You are using the text-only client on your machines, right? Dropping the screen-saver client is the first thing I would do to see an performance increase.
Dan >-----Original Message----- >From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On >Behalf Of Howard L Ritter, Jr >Sent: Saturday, March 16, 2002 1:13 PM >To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] >Subject: SetiQueue > > > >Bruce-- > >I've now been using SetiQueue for a week or so and I love it. The sky >display is much more entertaining to look at, as well as being actually >substantive. I've found that the 2 GHz Pentium machine in my office will >polish off WUs in an average of just over 3:30, a good hour off the S@H >screensaver time and faster than I'd expected. OTOH, SetiQueue on my home >computer, a Pentium 700 MHz, runs WUs in about the _same_ length of time as >the screensaver, 11:30. At my satellite office, a P4 866 runs WUs in about >8h vs. 10h. Don't know why the discrepancies, especially the lack of any >improvement at all on my home computer. > >Any suggestions for optimizing the performance of SetiQueue? == Unsubscribe instructions: http://www.talkspace.net/mlists/setiathome.html This list sponsored by talkspace.net: building space communities online. Mailing list services provided by klx.communications -- www.klx.com
