I second that thank you for the reasons given. :-))))))))))))))))))))))))
"Orin" <orinbalenovic.NOSPAM@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:MPG.19d5e76375726a9b989686@news.carnet.hr...

In article <jwDab.1411$8b1.10480@news.uswest.net>, obermd-@-alum-mit-
edu-nospam says...

Roelof spent a lot of time that I didn't have benchmarking WUs to write

WU

progress calibration code.  SETI Driver doesn't have this code.  What

you

see in SETI Driver is taken directly from the state.sah file, whereas
SETISpy has this code.  It's well known that v3 of the CLI doesn't

report

progress linearly.  Instead, the first 5-10% is reported too fast, the
middle 10-95% is a little slow (not much), and the final part of the WU
processing is also faster.  SETI Driver doesn't make these distinctions.

Both programs are correct given the non-linear progress reporting by the
client.

Mike Ober.

Wow, the head guy himself ;) Thanks for the info (to you and Terry,
both)

-- 
Orin