Terry Pratchett wrote:

In message <1003s3lpg2h5129@corp.supernews.com>, Larry
<lweak@nospam.charter.net> writes

"Terry Pratchett" <tpratchett@unseen.demon.co.uk> wrote in message
news:nWzYn8SWAeAAFAud@unseen.demon.co.uk...

In message <1003ks1li5l5369@corp.supernews.com>, Larry
<lweak@nospam.charter.net> writes

Terry the new version of Seti driver shold take care of the
conflict issue in Win XP AFAIK.  It was rewritten to change the
priority level of seti so that it can use idle instead of low
setting.

It currently is using the idle setting, whatever else is running.
Is that okay?
--
Terry Pratchett

Should be ok AFAIK.  Using it on ME, XP Home and Pro with no
problems.  Only time I get a slow down is when I have had two
instances of Seti running on the same machine.  To check for that in
XP use CNTL_ALT_DEL and look at the running processes (second tab on
top).

Actually, this is a follow up to the thread in general.

A lot of messing around with diagnostics this morning revealed nothing
that gave us a clue, so we reinstalled the latest GUI version of SETI
(which was on there before, but we did the whole thing right and
downloaded it again.)  It looks like it'll complete its work unit in
something under 8 hours (it's at  93% now) which is slow,  but more
than twice as fast as the last 14 units.  I don't have a clue why.
We'll see what the next few units do before trying the CLI.

I put off going to the CLI for waaaay too long, thinking it was going to be
difficult. If I'd done it when I first thought about it I would have 5X the
amount of WUs done than I have now. Mainly because I'm using the PC for 80%
of the time it's switched on but am usually only using ~5-10% CPU for most
of that time. I experience no slow-downs, I don't even know it's running
until I check my stats, even during heavy gaming.
--
~misfit~