On 10/29/06, david eddy <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>
> > >>Hmm... just an idea, but why not a "screensaver mode"?
> >
> > any eyecandy would hugely slow the program down. check out the speed of
> > Seti-at-home screen saver vs the seti-at-home background service.
>
> We don't need "eye candy" - at least not time consuming stuff.
>
> I recall this being discussed ad nauseam on the Mersenne Forums a long
time ago. A screensaver, which would always take up some cycles, goes
against the spirit of the project. This project is to make the most
efficient use of spare CPU cycles, and using a screensaver to run the
program goes against that idea.
_______________________________________________
Prime mailing list
[email protected]
http://hogranch.com/mailman/listinfo/prime
