Message boards : LHC@home Science : LHC group should lobby the MUON1 screen saver people over to BOINC
Message board moderation

To post messages, you must log in.

AuthorMessage
HireMe.geek.nz

Send message
Joined: 27 Aug 05
Posts: 2
Credit: 164,470
RAC: 0
Message 13454 - Posted: 26 Apr 2006, 0:49:02 UTC

The LHC group should lobby the MUON1 (nutreno reseach) screen saver people over to BOINC.

This could solve the LHC "work not avalable" problem.

MUON1 seems to be fully debugged -- just not fully compliant with BOINC technology.

The changeover to BOINC could be trival for MUON1.
The current X86-XP binary is under 250k.

CERN should provision the moveover to BOINC as BOINC is better than 'homebrew' setups for distributed computing.

BOINC's design flaws keep disappearing with new version upgrades -- albeit MAC and LINUX / UNIX versions are essentally free of overt design flaws.
ID: 13454 · Report as offensive     Reply Quote
Profile Alex

Send message
Joined: 2 Sep 04
Posts: 378
Credit: 10,765
RAC: 0
Message 13456 - Posted: 26 Apr 2006, 4:41:27 UTC

http://stephenbrooks.org/muon1/

Distributed computing has been around before BOINC has become stable.

I think they've already made a lot of progress so far, and that telling them to switch to BOINC would not be productive at his stage of research.



I'm not the LHC Alex. Just a number cruncher like everyone else here.
ID: 13456 · Report as offensive     Reply Quote
Gaspode the UnDressed

Send message
Joined: 1 Sep 04
Posts: 506
Credit: 118,619
RAC: 0
Message 13460 - Posted: 26 Apr 2006, 21:53:03 UTC - in response to Message 13454.  

The LHC group should lobby the MUON1 (nutreno reseach) screen saver people over to BOINC.

This could solve the LHC "work not avalable" problem.

MUON1 seems to be fully debugged -- just not fully compliant with BOINC technology.

The changeover to BOINC could be trival for MUON1.
The current X86-XP binary is under 250k.

CERN should provision the moveover to BOINC as BOINC is better than 'homebrew' setups for distributed computing.

BOINC's design flaws keep disappearing with new version upgrades -- albeit MAC and LINUX / UNIX versions are essentally free of overt design flaws.


Why should CERN do this? Why would they want to?

There is no LHC work not available "problem".

Geek - you need to think before you post.

Oh - and btw I looked at your web site. From what you have posted here I can't imagine why anyone would employ you.


Gaspode the UnDressed
http://www.littlevale.co.uk
ID: 13460 · Report as offensive     Reply Quote
AMD-USR_JL

Send message
Joined: 24 Jan 06
Posts: 1
Credit: 5,758
RAC: 0
Message 14033 - Posted: 18 Jun 2006, 16:21:15 UTC

MikeW, what website did you look at? Geek's website is very interesting and i can't wait for someone to hire him.
ID: 14033 · Report as offensive     Reply Quote
Profile MalX

Send message
Joined: 9 Jul 06
Posts: 9
Credit: 36,422
RAC: 0
Message 14322 - Posted: 13 Jul 2006, 18:21:31 UTC - in response to Message 13460.  

The LHC group should lobby the MUON1 (nutreno reseach) screen saver people over to BOINC.

This could solve the LHC "work not avalable" problem.

MUON1 seems to be fully debugged -- just not fully compliant with BOINC technology.

The changeover to BOINC could be trival for MUON1.
The current X86-XP binary is under 250k.

CERN should provision the moveover to BOINC as BOINC is better than 'homebrew' setups for distributed computing.

BOINC's design flaws keep disappearing with new version upgrades -- albeit MAC and LINUX / UNIX versions are essentally free of overt design flaws.


Why should CERN do this? Why would they want to?

There is no LHC work not available "problem".

Geek - you need to think before you post.

Oh - and btw I looked at your web site. From what you have posted here I can't imagine why anyone would employ you.


Hey Mike - why are you being aggresive?
Fool.
ID: 14322 · Report as offensive     Reply Quote
Profile Seventh Serenity
Avatar

Send message
Joined: 27 Sep 04
Posts: 51
Credit: 72,804
RAC: 0
Message 14568 - Posted: 18 Aug 2006, 11:00:54 UTC

I think MUON1 should continue as they are. Their client is stable, highly optimised and does what the project admins want it to do.

I don't understand why projects should move over to BOINC - I think BOINC is possibly the worst project manager I've ever used. Personally, I prefer individual clients. The worst part about BOINC in my honest opinion is the credit system (we've all seen threads on project forums where arguments over credit has come up with fairness coming into the situation).
ID: 14568 · Report as offensive     Reply Quote
Profile Seventh Serenity
Avatar

Send message
Joined: 27 Sep 04
Posts: 51
Credit: 72,804
RAC: 0
Message 14569 - Posted: 18 Aug 2006, 11:01:00 UTC
Last modified: 18 Aug 2006, 11:02:08 UTC

<double post, delete please>
ID: 14569 · Report as offensive     Reply Quote
Profile UBT - Halifax--lad
Avatar

Send message
Joined: 30 Sep 04
Posts: 23
Credit: 1,372
RAC: 0
Message 14574 - Posted: 18 Aug 2006, 19:52:03 UTC - in response to Message 14568.  

I think MUON1 should continue as they are. Their client is stable, highly optimised and does what the project admins want it to do.

I don't understand why projects should move over to BOINC - I think BOINC is possibly the worst project manager I've ever used. Personally, I prefer individual clients. The worst part about BOINC in my honest opinion is the credit system (we've all seen threads on project forums where arguments over credit has come up with fairness coming into the situation).


Simple solution don't use BOINC if your not happy with it
Join us in Chat (see the forum) Click the Sig


Join UBT
ID: 14574 · Report as offensive     Reply Quote

Message boards : LHC@home Science : LHC group should lobby the MUON1 screen saver people over to BOINC


©2021 CERN