On 1/4/07, Adam Fisk <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

I've said this elsewhere, but I don't necessarily think BitTorrent support
would be a good thing.  BitTorrent's a crappy protocol for a bunch of
reasons, and it's getting closer and closer to being a bad Internet standard
not sactioned through any standards body.


Are you referring to the various implementations of DHTs, ISP caching
protocol (BitTorrent), protocol scrambling feature (Azureus), extensions
(like Azureus' download chat extention?). If i'm not mistaken, the baseline
form doesn't change... And bittorrent is still the best
big-file-download-on-clik method (on the p2p side), at least for media
content delivery or ISO downloading. The best one being in my opinion
multi-source http downloading for corporate/commercial needs.

Hopefully this ends with other clients outperforming BitTorrent in the
market


I'm sorry, weren't you talking about the protocol?

, but we're in danger of standardizing on a poorly designed architecture in
all adopting BitTorrent.


By the way, are there any similar protocols (in terms of instant
single-file-downloading features) possibly in the research area, which may
come in competition with BitTorrent in a near future ?


As for the downloading applet, i find this very interesting because the
mainstream computer users dont't want to/can't install/configure Bittorrent
clients. It's the first time i see an approch of giving Bittorrent support
to browsers (supporting Java), apart of Opera's plans to integrate it
natively.

Maybe my ISP throttles my BW usage, but the more bittorrent is employed, the
slower it seems to me (in comparison to 5 yrs ago). Is it an indication that
Bittorrent isn't really scalable because of the IP network architecture
drawbacks?


Thanks

Florent
_______________________________________________
p2p-hackers mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.zooko.com/mailman/listinfo/p2p-hackers

Reply via email to