LOL - I don't use windows, I use linux on all but my kids computers.

My kids computers have windows with ClamAV
When people with home computers ask me for a free AV suggestion, I tell them to get AVG Free
When clients with a business want a free AV I tell them to get Microsoft Antivirus

ALL 3 of those on your list don't complain about it LOL

If and when they do complain it about - I will have the same thing to say about them also.

Yep I still say EXACTLY the same thing about Symantec and I will say the same thing about all the rest of those in the list that claim it is a virus/trojan/rootkit
Those virus checkers are brain dead and programmed by idiots.
They detect a program that is not a virus or a trojan or even a root kit.
They should detect the rest of the software that is part of the payload to install it - not the cgminer.exe program.

Saying otherwise is seriously lacking understanding of what the problem is and also leaves a wide open hole in the virus checker
As I said before, it means that if the person who made the bot trojan simply replaced cgminer.exe with some other miner - suddenly the stupid AV program would be happy coz it isn't detecting the problem, just the non damaging piece of software that the trojan runs - which MANY other people run legitimately and yet these virus checkers actually DELETE it from their system and try to stop them from running it.

Explain to me how what Symantec is doing is not dumb, stupid and moronic?
Posting links doesn't help coz that one says nothing against what I already said.
Tell me in your own words why what I said is incorrect

Just gave this miner a spin.  Very nice work!

But I did notice each instance takes about 16% of a CPU to run, although Xorg is showing a slightly lower CPU usage.

Unfortunately that's enough to keep the CPU out of the lowest power state on my machine.  This isn't the same problem as 11.7+ hogging an entire CPU per GPU compute instance.  If I go back to using any of the python miners those instances use far less than 1% of a CPU each, and the system remains mostly in the lowest power state.

Is there a way to crank down whatever it is cgminer is doing to trade a tiny bit of mining efficiency for letting the CPU spend its days snoozing?  I know it's a microtweak, but it's setting off my OCD side.

Oh yes, catalyst 11.6, SDK 2.5, Ubuntu 11.04.

I decided to give cgminer another try (latest version) on my linux rigs.  Again, within 24 hours, on my 2x5970, 1x6850 rig, 3 of the 5 GPUs were marked DEAD.  And this was with the GPUs underclocked from factory defaults. Note, poclbm and phoenix (including with the latest phatk kernel) never stop working like this even after 7+ days of non-stop mining on the same rig with overclocked GPUs.  I don't know if Python's OpenCL connectivity is just more reliable than what cgminer is doing, but I can say that something is pretty conclusively wrong with cgminer relative to other other miners this rig.

I like the idea of cgminer, but saddly will return to running 10 instances of poclbm because that is at least rock solid stable even if it is annoying to manage.

You could try decreasing the stale rate overall by running less threads per GPU with '-g 1'. While it will decrease your mhash slightly, it might be worth the compromise since the share submissions will start happening earlier (since each thread will find shares in less time).

How did pointing out a stupid flaw (caused by programming stupidity) with Symantec detecting cgminer.exe as a trojan turn into me being a "Windows runner" ?
I even pointed out 3 Windows AV programs that do not currently delete a completely benign program from your system.
So will you be happy and think it is smart when Symantec starts deleting, in the near future, whatever Bitcoin Miner program you use?

Again: (for the 3rd time - since you still don't seem to understand the blatantly obvious)
Symantec does not detect the trojan program that effects your PC.
The program that effects your PC is the bot code that installs cgminer.exe and that should be what it detects and removes.
Instead Symantec says it detects cgminer.exe as a trojan (which it isn't) and then removes it!

I've used linux since 1997.
My desktop and servers at home are all linux (except my kids PCs) and have been linux for most of those 14 years.
I am required by the Australian Government to run Windows to be able use their BAS software for my work and do my Tax so I run them (once every 3 months) in a VirtualBox with a valid paid for Windows XP license.
I base my OS decision on my extensive knowledge of software, programming and OS internals and design.

Not currently, unless you run multiple instances of cgminer, one for each pool, bound to just one GPU.

cgminer -d 0 -o pool1...
cgminer -d 1 -o pool2...
cgminer -d 2 -o pool3...

I have no intention of adding the feature of binding one pool to one gpu as it's a really inefficient way of managing resources in my opinion, and you can get the same effect by running multiple instances of cgminer anyway.

GPU 0&3 (5850) has the same clocks 875/300, but the speed is a little different. The params which I use is
With phoenix 1.6.2, their performance are nearly the same (~365MHash/s)

My 5870s on the other system also has the same issue.

My Linux box is Ubuntu 11.04 with AMDAPP v2.5, fglrx 8.861.

If I were running on Linux it would not be an issue as I could just use the screen command.

On windows, running 4 separate windows (one per GPU) looks like a cluster F**K (especially at 1024/768). I have an 8 port KVM that I switch between computers.

Cgminer already will use my 4 GPU's showing on one screen in windows, I just cannot have each GPU using a separate login name on the pool.

I monitor my workers remotely using http://www.btc-poolwatch.com/ on my phone and by using separate workers for each GPU, I can see when a Miner/GPU/Worker goes down. Ex. BC1-0, BC1-1, BC1-2, BC1-3, BC2-0, BC2-1 ... Using those workers, I can immediately tell which computer and which GPU is having issues.

I am able to do this in Guiminer, just wanted to be able to do it in Cgminer. Without it it is kinda useless for me unless I were to take the down time and convert all my computers over to Linux.

Also the author said he thought that would be inefficient, but I disagree. I think running 4 separate instances is inefficient and awkward.

I think it is a bit short sighted to not include this functionality (Pools allow multiple workers for a reason, be it multiple computers, multiple GPU's or for monitoring).  

If he were to include the multi worker functionality I think not many people would ever have a reason to be using Guiminer.

If one has problems with Miner/GPU/Worker going down from time to time, one should have the whole process of restoring them automated.
Much easier to do in linux, but can be done in windows too, just easier in linux.