New technique will accelerate p2p downloading up to 70 percent

sweet this could be excellent i hate when people have below 1.00 share ratio

cool

For every bit uploaded - someone must download it, so if someone has over 1.00 ratio someone else is bound to have below 1.00 ratio. If someone has 100.00 ratio, a lot of people have way under 1.00 ratio.

But back to the topic.

I wonder how much extra data this handprinting technique requires to be transferred...

Although this is great news, I can't help but feeling there is a catch. I mean Intel and numerous other groups are for P2P file sharing now? I dont see it happening and like I said theres a catch.

Sounds great :)

I will stick with newsgroups....can't get better than your connection maxed out from start to finish!


But I have to agree that this will NOT go over good with the media mafia...if it does what it says, they are having a heart attack about p2p speeds now.

Also, it does seem strange that companies like intel are wanting to help it....when they have been known to cooperate with the media mafia clowns!

Think about it, if you can "outsource" at almost no cost your bandwidth from your servers to P2P it would save big companies like Intel millions to billions of dollars in bandwidth costs per year.

Instead of having to spend ~$10,000-$100,000/mo. on bandwidth for users to download patches etc. for your software you simply have one or two (as opposed to 100+ server connections) fast seeds until the patch or application are uploaded to ~100 people who then become seeds.

From there the companies only spend in the thousands (or less!) per month in bandwidth which would save them tens to hundreds to possibly millions of dollars per year by using P2P technology to distribute their stuff.

The main problem, even with BitTorrent, is that like the article mentioned if the seed amount is lacking (or even if a the seeds are in a good amount but they all have small uploads) then it takes longer for people to get the software and some (probably most) would give up and go for an HTTP server which, in some cases, is faster.

However, I like the way Blizzard (one of the few things I like that they have done) did the WoW downloader. I purchased a 14-day trial and it uses the "Blizzard Downloader which runs through their own BT tracker and built-in torrent client. It downloads the full version (non-Expansion) of WoW using BT that you can later activate online (in specific countries) or with a retail WoW key.

Peace

Originally posted by Pop_Smith:

---

Think about it, if you can "outsource" at almost no cost your bandwidth from your servers to P2P it would save big companies like Intel millions to billions of dollars in bandwidth costs per year.

Instead of having to spend ~$10,000-$100,000/mo. on bandwidth for users to download patches etc. for your software you simply have one or two (as opposed to 100+ server connections) fast seeds until the patch or application are uploaded to ~100 people who then become seeds.

From there the companies only spend in the thousands (or less!) per month in bandwidth which would save them tens to hundreds to possibly millions of dollars per year by using P2P technology to distribute their stuff.

The main problem, even with BitTorrent, is that like the article mentioned if the seed amount is lacking (or even if a the seeds are in a good amount but they all have small uploads) then it takes longer for people to get the software and some (probably most) would give up and go for an HTTP server which, in some cases, is faster.

However, I like the way Blizzard (one of the few things I like that they have done) did the WoW downloader. I purchased a 14-day trial and it uses the "Blizzard Downloader which runs through their own BT tracker and built-in torrent client. It downloads the full version (non-Expansion) of WoW using BT that you can later activate online (in specific countries) or with a retail WoW key.

Peace

---

Fantastic.

Once again the talent & ideas guys respond to the consumer's clear demand(s).

Of course the imagination-free idiots in the established major old networks will be left still banging away at their vicious but futile efforts to try to exert control over something they cannot control.

Hooray for the net!

Power to the people etc etc.

I can see the catch..

Say you are downloading a perfectly legal film trailer or music track..
What if. (scenario follows) there are many many illegal versions of that same file being uploaded by pirates.
This technology doesn't care that you have chosen to download the legal version, and will add the illegal ones to your sources and get data from them as well. This adds you to the category of "illegal downloader" whether you are aware of it or not, or have chosen to source illegally or not. The data packets will still be traceable, and that's what the mafiaa and the cartel are using to hammer people..

I need to see a lot more about this before I can draw any hard and fast conclusions.. For one I will be avoiding anything which spreads the data sourcing further from my control.

Purdue University was number five on the MPAA's top 25 list. Seems to me that they might know a little something about downloading in general.

Leave it to a bunch of “illegal downloader’s” to figure out a way to make it happen more quickly.

Originally posted by PeaInAPod:

---

Although this is great news, I can't help but feeling there is a catch. I mean Intel and numerous other groups are for P2P file sharing now? I dont see it happening and like I said theres a catch.

---

It is always good when things get sped up. :)

Nah, I wouldn't say there is a catch to consumers. Look at some of the investors in Azureus's newest creation, Vuze (Hi-def theater). The investing groups are prominent "early-stage" investors who want their piece of the pie. The interested parties here are similar to the same; to accelerate technology among consumers and making a bigger profit for themselves at the expense of the copyright holders. Seems that technology has more innovators and is advancing far greater than content distributors want it to. So what's the answer? Same thing they've always done: Lie, cheat, and steal only this time it's from an opposing or shall I say "uncooperative" industry instead of us. Take a good look at the super high-end video cards and Quad-core chips. They're overkill in the majority of today's technology and may be that way for years to come. No, I think this is about time, revenue, and encroaching competition not a ploy to sniff out and bite the hand that feeds. At least we benefit in the short-run.