SETI Spy vs. SETI Watch and others

[saabcaptain]

Just switched to CLI / SETI Driver with my WinXP box. I am using SETI Spy with it for info and it is working well. Is SETI Spy considered the best info program? What about SETI Watch and others, are they better etc.? Let me know since there are tons of these freeware programs and no real heads up on what is best... I want little or no impact on system performance from any though...

Thanks!

 

[Thoreau]

*bump* I'd be anxious to know the answer to this question too.

 

[Overkiller]

SetiSpy uses approximately 5000KB of memory constant and 00% of the cpu

SetiWatch uses 2800KB of memory constant and 00% of the cpu

So...in essence neither really uses that much of ANYTHING but i prefer just using SetiDriver myself

 

[networkman]

To be honest, I've never really looked at the memory footprint of SetiSpy.

I've just always used it for the convenience(and donated to the author). All of my rigs have a minimum of 128meg so I've not worried about the ram taken for it, but yeah, basically zero CPU time is taken for it, so the S@H CLI gets it all.

 

[BlackMountainCow]

I use SETI Hide 1.5.4.4 ... doesn't give u that much info about your WU but it has a nice skymap feature (with tracking for old WUs), it has a built in cache up to 99 WUs and if u have a network SETI Hide can manage the upload of all the Network WUs if u don't have ICS or a direct internet connection on each single machine.

Check it out here

 

[networkman]

I do use SetiQueue on one machine at home that acts as a server, so all the other rigs point to it for their WUs.

 

[Spacehead]

I use both SETI Spy & SETIWatch.
I like SETI Spy for info on the WU in progress, the sky map feature & the individual/team stats. Although Spy keeps a record of past WU's, i like SETIWatch for that & it shows all computers on my network.
Also, SETIWatch doesn't need to be running all the time for it to keep a record, as it just reads the 'csv' file.