Slashdot Mirror
P2P Services Speak Out Against Gnutella2
An anonymous reader writes "Three leading Gnultella services voice their opinions on Gnutella2 or Mike's Protocol as they refer to it as. None of the three recognize Gnutella2 as true Gnutella and worry its propritary protocol will divide the Gnutella community. In the first interview Vincent Falco of BearShare contributes his thoughts. The second interview gets input from Greg Blidson of LimeWire, and Arno Steenbekkers from XoloX."
I can't remember the last time I ever considered Gnutella as an operable and useful P2P application.
It was a mission to connect and even more of a problem to actually download useful content !
Unless you were a l33t bandwidth wh0r3, it remains to this day, a useless p2p application.
Kazaa on the other hand actually works !
On a low bandwidth pipe, you can still obtain large files, even if it takes you a week to do it.
A slashdotting - you get the stick first and then the carrot !
I would think that it would be fairly trivial to get past any blocks of a certain P2P agent (with an upgrade of the software, that is)...is there some information about the protocol that makes each client unique, and constantly so; i.e., upgrades to the software cannot change this identifying bit of the protocol for the client?
"I may be quite wrong." - Socrates
If you want popular or semi-popular things, kazaa works well. For rare things, you might, if lucky, find one person somewhere who has it and it almost always returns 'Needs more sources'.
-
Mike may be young and naive, and a bit arrogant. But Shareaza is the most robust, feature-filled Gnutella client there is, and he did it all by himself. That's impressive.
FastTrack is proprietary and under attack, the donkey depends on central servers and Gnutella is stagnant. Assuming Mike releases the specs this month (as he's promised), we'll have an open source, server-free, super-scaling, global searching P2P network. We've never had one, and that's exciting.
The fact that Shareaza is free as in beer and free as in of-spyware/addware is just a bonus.
No, they are childish and unwarrented. There aren't any excuses for that behavior.
If the GDF would of acted mature in reaction to Gnutella2 when it was first proposed to the GDF, then this would of never of happened. Gnutella2 would of replaced Gnutella1 and remained "Gnutella". Or at least the GDF could of discussed G2 in a technical context, which did not happen.
No "hard work" was stolen. Shareaza did not use GUESS in any way to create G2, so I hope that's not what your implying. Sure, G2 uses some things discussed within the GDF. But anybody can suggest concepts, but it's not as easy when you go and try to code it in.
Look at GUESS. How long was that discussed? Now that's dropped for "Outdegree", something Gnutella2 came up with.
The GDF needs to let their death-grip of the Gnutella throne go and accept Mike as a legitimate contributer trying to help.
The problem with BitTorrent is that it's system is flawed. When you close the window after downloading, your not sharing anymore. Thus people often find they can download 80% of the file and can't ever get the rest. Thus, only downloading 0day releases within a few days of their release is only when BitTorrent works well.
Also, you can't search on BitTorrent. You have to find websites to download from. If the website gets shut down, so does the ability to get the files.
This guy acts like an ass all the time apparently. If you consider that he's trying to make money with his software you soon realize he's cheesed because this other guy came in and scooped him and the other sleeping beauties on several features. Where they came from really isn't important, they fact he did it in record time without co-towing to them is what set him off more than anything else. More power to those who innovate and actually get something done rather than talking about it forever. If the other guys can out innovate/feature this guy's client then I'd support them; it's all about the best working client. So slap a tampon between your legs, stop crying like a woman and get busy guys.
*Fortitudo, aequitas, fidelitas.*
Can someone please explain to me why unity is always considered mandatory??
;-)
I really don't understand what is supposed to drive genuine innovation if we demand that everyone (as much as possible, anywayz) is under one banner and doing the same thing. Why is having many different P2P protocols a bad thing? I always thought that this kind of diversity meant that, even if eventually there had to be only one, having large numbers initially would better facilitate the selection process.
Read Darwin, people. Genuine technological development does not come about from rigid unity, but rather just the opposite. You have as many different prototypes, re-interpretations, code forks, or versions of whatever it is you're developing as possible. That way the most suitable model/s for the task are identified over time. The relevant salvageable features of the less suitable models can be taken and added to the more suitable ones, and the less suitable ones eventually fall away by themselves...naturally.
This goes back to the entire Linux vs Windows question, where the thing people complain about is the idea of only having one system (Windows) where they can't make any of the decisions concerning the operating system for themselves.
To me it makes a lot more sense if you don't just have Windows OR Linux, but rather that you have Windows, Linux, FreeBSD, the Mac OS, AmigaDOS, and so on, and if they all have their attendant fan/developer base. That way each system has it's particular use or area of strengths, and work continues on developing others for other uses as well. It also means that the user is free to choose what he/she thinks is the best system for the task at hand. Things get done, people are happy, freedom is maintained, and the world keeps turning.
If you have a singular or monolithic model, this doesn't happen...instead we very often get saddled with frozen, unchanging dinosaurs. Is this really what we want?