A "CPU Only" algorithm is nearly impossible. AxiomMemHash lowers the incentive of GPU mining by making the algorithm more GPU-resistant. As has been explained many times in this thread, a GPU get's 2-3 times more hash on average with Axiom's algo. When compared to other algorithms where it is 100-1000x faster than a CPU, you will begin to see the merit of the devs effort. Considering GPU's have higher initial costs (on average) than a CPU, while also incurring higher variable costs (more energy usage), the GPU advantage grows smaller.
Axiom is an experiment, just like every other crypto currency or related product. I think the dev has done well, despite his absence (which doesn't really matter, when the wallet works perfectly and he may well be biding his time for updates) It's only the trader's who are whining and the unfortunate few who bout at the top of the initial bittrex rush. There is a future in this coin, or if not this coin, then the theory behind the underlying math. Only time will tell.
Yes, I know full well what has been discussed in this thread since page 1. Quite a few people here have complained that it ISN'T CPU only (quoting the original thread title). When this coin was announced, the team stated it was CPU only. Of course, it was at the time but they should have had the foresight to avoid such a claim. They also made references to the algo's whitepaper explaining why it was CPU only. That whitepaper, and the resulting algo, were based on facts from a number of years ago and were not in any way updated for today's technology.
If I remember correctly, the original author of the algo's whitepaper even stated that, had the coin team checked with him, he would have confirmed that the claims of being CPU only were no longer accurate, which was duly proven by the release of GPU miners. The efficiency comparison between the two hardware types wasn't (and really still isn't) what many were crying out about. It instead was the fact that the algo could indeed be hashed with a GPU. The Axiom PR account initially attempted to deny the existence of any such GPU mining software, implying that the screenshots were fake.
Despite the repeated proof that Axiom's initial claims were false, the Axiom PR person continued to insist that the algo was CPU only. Eventually he/she/they caved and admitted that AxiomMemHash was indeed NOT a CPU only algo. Around that time, the indication from the PR person was that efforts were being made to FURTHER harden the algo and increase the inefficiency factor of GPU hashing and also release APOS 3.0. Shortly after such announcements, the "dev" that initially provided the codebase for this coin vanished.
So here we are today. We have an "experiment" as you call it which in my mind failed horribly to deliver on the announcements and claims of the person(s) that released the coin. We have no communication whatsoever from the "team" regarding the future direction of this coin nor as to the status of the already proposed updates. And, while the coin certainly does "work" and is technically able to continue working in it's current state, it certainly isn't how early adopters were led to believe it would be.
Mind you, my complaints revolve around the actions and inactions of this particular coin's "team" and not so much the algorithm. I certainly do believe that the AxiomMemHash algorithm has (or can have) a bright future. But this coin...I'll trust my magic 8-ball when it tells me "No" It had potential, and could have avoided a lot of the negativity, but the "team" chose a different path.
