On 5/4/05, Alastair Preston <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Azureus is the only one I've tried so far - and that was due to Kubuntu's site > requiring the use of bittorrent for downloading their isos. > > I wasn't impressed. On most downloads without bitorrent, I usually get about > 156 to 160 KB/sec download. When I used Azureus, I was getting 83 KB/sec - > just over half my normal rate. > That wasn't really Azureus' fault so much as it was just the way torrents work. Yesterday I tried downloaded 3 different iso's, one Gentoo live CD and two different Kubuntu live CDs. The Gentoo one I never bothered letting finish because it was going at about 2 kBs. One of the Kubuntu ones only ever hooked up to one peer, but it was pulling in at over 250 k, so that was pretty good. The other Kubuntu hooked up to at least 5 peers and hovered around 200 k. Nothing to do with the client I used and everything to do with how much torrent there was out there.
So, what I'm saying is, I agree with you. BT can be disappointing. I find it very hit and miss, and more miss than hit in delivering the huge transfer speeds it could deliver. <rant> BT is a really cool idea, but a) it sucks during the Slashdot effect, despite everyone thinking it's supposed to cure it, because you may get ten thousand peers, but if all of you only have the first 2% of the file, no one gets anywhere because the seed system is /.'d anyway, and b) it sucks 2 days after the file was cool, because there are only two or three die-hard BT'ers still running their clients, so your economies of scale are all gone. BT would work way better if people were generally more willing to share their bandwidth, but since bandwidth costs, no one shares. Sad, really. </rant> Nothing like a morning rant. :-) Ian _______________________________________________ clug-talk mailing list [email protected] http://clug.ca/mailman/listinfo/clug-talk_clug.ca Mailing List Guidelines (http://clug.ca/ml_guidelines.php) **Please remove these lines when replying
