| Subject: Re: Command line v. Screensaver |
| From: "Gonzo" <james@FUCKSPAMFUCKzerblattzoo.co.uk> |
| Date: 08/01/2004, 13:24 |
"Terry Pratchett" <tpratchett@unseen.demon.co.uk> wrote in message
news:FHZADWlDYS$$EAsl@unseen.demon.co.uk...
In message <nb%Kb.1487$5%6.788@newsfep3-gui.server.ntli.net>, Gonzo
<james@FUCKSPAMFUCKzerblattzoo.co.uk> writes
yes it is. i installed it on my linux machines having a partition which
they
share with win98 just before xmas. there's approx a 20% improvement
between
the win98 screensaver and the unix cli version which knocks my network up
to
15 units per day roughly. 10% of that is o/s and the rest is the cli
version
so you should see an improvement.
Unfortunately the CLI version quarrels with WordPerfect (it says in the
small print somewhere) so I can install it on a couple of the powerful
machines only if I also run a little program that shuts SETI down when
WP is used -- which rather defeats the object.
have you actually run WP and whats the error with it when you run SETI? if
you do a test run to see what happens then maybe we can help fix it :) id
tell you to run open office but im guessing youre fond of WP.
--
cheers
james