"Big Bob Smith"  wrote:

At some point old horses no longer can "run" the race and must be
replaced or retired.....and so it was for Seti Classic as
well........it had its time and now its time to move on....
Classics days are numbered ..........soon it too be go
away

<rest of, no offense, total bullshit snipped>

Lets see here.  At the core, SETI Classic and BOINC-SETI are both crunching
basically the same algorithms.
(They are both doing the same math.)

SETI Classic works just fine.

BOINC is a resource hog.

Which one is more efficient here?

"You need new computers" is a completely asinine and ignorant comment.
These computers are just dumb fileservers, and have worked great as such
(even while running SETI Classic).  I'll be damned if I'm going to invest in
new computers for fileservers just for SETI.  I have new "working" computers
(desktop and laptop), but don't want SETI running on them.  The fileservers
are/were the perfect home for SETI.  I don't want to have to dick around
troubleshooting them constantly either.  I want SETI running transparant in
the background, hidden and forgotten.  SETI Classic required no babysitting.
It worked wonderfully.  BOINC is bloated and causes them to crash about once
every week.  Both are doing the same math, so why is Classic much more
efficient?  Where is the extra resources going with BOINC?  A prettier
screensaver?  Who cares.  Hell, the BOINC screensaver doesn't even work
properly with passwords enabled anyway.

My gripe is with the (in)effeciency.   I've ran SETI since the beginning,
but if its going to become just a dick sizing contest of specs -- well,
then, fuck 'em.

Apologies for being so blunt...

Cheers,
Eric