But I am a fair computer geek. From having read the papers here and at F@H, I think F@H and DF are answering fundamentally different questions. It is the equivelent of asking "How do I get to Seattle?" against "Show me a map of Washington". Both valid but imply differnet purposes.

F@H is asking the question, "How exactly do protiens fold, whats the process, what comes first?" DF is asking, "How can we rapidly determine the final shape so the drug guys can get to work?"

For the more techno-geeks among us, F@H is the equivalent of research into compiler optimization. Very useful for a small group of researchers and has a lot of deep follow-on effects. DF is working on the equivelent of a database engine. This is what a much larger number of people need so they can get on with their work. Calling both of them software doesn't make them competitors.

So they really are asking different questions but in at least one case, they focused on exactly the same protien: Villin. Howard may be too modest to say this so I will take the opportunity-

F@H best RMSA = 3.3 with 30,000 users.
DF = 2.03 with 7000 users.

Which one do you think is wasting cycles?.

However, I do think the two projects are more likely to feed off each other than to compete. And if your crunching motivation is more personal because of someone with a disease, you will have to do your homework. Alzhiemers, vCJ seem to be folding problems which is the F@H domain. DF is a good choice for those of us working because of an orphan disease or where they don't know anything about the protiens or interactions since it will make good info available sooner