessage
1mp0£173
Volunteer tester

Send message
Joined: 3 Apr 99
Posts: 8423
Credit: 356,897
RAC: 0
United States
Message 840336 - Posted: 15 Dec 2008, 23:08:28 UTC

There are really only two criteria that should be considered:

1) Who/what is lost when you set a limit (i.e. if you reject 4.x clients)

2) What damage is being done by the earlier client.

If 5.10.45 works, works on older systems that are still returning valid work, and grants credit, there is no reason to arbitrarily block it.

At the same time, anyone who can run 6.x and does not just because they don't like the layout is just being chauvinistic.
ID: 840336 · Report as offensive
Profile SATAN
Avatar

Send message
Joined: 27 Aug 06
Posts: 835
Credit: 2,129,006
RAC: 0
United Kingdom
Message 840339 - Posted: 15 Dec 2008, 23:19:11 UTC
Last modified: 15 Dec 2008, 23:19:47 UTC

Henri, I've never understood why you always bring this up. Your main point seems to be about lost credits. So it has no valid basis what so ever. If credits are that important to you, why don't you buy this new machine you've been on about for over 12 months. What difference does 1 result in 100 make?

You say install and leave isn't the way to do science. Then moaning about a worthless points system is also not the way to do science. If losing these credits is that important to you, then maybe you should look at crunching elsewhere.
ID: 840339 · Report as offensive
HTH
Volunteer tester

Send message
Joined: 8 Jul 00
Posts: 691
Credit: 909,237
RAC: 0
Finland
Message 840499 - Posted: 16 Dec 2008, 7:48:40 UTC - in response to Message 840339.  

If losing these credits is that important to you, then maybe you should look at crunching elsewhere.


You are right. :)
ID: 840499 · Report as offensive
QSilver

Send message
Joined: 26 May 99
Posts: 232
Credit: 6,452,764
RAC: 0
United States
Message 840584 - Posted: 16 Dec 2008, 14:55:59 UTC - in response to Message 840323.  

lets not get to hasty. 5.10.45 is a fine piece of work all other previous versions are caca


Agreed--I use 5.10.45 and 5.10.41 with absolutely no difficulties


I believe the version 5 that Henri is referring to is 5.2.6 and prior.
ID: 840584 · Report as offensive
W-K 666 Project Donor
Volunteer tester

Send message
Joined: 18 May 99
Posts: 19202
Credit: 40,757,560
RAC: 67
United Kingdom
Message 840777 - Posted: 17 Dec 2008, 6:53:49 UTC - in response to Message 840159.  

What about those of us who just don't like the way Boinc 6 sets up on the system and prefer the older structure? Honestly, there's nothing wrong with 5.10.45, 5.10.28, or 5.10.13 (all of which I use), so what's your problem with these versions that makes you want to just cut them off?


Using those versions is ok at the moment, I think, but some older BOINC 5 clients and all the BOINC 4 clients are underclaiming, I think.

"Setting-and-forgetting" is not the correct way to do science. Everyone should have some responsibility keeping their programs up to date. Just about five minutes once a year to check the BOINC site, downloading and installing.

If BOINC is so difficult to update, how did they manage to install the BOINC 4/5 in the first place??

HTH.

I recently had a task with wingman using Boinc V4.x and he was overclaiming. It's not noticeable normally, because it cases like the other claim is the one that is granted. And therefore no one complains.

When did you last complain because you, or anybody else, were granted what you claimed or more.

5.10.13 user and definitely not about to move to ver 6.
ID: 840777 · Report as offensive
Profile Vipin Palazhi
Avatar

Send message
Joined: 29 Feb 08
Posts: 286
Credit: 167,386,578
RAC: 0
India
Message 840788 - Posted: 17 Dec 2008, 8:33:48 UTC - in response to Message 840336.  

I personally like the way 5.10.45 is built. I use it for the first installation and then update it with Crunch3r's 6.1.0. I have no intention of changing over to the newer models, mainly because, as stated by others I do not like the new layout, and I need all my files in one basket. Moreover, I havent come across any errors whatsoever, even with one of my rigs which crunches AP. Labelling such guys as chauvinistic seems a bit extreme.

What one needs to keep in mind is that this is purely volunteering effort. Hence it is improper to force all the crunchers to use only certain versions of the application. As long as the computation is being done properly and the guys back in Berkeley think the results are fine, why worry.
______________


ID: 840788 · Report as offensive
Previous · 1 · 2

Message boards : Number crunching : Old BOINC clients re-re-revisited.


 
©2024 University of California
 
SETI@home and Astropulse are funded by grants from the National Science Foundation, NASA, and donations from SETI@home volunteers. AstroPulse is funded in part by the NSF through grant AST-0307956.