A
Alias
Justin said:
Nope, wrong, all you posts, unfortunately, came through.
Alias
Nope, wrong, all you posts, unfortunately, came through.
Alias
J
Justin
Alias said:
Then MS bounced them to other servers before killing them on their own
server. Which is downright stupid.
D
DanS
Alias.....just wanted to hi.
Almost no Carey posts here
Regards,
DanS
Almost no Carey posts here
Regards,
DanS
D
DanS
Nope, it wasn't. I saw you try to post that same reply 4 or 5 times.
Here is my post you didn't see....
<[email protected]>
To sum it up, I completely debunked your example of how Vista runs apps
better than XP based on your example of Folding@Home.
There absolutely had to be something wrong with your XP configuration if
you saw what you did. Or, the machine you are running has a dual-core CPU
with which Vista is supposedly faster than XP, although I have seen no
good quality tests reports stating that. But, barring that, that would
not explain why Folding@Home runs w/o any affect what-so-ever on my 7
year-old PC running XP.
So it could be that your comments of how much faster Vista runs apps over
XP may be completely invalid, since you apparently had a poorly running
install of XP.
A
Alias
Justin said:
Maybe if you call India and activate it will help.
Har, har, har!
Alias
A
Alias
DanS said:Alias.....just wanted to hi.
Hi.
Almost no Carey posts here
Regards,
DanS
I was wondering what happened to him.
Alias
J
Justin
Alias said:
Well, I'm glad you think you're funny however I'm not on a Vista machine
right now.
Har, har, har!
J
Justin
DanS said:
You "SAW" but you did never mentioned it being a reply to the wrong message
in order for you to state "AGAIN, not the post I was referring to."
Unless you as well are missing posts on the MS server.
HAHAHA! Yes, I do not see that message. It's also completely BS as you did
not disprove anything.
Nope. More BS. This has been seen on many different machines and many
different installations.
It's obvious you'll say "anything" to make yourself "look" right however
reality will continue without you.
This is seen on both single and dual core machines.
1. What settings?
2. Which client?
3. If you are running F@H with the pedal to the metal and you are reporting
that your 7 year old machine is still completely usable then I urge you to
contact the F@H forums immediately and pride all proof of your claims!!!
You have a one of a kind machine and it could revolutionize the research!
Again, you ASSume too much. Read above. You have debunked nothing and you
will simply disregard anything positive about Vista.
So, have fun with that. The rest of us will continue to gain ADVANTAGE with
Vista and continue to squash all the bugs to make it even better.
D
Doris Day - MFB
Vista being relatively new, there isn't enough material for him to cut andAlias said:
paste here, so I guess he's staying away.
Love and Kisses,
Doris
D
DanS
No, it looks like you can not admit that you are wrong about this one
specific issue.
I already said in a previous post. v5.03 d/l'd from the Stanford website,
w/the CPU usage turned up to 100% and the 'Optimized Machine Code'
disabled, and the redraw interval of the molecules to minimum.
I have signed up on the site and posted a question. I will notified by e-
mail.
While I was there, I was reading many threads about all kinds of problems
on different OS's, Vista included. The OS has no difference with this
piece of s/w's ability.
No. I don't ASSume anything. I tested everything you said and proved you
wrong. I made no wild claims. Offered you video proof if you want. I
proved that you running Vista has no bearing on why Folding used up your
PC.
The program worked exactly as it is intended to run.
Up until this point I have been calmly discussing.
Now, I take the satisfaction that you are really nothing more than
another gluebag in here with an opinion that refuses to acknowledge any
evidence about any one tiny thing you may be wrong about.
A
Alias
Justin said:
Who said anything about Vista? You're using an MS product, Windows Mail
Live Desktop, aren't you?
Alias
J
Justin
Alias said:
So now your crying about XP activation? It's not a problem. WLMd does not
require activation so your comments are pointless.
J
Justin
Why would I do that? My findings are true. 100% solid and verified by
others. If you refuse to believe it then that's your problem. I don't
really care. My gain, your loss.
Ah, yet ANOTHER missing post. Interesting.
And doing as such results in 100% CPU usage and you can continue to run any
apps you wants? Photoshop, Outlook, Video editing?
Hey everyone!!!!!!! What happens to XP when an app pegs the CPU at 100%?
Anyone! Trolls will be dismissed.
You read about problems? Of course there are problems. Where the hell have
you been? Someone running Vista with crap drivers does not qualify.
Sure you have! Ok mister magic XP machine. You can peg your CPU at 100%
and continue to work with any app you want with VERY LITTLE performance hit
on your SEVEN YEAR OLD MACHINE.
What-ever-you-say.....
No you didn't. Not on the MS server anyway. Since just offered. Bring it
on!!! I want to see the CPU client of F@H doing a max WU then I want to see
you run Outlook and open Photoshop WITH an image and perform some work in it
and while those are open run IE and watch a video or two then you can make
up your own stuff from there.
And don't forget to bring up an app showing all the goods in the case. Live
results. As well as the task manager.
English please.
And? Did you have a point there?
Evidence? Ha! That's funny. When I actually see some I'll look into it.
I still can't get over your magic 100% CPU machine. Hilarious!!!
A
Alias
Justin said:
I know that it doesn't require activation. My comment obviously went
right over your head.
Alias
D
DanS
Your findings ? What that it had a problem on YOUR PC ?
No, not another missing post. It's the same missing post you never replied
to that I posted the message ID for before...
[email protected]
Yes, and Folding yields CPU ticks EXACTLY like it is supposed to. Just
because a program WORKS PROPERLY on your Vista PC and not when it was XP
doesn't automatically mean it is strictly because it is Vista itself.
Then you are dismissed.
Someone running XP with crap drivers doesn't count either, like you
possibly had on your PC when XP was on it.
I can not believe that you, and others, sit here all day and when anyone
makes a comment about Vista being a POS when thing's crash, and programs
lock up, and continually place blame on 3rd party issues, while at the same
time, fail to see that the issues you had with this program are not the
program itself or XP, since it runs on other XP machines fine. You fail to
acknowledge that there may have been something wrong with a 3rd party
driver in your PC when it had XP on it, which may have affected everything
on your PC, and subsequently render your finding's worthless.
Complete hypocrisy.
YOU HAD SOME OTHER PROBLEM WITH THIS PROGRAM THAT HAD NOTHING TO DO WITH XP
ITSELF AND VISTA DID NOT SOLVE THIS PROBLEM BY THE VIRTUE OF JUST BEING
VISTA.
I never said I have a magic PC. You did, when I said that Folding acts
EXACTLY as it is supposed to.
Ask and you shall receive. I'm rendering a Flash video now. That is, if you
can get Vista/IE7 to play a flash movie.
Task manager is plainly evident, and you can see the cpu usage as it goes
up & down depending on what else I want to do with my PC. Also, I put on
the desktop a clock that runs in realtime with seconds and tenths of
seconds. Just so you don't think I hacked something with the video file. I
don't have Photoshop so I used PSP X10, and ran a 'One-Touch Photo Fix' on
an image of 2304 x 1728. Nor Outlook, so Mozilla Thunderbird is shown.
As a note, the mention of video evidenc was offered in the same post that
you claim to be 'missing'. Maybe if you didn't use the msnews server, you'd
see all posts.
[email protected]
Incidentally, here is the link to the F@H message I posted and of which is
visible in the video....
http://forum.folding-community.org/viewtopic.php?p=181685#181685
You will see in the replies that some people have problems, some don't,
Unfortunatley, I can't upload to the website provided to me by my ISP.
Seems as though I can't login right now. I was on the phone with tech
support yesterday about another matter, and they told me that this weekend
is the changover from Adelphia to the TimeWarner system, so that must be
related.
HOWEVER, I have posted it to my ftp site. It is a 5 file RAR archive of a
Flash movie (.swf) and an html file that opens the flash movie. You do know
what a RAR archive is don't you ? After extracting, to view it, you would
just open the html file.
You can try:
ftp://usenet:[email protected]:21
if you want, but that most likely won't work thru a browser, as most try to
open multiple connections (FTP is 1 conn per IP & 1 conn per Username), or
browsers also sometimes insist on using PASV mode.
Do you know how to FTP with an actual FTP client ?
Address: freakneck.cjb.net
Port: 21
Username: usenet
P/w: usenet
NO PASV MODE !!!! The FTP will NOT wrok with PASV mode set.
******(I just added this right before I posted, and after the rest of my
post had been written. There is also a screenshot of the output from
Everest and the Property page of My Coputer showing the PC, and I am adding
a second video showing Everest running and showing the PC specs. Folding is
running, as is the task manager and the timer and I do some operations just
to show you I am getting the same results as the other video. Of course now
is where you say.... "it's a different PC", but it is not, as ANYONE else
would be able to see, look thru the process list.. If required, I can go
through this whole excercise again and include the Everest part in the main
video if you like. It is the weekend and I've got some free time.
Interestingly enough, in the PC Specs video, I move the Folding window and
it appears to cause on anomoly on the screen of that window. I didn't
notice it when capturing, but it is evident in the video. Whether or not
this was in the video only or one the screen as I captured it, I don't
know. But what I do know, is this had no effect oin the PC either, so it's
a non-issue.)*******
I only picked Flash because I thought it would give a smaller output file,
but it's 23 megs for 5 minutes of video. The FTP is choked to 50 kBytes/sec
upload, so to d/l should take about 8 or 9 minutes. Unles of course you are
on dial-up.
That is english. Not my fault if you can't understand it.
Yes, that you are blatantly ignoring items I have actually proven and
insisting I am wrong, or lying.
No dude, YOU are hilarious. I didn't say I have a magic CPU. I said that
Folding doesn't kill my PC and that you had to have an issue with your XP
install. My only intent is to show that Folding@Home runs perfectly fine on
an XP machine, this older XP machine even. Don't, I repeat DON'T, try to
put words in my mouth that I absolutely have never said.
I really am interested in your reply after you view the video. Absolute,
definative, beyond-a-reasonable doubt proof that Folding runs EXACTLY as
it's designed on this PC.
(That is, unless of course you don't view it. Which I can see happening.
You'll cry and whine.....a flash movie's not 'safe', it's too big, I
couldn't extract the archive, UAC blocked it, blah blah blah......wuss.)
J
Justin
Alias said:
Yeah, your right. A lame activation stab went right over head.
Here, let me actually call India and have them "activate it". Yup....that
helped.
J
Justin
DanS said:
Start from the beginning then get back to me.
Oh, was I supposed to hunt that down? Sorry, no time. Remove the fowl
language and try posting again.
Working properly has nothing to do with it. RESOURCE HANDLING DOES. Sorry
but you are very ignorant here if you think you can use 100% of your CPU in
XP and have XP HANDLE your CPU RESOURCES to allow other apps to function
"well". Or are you running the F@H client with default settings? If so
then you really are out in left field.
This is where talking to you is pointless. I've already told you MANY
MACHINES via MANY INSTALLATIONS. Get a clue will you?
Do you honestly believe you are the ONLY "computer guy" around here?
1. Things do crash
2. Vista is not a POS because of that.
#1 makes me a guy that helps people with those problems.
#2 makes you an absolute troll.
What about it? Do you have an app you need help with?
More then 90% of the time, it's the problem. When it's not the problem we
try to figure it out. You can't understand that? I'm sorry.
The problem WAS NOT THE PROGRAM. The problem was a program that uses 100%
of the resources (which is normal) and that XP can not handle an app that
does that "properly".
How are you not getting this?
Of course it runs fine. Why wouldn't it. You are so completely lost it's
pathetic.
Right. So of ALL THE MANY machines they all had a driver problem that did
not allow applications to run "well" on ALL THOSE MANY machines after an app
pegged the CPU at 100%?
LLMF
Sure. That must have been it.
Like I said. You are so completely lost it's pathetic. The problem wasn't
the app. The problem was XP's resource handling.
I'm not going to reply to the rest of it because it all has to do with the
notion that my findings are on ONE machine (which is completely wrong) and
that F@H itself works as it's supposed to which 100% true. I never said F@H
doesn't work.
As for the forum question. You asked the wrong question and you have
completely misunderstood. Note this reply:
Use the console client (with service option) only.
Set the CPU usage to 80% (this is the max that folding will use up to)
Answer no if want to accept projects >5MB
Answer idle for priority.
Answer no if want to accept beta projects (-advmethods)
There are ways to setup F@H so that it takes a backseat to everything
(default). However when you run a MAX WU it DOES NOT do that. If all you
do is run the app (depending on client) then you are not cranking it up.
Go back and read my original statements. Oh, and where is this flash video
of yours? Of which you, as usual, had a smarta$$ comment to make about
Vista. I get the impression you "think" you are linking to the other post
but your links do not work. They open of my default mail client. I have no
intention of reading MS NGs from any other server. MS usually does a good
job at filtering spam.
So, what's the end result? I guess I'll continue to help people with bugs
and use Vista and you'll continue to BS about Vista not being able to play
flash and calling it a POS.
You know what? Good for you!
A
Alias
Justin said:
It was a joke, son, one that went right over your head.
Alias
D
DanS
Why should I get back to you when I have already gave you all the
information necessary, have done a lot of leg work, experimenting and
have made anything you asked for available.
Geez...so hard... cut & paste that MSGID into gg and it will take you
directly to it.
WTF !!!!! Look at the video. It plaijnly shows that Folding@Home yields
CPU clicks EXACTLY as it is supposed to. Which, is exactly what this
entire argument is about, although you hav tried to expand it stating
things that I have never said or inferred.
Whatever that has to do with anything, I don't know.
Yes they do.
No it's not. And I never said it was. I was disputing the fact that you
claim that Vista handles CPU rationing better than XP based strictly on
the fact it is Vista.
Nope, not a one.
By the same token, why can't you belive that Folding runs EXACTLY as it
is designed on my box.
No, how are you not getting this. View the proof.
No, you are completely lost.
No, you are the pathetic one. You are basing your belief that Vista runs
much better because of this one application that may or may not act
properly no matter what OS you are running.
I AM SAYING THAT VISTA IS NOT THE REASON FOLDING@HOME doesn't cause a
problem on your Vista computer.
Why not ? Because your story doesn't hold water that the sole reason
Folding doesn't completely eat up all of your CPU on your Vista machine
is because it is Vista itself.
If you would see the video, you would see that I show in the program
options, everything is cranked up to the max.
The d/l info, again, is in the post your replied to. What are you friggin
blind. I gave you an ftp:// link as well as the raw info to log on using
an FTP client.
That's a shame, in XNews, clicking on a msgID takes you directly to the
message. And what I thought I was posting was a message ID, not a link.
Nice ASSumption a**hole.
That is NOT what I do. The flash comment was only made after your
inability to listen to any reason.
I mostly post asking people to clarify their comments, or in an attempt
to get the truth from someone, or to verify something that was stated.
D
DanS
You are wrong. Watch the video.