Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Azureus' HD Videos Attempt To Trump YouTube

Posted by Zonk on from the one-upsmanship dept.

tedgyz writes "Wired has an article describing a high definition video service from Azureus. It looks like many of the highlights of our previous discussion about service commercialization are panning out. The new Zudeo site, made by the masterminds behind the bittorrent service, aims to be a platform for movie-makers and professionals. Will distancing itself from the homespun efforts of YouTube prove successful, or lead to the service being ignored?" From the article: "With high-definition video cameras available for less than $1,000, and with the rapid adoption HDTVs in the home, it's clear that high-definition entertainment has a future. But the visual clarity of internet video tends to be less than stellar, mostly because the bandwidth costs associated with serving large, high-quality video files is prohibitively expensive. However, the BitTorrent protocol enables content distributors like Azureus to share large files using much less bandwidth."

117 comments

  1. Very cool. Very unlikely to succeed. by AKAImBatman · · Score: 5, Insightful
    But the visual clarity of internet video tends to be less than stellar, mostly because the bandwidth costs associated with serving large, high-quality video files is prohibitively expensive. However, the BitTorrent protocol enables content distributors like Azureus to share large files using much less bandwidth.

    Such a beautiful idea, but with such a high chance of failure. :(

    The key issues I see are:

    1. Who's going to keep videos seeded? On Youtube, if the video is available, the video is viewable. Not so for Azureus! The video could be only partially intact (no seeders with not enough downloaders) or it could just be gone. The Bittorrent network has already lost several fan films due to this issue. Will Zudeo keep a seed of every video they've ever carried? Will they be able to afford the bandwidth when the viewers start trickling to videos rather than assisting each other with their downloads?

    2. Like it or not, Youtube is often used in workplace camaraderie. Many corporate firewalls whitelist business appropriate ports rather than blacklisting P2P clients. Youtube uses regular HTTP, so it works. Azureus uses the Bittorrent protocol which requires more esoteric ports.

    3. Will the bandwidth usage be acceptable for the average user? When you view a Youtube video, you use only the bandwidth necessary to download the video. This active form of downloading means that bandwidth usage stops as soon as the video is completely downloaded. With Bittorrent, users will both upload and download while waiting for the video to complete. They also are recommeneded to leave the client open while going about other tasks. Which can have a negative impact on their other Internet activities.

    4. Zudeo breaks up your workflow by launching an external program. This not only breaks up the user's workflow, but it also presents a more confusing interface. If the user wants to view the video, he has to open the torrent tab, click on "Files", then double click the correct file. This action is non-obvious to someone who simply wants to view the show. In addition, Azureus may not even launch when the Zudeo link is clicked! Magnet links are intended as a generic P2P descriptor, and are often claimed by programs other than Azureus.

    5. Perhaps the most important point of all: Bittorrent cannot stream files. The viewer must wait until the file is completely downloaded. With Youtube, they can simply watch their show with no intermediary steps.

    IMHO, the best bet for Zudeo is to reinvent themselves as an iTunes competitor. If they created a frontend program to Azureus that did all the dirty work, they could at least compete in an arena where they're more likely to succeed. Streaming will still be an issue, but consumers may be willing to wait for High Def content.
    --
    Javascript + Nintendo DSi = DSiCade
    1. Re:Very cool. Very unlikely to succeed. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Informative

      Azeures have their own "Seeding Servers" which are permanently online,
      guaranteeing that the file will always be available.

    2. Re:Very cool. Very unlikely to succeed. by Lumpy · · Score: 3, Insightful

      you missed an impoartant part that youtube has and this cant have.

      I can click play and decide in a few seconds if the video is garbage,gross,or not interesting and go on to the nest. With this Hd offering I haveto wait until I downloaded the whole damned thing before seeing it's crap or even broken. This has a huge problem inside Bitrottents already. you dont know if the video is even playable until you get a 100% download and try it. Unless they are offering as well as the HD content a LD clip showing you 30 seconds of it (or the whole thing if less than 30 seconds) that can be viewed instantly.

      Most people will bail on using a service if after 10 times they view a video and it's bad, or they are not interested in seeing it as it was mis-labelled.

      --
      Do not look at laser with remaining good eye.
    3. Re:Very cool. Very unlikely to succeed. by XorNand · · Score: 4, Insightful

      You make some excellent points, which illustrate why this service shouldn't really be compared to YouTube. It's a lot like comparing email to SMS. Both are very similiar on the surface, but both are also very successful because they serve slightly different purposes. As you pointed out, it's lack of streaming is the reason why it can't directly compete with YouTube. But because YouTube chooses to stream, they can't offer the same high-quality video as Zudeo. I think it's way to soon call this idea dead in the water. I mean, the iPod was just another MP3 player when it came to market. We'll have to see how well the idea is executed first.

      --
      Entrepreneur : (noun), French for "unemployed"
    4. Re:Very cool. Very unlikely to succeed. by nametaken · · Score: 1

      IMHO, the best bet for Zudeo is to reinvent themselves as an iTunes competitor. If they created a frontend program to Azureus that did all the dirty work, they could at least compete in an arena where they're more likely to succeed. Streaming will still be an issue, but consumers may be willing to wait for High Def content.

      Check out their beta app. I think they were aiming for the iTunes feel.

    5. Re:Very cool. Very unlikely to succeed. by dsginter · · Score: 4, Interesting


      Such a beautiful idea, but with such a high chance of failure. :(

      Here's a suggestion as to the solution to their problems:

      Bars.

      That's right - as in "establishments that serve alcoholic beverages". All of 'em have these huge screen, high-def monitors all over the place to show sporting events. What do they use 'em for when there are no sporting events? Nothing, largely. Just filler (stick it on ESPN News or CNN and go).

      These places have *paying* customers that would rather watch stupid teenagers smashing cans of WD40 with a sledgehammer. You could even install a little controller at each table so that the viewership could vote on the videos (make it simple like "thumbs up", "thumbs down" and "replay" - enough people voting for replay would cause the video to run again).

      Install a kiosk for people to download the videos to mobile phones in exchange for the purchase of [INSERT FOOD OR BEVERAGE PRODUCT HERE]. A portion of the money goes back to feed the victims in said videos.

      The possibilities are endless.

      --
      More
    6. Re:Very cool. Very unlikely to succeed. by Aladrin · · Score: 3, Interesting

      1) The company will. The other seeders are just to reduce load, if they exist.

      2) Yeah, major problem.

      3) Average user doesn't know jack about bandwidth and won't care.

      4) Yeah, this is bad.

      5) Not true. There are BT clients that prioritize the beginning of the file and tend to download it first. It could be used to stream, just not as nicely as normal streaming.

      --
      "If you make people think they're thinking, they'll love you; But if you really make them think, they'll hate you." - DM
    7. Re:Very cool. Very unlikely to succeed. by morgan_greywolf · · Score: 1
      1. Who's going to keep videos seeded? On Youtube, if the video is available, the video is viewable. Not so for Azureus! The video could be only partially intact (no seeders with not enough downloaders) or it could just be gone. The Bittorrent network has already lost several fan films due to this issue. Will Zudeo keep a seed of every video they've ever carried? Will they be able to afford the bandwidth when the viewers start trickling to videos rather than assisting each other with their downloads?


      Malware and botnets? No, really, I'm not joking. I could see someone like Azureus doing this: download a new version of the Azureus client, install, and every 5th download (or whatever) is automatically seeded by the bot. Not that I disagree with you here, just playing devil's advocate.

      2. Like it or not, Youtube is often used in workplace camaraderie. Many corporate firewalls whitelist business appropriate ports rather than blacklisting P2P clients. Youtube uses regular HTTP, so it works. Azureus uses the Bittorrent protocol which requires more esoteric ports.


      And some corporate firewalls, especially ones with 'net nanny' filtering, blacklist any site from which a P2P client can be downloaded, including BitTorrent. Such sites are typically blocked as "piracy and hacking" sites.

      4. Zudeo breaks up your workflow by launching an external program. This not only breaks up the user's workflow, but it also presents a more confusing interface. If the user wants to view the video, he has to open the torrent tab, click on "Files", then double click the correct file. This action is non-obvious to someone who simply wants to view the show. In addition, Azureus may not even launch when the Zudeo link is clicked! Magnet links are intended as a generic P2P descriptor, and are often claimed by programs other than Azureus.


      Again, playing devil's advocate, but it may be possible for Azureus to create a Java client that actually does all the BitTorrent stuff in the background, saving the download to %TEMP% or $TMP, then auto-launching the appropriate player using the user's desktop shell. Perhaps with some type of popup or toolbar notifcation that gives the progress of the file.

      5. Perhaps the most important point of all: Bittorrent cannot stream files. The viewer must wait until the file is completely downloaded. With Youtube, they can simply watch their show with no intermediary steps.


      OTOH, hardly anyone has the bandwidth to stream HD content anyways; that's what Internet2 is all about. If you want HD video, for now, you're going to have to wait, and I think the people that really want HD video will understand that.

      --
      My blog
    8. Re:Very cool. Very unlikely to succeed. by grant420 · · Score: 0

      You are right that it is definitely easier on the user to stream it using more conventional means, but think about this:

      Without bittorrent being the distribution method, there is simply no way you can enjoy the movie while attempting to watch it during the streaming process because it will stop playing periodically or play very "chunkily". I base this comment on the fact that, using Google video, a video I attempted to watch wasn't downloading nearly fast enough for this to work. I have a 6mbps down (1.5 mbps up) Qwest DSL line. Even with this nice high speed internet connection, the filesize of HD content is simply too huge to use the classic "one uploader, multiple downloaders" scheme. Using Azureus, pieces of a torrent can be downloaded in their entirety and then accessed prior to the entire torrent finishing its download, so you could technically watch parts of the HD content before it's finished. Yes, people have to continue seeding for a few days after they finish for this to work, but it's a vastly more efficient use of bandwidth opposed to one ISP doing all of the uploading and every video viewer's ISP only downloading the data.

      FYI with Azureus and a popular torrent, I can get download rates above 400KB/sec and upload consistently at over 80KB/sec.

    9. Re:Very cool. Very unlikely to succeed. by emil10001 · · Score: 3, Insightful

      While you do have some good points, I'd like to point out a couple of things from TFA:

      In a demonstration last week, the company showed a crisp, clear, DVD-quality clip that began streaming only seconds after the download was started.

      Isn't it possible that they've figured a way around the streaming issue by requiring the chunks downloaded to be sequential?

      Users can upload video either to the central server or they can share a video among a select group of friends by creating a private "trackerless" torrent.

      So, it seems that they use a central server for keeping these things alive.

      I do agree with your points about the bandwidth usage outside of the actual download, but I guess that's the price you pay for good quality video.

      One other thing that I'd like to ask is what about all the bandwidth throttling by the ISP's of torrents?

    10. Re:Very cool. Very unlikely to succeed. by AKAImBatman · · Score: 1
      1) The company will. The other seeders are just to reduce load, if they exist.

      That still doesn't address the issue of being nipped at by old videos. Let's say that they have 500 old videos that only get one user downloading every 12 hours. These users shut down their PCs at night, so their clients won't be able to assist the next downloader. For HD video, the result would be a rather massive drain on their bandwidth. I sincerely hope they're planning for such massive increases.

      3) Average user doesn't know jack about bandwidth and won't care.

      They will after they realize Splinter Cell or World of Warcraft is running slowly. All it takes is a, "Hey guys, why am I lagging so much?" to tarnish the reputation of Zudeo.

      5) Not true. There are BT clients that prioritize the beginning of the file and tend to download it first. It could be used to stream, just not as nicely as normal streaming.

      Has you ever had that work? I have the option set, but Azureus invariably leaves far too many holes at the beginning and the end for VLC to play. Annoyingly, those key pieces never seem to fill in until the end of the download. My guess is that the balancing algorithm (the one that attempts to ensure that there are enough pieces out in the wild to survive the loss of seeders) combats the effectiveness of the "Download Beginning and End" option.
      --
      Javascript + Nintendo DSi = DSiCade
    11. Re:Very cool. Very unlikely to succeed. by EmperorKagato · · Score: 1
      1. Who's going to keep videos seeded? On Youtube, if the video is available, the video is viewable. Not so for Azureus! The video could be only partially intact (no seeders with not enough downloaders) or it could just be gone. The Bittorrent network has already lost several fan films due to this issue. Will Zudeo keep a seed of every video they've ever carried? Will they be able to afford the bandwidth when the viewers start trickling to videos rather than assisting each other with their downloads?
      I'm assuming it's Azureus. Especially with 50+ seeds on most movies.
      2. Like it or not, Youtube is often used in workplace camaraderie. Many corporate firewalls whitelist business appropriate ports rather than blacklisting P2P clients. Youtube uses regular HTTP, so it works. Azureus uses the Bittorrent protocol which requires more esoteric ports.
      Ah, yet youtube.com can be either blacklisted or not within the safe haven white list of domains.
      3. Will the bandwidth usage be acceptable for the average user? When you view a Youtube video, you use only the bandwidth necessary to download the video. This active form of downloading means that bandwidth usage stops as soon as the video is completely downloaded. With Bittorrent, users will both upload and download while waiting for the video to complete. They also are recommeneded to leave the client open while going about other tasks. Which can have a negative impact on their other Internet activities.
      Unlike Youtube.com you don't have to have Azureus to view content: A MAJOR ADVANTAGE TO YOUTUBE Download Once, play forever. Much better than download every time, play as much as we say. Also, Youtube is known for removing content that is valid.
      4. Zudeo breaks up your workflow by launching an external program. This not only breaks up the user's workflow, but it also presents a more confusing interface. If the user wants to view the video, he has to open the torrent tab, click on "Files", then double click the correct file. This action is non-obvious to someone who simply wants to view the show. In addition, Azureus may not even launch when the Zudeo link is clicked! Magnet links are intended as a generic P2P descriptor, and are often claimed by programs other than Azureus.
      Friend? Buddy? Have you tried launching the Zudeo/Azureus? Is it me, or does this interface seem intuitive?
      5. Perhaps the most important point of all: Bittorrent cannot stream files. The viewer must wait until the file is completely downloaded. With Youtube, they can simply watch their show with no intermediary steps
      True. Yet, once I download it, IT IS MINE!
      IMHO, the best bet for Zudeo is to reinvent themselves as an iTunes competitor. If they created a frontend program to Azureus that did all the dirty work, they could at least compete in an arena where they're more likely to succeed. Streaming will still be an issue, but consumers may be willing to wait for High Def content.
      They can compete with Youtube and iTunes by attracting new users and leaving the content free of DRM.
      --
      ----- You know you have ego issues when you register a domain in your name.
    12. Re:Very cool. Very unlikely to succeed. by R2.0 · · Score: 3, Interesting

      IIRC, one can prioritize the first segment of a file in Azeurus for specifically that reason - viewing the first part of a movie file. It would seem like a trivial excercise to enable this by default along with a a little viewer for previewing.

      --
      "As God is my witness, I thought turkeys could fly." A. Carlson
    13. Re:Very cool. Very unlikely to succeed. by EmperorKagato · · Score: 1

      Just read the ratings of a video before downloading. It is clearly available.

      --
      ----- You know you have ego issues when you register a domain in your name.
    14. Re:Very cool. Very unlikely to succeed. by jazman · · Score: 3, Funny

      > Bittorrent cannot stream files. The viewer must wait until the file is completely downloaded.

      Well, to be hon...buffering.
      est, I usu...buffering.
      ally wait unt...buffering.
      il the fi...buffering.
      le has comp...buffering.
      letely downl...buffering.
      oaded before I st...buffering.
      art to watc...buffering.
      h it anywa...buffering.
      y, otherwise it j...buffering.
      ust gets frus...buffering.

      oh sod this, I'll go and do something else.

    15. Re:Very cool. Very unlikely to succeed. by James+McGuigan · · Score: 1
      One other thing that I'd like to ask is what about all the bandwidth throttling by the ISP's of torrents?
      Think of this in reverse, when the average Joe starts being a "bandwidth hog", the ISPs will have no choice but to increase their capasity to keep up. Us early adopters will no longer be scapegoats for using our connections to the full.
    16. Re:Very cool. Very unlikely to succeed. by Salvance · · Score: 1

      They could make this work if for every video they also had a low quality clip that could be streamed. Then if it's good, someone could download the whole thing, store it in their movie selection, show it to their friends, etc.

      I really don't think there's that much of a demand for HD quality home movies. I'd be happy if everyone on YouTube just uploaded TV quality stuff, rather than the jittery cell phone video that appears to be the bulk of uploads. Sure, the demand is there for full length movies, but if Zudeo is carrying copyrighted HD movies you can get that Google and the movie industry will shut them down quick.

      --
      Crack - Free with every butt and set of boobs
    17. Re:Very cool. Very unlikely to succeed. by Lumpy · · Score: 2, Informative

      Ratings can easily be astroturfed and some on youtube currently suffer from that.
      If a piece of content is old enough to have real ratings on it then that could be useful but it's still not as fast as clicking play, saying "ewwww!" and going on to the nest one as most internet users do.

      The other problem is their "streaming" still does not work. I tried it on 4 of their HD content clips and they do not stream, they download just like a normal torrent with pieces all random every clip would with not play or would only play the first 1-2 seconds before hitting a missing piece until the end of the download.

      --
      Do not look at laser with remaining good eye.
    18. Re:Very cool. Very unlikely to succeed. by misleb · · Score: 1
      5. Perhaps the most important point of all: Bittorrent cannot stream files. The viewer must wait until the file is completely downloaded. With Youtube, they can simply watch their show with no intermediary steps.


      I wonder if this is so much of an issue. I mean, people who use devices like TiVo very often don't watch things "live" anyway. They just let the TiVo record all the shows they want and then they go back and watch them at their leisure. So you let your Azureus client (assuming you have it set to auto-download certain content) do its thing in the background... maybe on a dedicated media PC... and then watch your shows when you want.

      The real problem is the shear size of HD content. No matter how you deliver it, it isn't going to be convenient for user. I don't see how the internet could possibly compete with the "on demand" potential of cable and satellite... you know, the companies that actually have to the bandwidth to deliver HD content now.

      You'd have a hard time reliably streaming SD content over the internet. Forget about HD content. It isn't going to happen any time soon.

      -matthew
      --
      "THERE IS NO JUSTICE, THERE IS ONLY ME." -Death
    19. Re:Very cool. Very unlikely to succeed. by Orange+Crush · · Score: 1
      5. Perhaps the most important point of all: Bittorrent cannot stream files. The viewer must wait until the file is completely downloaded. With Youtube, they can simply watch their show with no intermediary steps.

      Since it's a custom client and they'll likely have at least a few I imagine they can combine direct download with bittorrent--streaming what's actively playing while bittorrent grabs what pieces it can to reduce the load. Once a viewer subscribes to a program, they can deliver video pod-cast style using nothing but bittorrent. They're building the client app, no reason they can't modify the protocol for their purposes.

    20. Re:Very cool. Very unlikely to succeed. by quakeroatz · · Score: 1

      Some good reasons why this service will have problems competing with YouTube, but your statement of FAILURE is dramatic and out of context. This is really just a commercial interface for torrents, and I don't have to tell you how SUCCESSFUL the bittorrent protocol is. A commercial outlet for torrents is great thing.

    21. Re:Very cool. Very unlikely to succeed. by smallfries · · Score: 1

      OTOH, hardly anyone has the bandwidth to stream HD content anyways; that's what Internet2 is all about. If you want HD video, for now, you're going to have to wait, and I think the people that really want HD video will understand that.


      I don't think that's true anymore. 8Mb broadband is quite common in the UK now, don't know about other countries. On my ISP I can max out the connection if the far end has the bandwidth to supply. If the video is in a sensible codec (ie a variant of h264) then that is more than enough bandwidth for video. 60MB/min or 3.6GB per hour is a lot of h264 video...
      --
      Slashdot: where don knuth is an idiot because he cant grasp the awesome power of php
    22. Re:Very cool. Very unlikely to succeed. by 3choTh1s · · Score: 2, Informative
      Most of these can be circumvented or irrelevant.

      1. Who's going to keep videos seeded? On Youtube, if the video is available, the video is viewable. Not so for Azureus! The video could be only partially intact (no seeders with not enough downloaders) or it could just be gone. The Bittorrent network has already lost several fan films due to this issue. Will Zudeo keep a seed of every video they've ever carried? Will they be able to afford the bandwidth when the viewers start trickling to videos rather than assisting each other with their downloads?

      1. It's true that you need to have a client "out there" with the video that you want to watch in order for this to work. In comes what I like to call super clients. Clients with high bandwidth abilities that auto-download torrents from popular sites and seed within their ability. They don't have to be watched and quickly give availability to the masses.

      2. Like it or not, Youtube is often used in workplace camaraderie. Many corporate firewalls whitelist business appropriate ports rather than blacklisting P2P clients. Youtube uses regular HTTP, so it works. Azureus uses the Bittorrent protocol which requires more esoteric ports.

      2. Really? you really shouldn't be watching YouTube at work. Not that I don't... =P

      3. Will the bandwidth usage be acceptable for the average user? When you view a Youtube video, you use only the bandwidth necessary to download the video. This active form of downloading means that bandwidth usage stops as soon as the video is completely downloaded. With Bittorrent, users will both upload and download while waiting for the video to complete. They also are recommeneded to leave the client open while going about other tasks. Which can have a negative impact on their other Internet activities.

      3. That's the exact thing we're trying to do! HD videos require large space and bandwidth requirements. Much more than a single service can ever handle. So we need regular people to help out. Uploading is part of the p2p game and you get faster service out of it. It doesn't have to ruin the rest of the internet experience. Just make sure that the you have enough upload bandwidth to do the rest of the stuff you want to do. I'm sure in the near future Azereus(it's been a while since I used it) will be able to intelligently upload depending on how much you are using the internet.

      4. Zudeo breaks up your workflow by launching an external program. This not only breaks up the user's workflow, but it also presents a more confusing interface. If the user wants to view the video, he has to open the torrent tab, click on "Files", then double click the correct file. This action is non-obvious to someone who simply wants to view the show. In addition, Azureus may not even launch when the Zudeo link is clicked! Magnet links are intended as a generic P2P descriptor, and are often claimed by programs other than Azureus.

      4. uh yeah. If you had Azereus then you had another window open helping with torrents: Again this is p2p's domain. I haven't used Zudeo so I really don't know about its interface. But interfaces need to be refined over time depending on how the users actually use the program. Just ask Apple(never buy an Apple 1.0 product). Magnet links may be generic but if you have multiple p2p clients then you seriously need to understand that it's up to you to determine which program handles what links. I use eMule, uTorrent and Sharaza, and some can use the same links, but I specifically state that I want eMule to handle ed2k links and shareaza to handle magnet links even though they both can handle both types.

      5. Perhaps the most important point of all: Bittorrent cannot stream files. The viewer must wait until the file is completely downloaded. With Youtube, they can simply watch their show with no intermediary steps.

    23. Re:Very cool. Very unlikely to succeed. by British · · Score: 1

      Were you trying to simulate a bittorrent-based multi-stream download, or a RealPlayer stream? :)

    24. Re:Very cool. Very unlikely to succeed. by vindimy · · Score: 1
      Bittorrent cannot stream files

      This is actually possible (although with some delay). Look at TVUPlayer, a Chinese streaming video client that uses a peer-to-peer technology and built-in VLC player to deliver live streaming video channels to its users. The average delay between the actual TV channel and the streamed video is somewhere around 1 minute, and everyone can live with that...
      My point is, streaming video using peer-to-peer technology IS possible AND has been done already.
      --
      Check out Pandora by Music Genome Project
    25. Re:Very cool. Very unlikely to succeed. by owlnation · · Score: 1
      Your points are mostly non issues as far as I can see.

      1. Who's going to keep videos seeded?
      This service is designed for professionals and serious indie filmmakers. Even a minimalist indie film has about 10 people who have a vested interest in the success of the movie. And their moms and friends and whatever... Prostudios have a webserver set up with the files stored there and a perpetual seed. No problem.

      2. Like it or not, Youtube is often used in workplace camaraderie.
      If you don't work in the movie industry and you are downloading full feature length movies from YouTube in your workplace, your chances of a pink slip are really really high - that's just a tip. This is a different animal. YouTube can even be used for trailers on Zudeo. You can download by opening those ports on your home pc without issue (assuming you have a non-fascist ISP admittedly)

      3. Will the bandwidth usage be acceptable for the average user
      Azureus aside, which is a monstrous resource hog IMHO, The bandwidth is controllable with most BT clients, and you are aware of the file size when starting the torrent. There are some great BT clients out there that make it easy to use. With YouTube you never know when something will load if the servers or your connection is running slow. Plus, you have to use Flash, which again IMHO should be driven off the Internet as fast as possible.

      4. Zudeo breaks up your workflow by launching an external program.
      I have Flashblock installed for a reason. Flash is a third party program. Torrents can run nicely and quietly in the background.

      5. Perhaps the most important point of all: Bittorrent cannot stream files.
      Ok, so that is a fairly genuine point, but it just means you have to have a little patience and do a little planning. Other than pr0n, I'd imagine that most people aren't going to need a movie right there and then.
    26. Re:Very cool. Very unlikely to succeed. by emil10001 · · Score: 1

      I don't think that the ISP's will ever want to give us what we're paying for. I could see them blocking all BitTorrent traffic, and re-writing the TOS contract before opening up the bandwidth. Capacity will be increased, there's no doubt about that, but I don't think it will be used to open up this sort of traffic.

      If the Average Joe sees this site and it's claims of fast and free HD vid's, and he's on Comcast, or the like, then he will be dissapointed. After perhaps the third video he'll say, 'that was neat,' and give up, or he might complain to somebody about it, either the ISP or the video service. That said, I generally start out a torrent, and let it stew for hours or days, because I have other things to occupy my time, and I will get what I want eventually.

    27. Re:Very cool. Very unlikely to succeed. by tepples · · Score: 1

      hardly anyone has the bandwidth to stream HD content anyways I don't think that's true anymore. 8Mb broadband is quite common in the UK now, don't know about other countries.

      DVD itself is 10 megabits per second.

      If the video is in a sensible codec (ie a variant of h264) then that is more than enough bandwidth for video.

      HDTV at 1920x1080p24 has six times as many pixels per second as DVD at 720x480p24. Is H.264 six times as efficient as MPEG-2 at encoding those pixels? Or by "HD" are you talking about low-end HDTV at 1280x720p24, which has a more reasonable 2.67 times the pixels of DVD?

    28. Re:Very cool. Very unlikely to succeed. by smallfries · · Score: 1

      From what I've seen H.264 does appear to be *at least* six times as efficient as MPEG-2 at encoding. The comparison that I would make is various DVD rips of about 700MB that cannot be distinguished from the DVD where the MPEG-2 stream is 4-7GB. This includes some fairly tricky films (smoke, fog, subtle graduations of colour) like King Kong. I was quite dubious about the codec until I watched a few films that had been encoded really well in it. It is hard to explain just how much better than MPEG-2 it is.

      I've also seen a Lost episode that was 1GB, in H.264 with AC5.1 sound. This was 40 minutes of video, encoded in 720p, and well within the limits of an 8Mb connection. As for 1080p - I haven't seen any content so I can't comment on how well H.264 handles it. It does seem feasible to store an hours 1080p in 3.6GB which is about satuation for an 8Mb line - on the basis that H.264 handles an hours worth of DVD in ~600MB.

      --
      Slashdot: where don knuth is an idiot because he cant grasp the awesome power of php
    29. Re:Very cool. Very unlikely to succeed. by raynet · · Score: 1

      I recall reading that HDTV 1080i video as MPEG-2 would take max 20Mbps. So if we assume 6 times better compression via H.264 we get 3.3Mbps which is quite ok for 8Mbps internet connection. And 1080p should take double that, 6.6Mbps, so that is doable too. Though upload speeds for those connections are much slower, so that often limits the speed.

      --
      - Raynet --> .
    30. Re:Very cool. Very unlikely to succeed. by Idbar · · Score: 1

      When I first read your post, I thought you could be right. Luckily, I kept reading other responses.

      You're being pretty bad at those guys already, it's a brand new idea and nothing should be given for granted.

      There is no fair comparison between youtube and zudeo, but you can make it work if you find your target market... after all, who would think this could be a product with any market at all?

    31. Re:Very cool. Very unlikely to succeed. by lenroc · · Score: 2, Informative
      you missed an impoartant part that youtube has and this cant have.

      No, he didn't. That was point #5, the one that was bold...

    32. Re:Very cool. Very unlikely to succeed. by Jherek+Carnelian · · Score: 1

      It is all a lot more variable than that, I'm just going to throw out a bunch of them:

      1) ATSC standards put HDTV's max bitrate at about 18.5Mbps. But, in practice, it is often closer to 13Mbps with null-padding or multi-plexed standard-def channels.

      2) h264's advantage over MPEG2 is reduced at higher resolutions. The best HD-h264 encoder versus the best HD-MPEG2 encoder will probably yield a maximum of 2x bitrate savings, often less, for equivalent visual quality.

      3) Because film runs at 24fps (24Hz), 60Hz 1080i already carries the same information that any of the 1080p variations (60Hz, 30Hz, 24Hz) can carry. The right software (on a pc) or firmware (on a dedicated HD tuner/player) can reconstruct the original 24fps video from a 1080i encoding in a way that is indistinguishable from a 1080p encoding of the same thing.

      4) Actual video sources, like what most HD-cams output are usually more that 24fps, but they are also often resolution-limited to 1440x1080i rather than 1920x1080i, so the numbers aren't straightforward there either.

      5) In europe, they decided to stick with the 50Hz thing like they did for standard-def PAL TV. It is weird they would do that since the restrictions that made 50Hz easier for analog tv don't really apply in the digital world. But that's what they did anyway.

    33. Re:Very cool. Very unlikely to succeed. by carl0ski · · Score: 1

      2. Like it or not, Youtube is often used in workplace camaraderie. Many corporate firewalls whitelist business appropriate ports rather than blacklisting P2P clients. Youtube uses regular HTTP, so it works. Azureus uses the Bittorrent protocol which requires more esoteric ports. not on my network mate. Azureus will maintain the initial seed of a file obviously, however every time there is more than one leecher it will reduce the bandwidth required by Azureus official seed
    34. Re:Very cool. Very unlikely to succeed. by strider44 · · Score: 2, Informative

      And, as it says in the article, the videos start a few seconds after it starts streaming.

    35. Re:Very cool. Very unlikely to succeed. by redcane · · Score: 1

      I use this successfully. Depending on the file type. But azureus only prioritises the first chunk of the file, just enough to get a thumbnail generally. It doesn't at all attempt to download it in order. But with MPEG-2 or MPEG-4 I have watched a video before it's complete, it skips and breaks up where it hasn't downloaded yet, but it generally plays. Sometimes if I'd rather watch a show now, and I'm not worried about missing parts, I'll just play it like this. Now if zudeo was tuned to try as hard as possible to get the file in order, sacraficing the availability of parts of the file, you could stream it.

    36. Re:Very cool. Very unlikely to succeed. by Rakshasa+Taisab · · Score: 1

      5. Perhaps the most important point of all: Bittorrent cannot stream files. The viewer must wait until the file is completely downloaded. With Youtube, they can simply watch their show with no intermediary steps.

      Well, as some above poster pointed out, that is not true as BT can prioritize what pieces to download first.

      There has been some discussion in my mailing-list about what would happen if all peers did this. I came conclusion that assuming we got a reasonably healthy swarm where most of the peers download faster than their playback, (twice as fast should be enough) and those peers use the spare bandwidth to download the rarest chunks, then that should ensure there is enough leechers with the last parts of the torrent. I don't think the randomized rarest-first algorithm would even need to be tweaked for this to work properly.

      --
      - These characters were randomly selected.
    37. Re:Very cool. Very unlikely to succeed. by d0h · · Score: 1

      hmm, i've just tried using the service and i noticed that for files that are yet to complete, there's a grey-ed out "Stream" button that has a tooltip saying "coming soon".
      the download speeds for the popular videos are pretty fast too.
      looks like it'll do well for a bit imo

  2. Well... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I, for one, welcome our new HD overlords?

  3. Who let Phil Collins in the room by Overzeetop · · Score: 2, Funny

    Wasn't that a hit way back in the...ohhhhh, Z udeo. Sorry.

    --
    Is it just my observation, or are there way too many stupid people in the world?
    1. Re:Who let Phil Collins in the room by darb_is_fat · · Score: 0

      Oh come on people, mod parent up!

  4. P2P Streaming? by FrostyCoolSlug · · Score: 5, Insightful

    It seems that Azureus intend on using P2P for the file 'Downloads'. One of the advantages that YouTube has currently is that you hit the 'Go' Button and the video streams straight from a persistent data source. As far as P2P goes, availability becomes an important issue, it's all well and good uploading a HD video, but you wont be able to stream it, and will have to wait for it to download and eat your bandwidth whilst you share to others.

    I can't see this taking off in the same way that YouTube did, some of us just don't have the bandwidth

    1. Re:P2P Streaming? by Warin · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Exactly. Most YouTube videos are what... a couple of megabytes? HD Video, even compressed, is going to be a lot larger. To the point where most people are going to hit bandwidth caps fairly quickly, if they are downloading even a few movies

      Positioning such a service as YouTube like is a little inane. Now, if they positioned it as a reasonable way to distribut indie films in High Def, they might find people a lot more receptive. I dont know what mastering a Blu-Ray or HD-DVD costs, but for some indie folk, it might just be too much... wheras this will let people get their films out in high quality at a reasonably low (well, free) cost.

    2. Re:P2P Streaming? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Interesting

      All false. P2P streaming *is* possible. Split the d/l into blocks. Download blocks in sequence. When you download block #n you seed the n-1 previous ones. It's not impossible, just hasn't been implemented yet.

  5. mm...like Veoh? by 1001011010110101 · · Score: 2, Funny

    There used to be another service that worked like that, called Veoh. Im not even sure it still exists, I stopped using it when they changed their term of services and forbid the posting of p0rn.

  6. Re:MOD PARENT DOWN -- PARENT IS A TROLL!!! by Nemetroid · · Score: 0, Troll

    Not trying to troll. The Azureus i know is a crappy Bittorrent program, and i wonder what makes their team "geniuses".

  7. for professionals - so it will only be ads? by 192939495969798999 · · Score: 1

    Doesn't this mean that the service will digress into an advertising platform for studios, etc.? If it's "professionals only", I believe this will cause it to collapse in the same way that mp3.com ate it when they sold out and quit hosting amateur music.

    --
    stuff |
  8. Am I the only one... by balsy2001 · · Score: 2, Interesting

    ...that doesn't care about HD video or HDTV. I am too cheap to pay for cable and my DVDs look just fine on my TV. I can tell a difference but for me it isn't worth paying anything to switch. As for posting HD videos of myself on the internet, please, no one wants to see me in low res let alone HD.

    --
    GENERATION 27: The first time you see this, copy it into your sig on any forum and add 1 to the generation.
    1. Re:Am I the only one... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      you aren't the only one

    2. Re:Am I the only one... by Control-Z · · Score: 1

      Have you been around HD video much? I'll watch 10 or 15 minutes of Sunday Night Football just to see the better-than-DVD quality.

    3. Re:Am I the only one... by balsy2001 · · Score: 1

      Yeah, I just don't care. I figured I would get modded down for the post because of the crowd.

      --
      GENERATION 27: The first time you see this, copy it into your sig on any forum and add 1 to the generation.
    4. Re:Am I the only one... by Raqem · · Score: 1

      I don't even own a TV^H^H^H^H an HDTV!

    5. Re:Am I the only one... by Wite_Noiz · · Score: 0

      You're not alone. Like you, I can see the difference with HD to SD, but I don't have a +40" screen or sit close enough to my 28" to actually care. Though, I do like the improvement with programs being filmed in HD; you can see the improvement even on an SD TV. When I can justify buying the 50" in the shop down the road I'll start to care.

  9. YouTube can kill this in an instant... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    ...by offering a "hi def chanel", as a premium service if they think the market will bear it, or totally free if they can support it the way they do regular vids. Also, the thing wanted me to run a Java applet, and the UI wasn't set up to watch the vid by clicking on the still, and then there are the drawbacks of the BitTorrent network that have already been brought up. It looks like the deck is stacked against these guys unless they can address these issues.

    1. Re:YouTube can kill this in an instant... by LifeWithJustin · · Score: 4, Funny

      I don't think they could do that. It's not like YouTube has the bandwidth that say a google has... oh... never mind.

  10. Re:MOD PARENT DOWN -- PARENT IS A TROLL!!! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Interesting

    It depends how you look at it. I use Azureus (of course to download LEGAL stuff, of course) and have no problems whatsoever with it.
    It's crappy in a way of programming language (Java) but except of it it's really nice and configurable.
    And all memory holes of the past have been gone for a long time...

  11. Re:Masterminds? by Aladrin · · Score: 1, Insightful

    Azureus != Bit Torrent
    Firefox != World Wide Web

    See what I did there? Azureus did not invent Bit Torrent. They weren't even the first clone.

    --
    "If you make people think they're thinking, they'll love you; But if you really make them think, they'll hate you." - DM
  12. Bullshit by 77Punker · · Score: 1

    Azureus.sf.net says to only get your Azureus from SF to avoid spyware. Where is this "3.0" on SF?

    1. Re:Bullshit by shudde · · Score: 2, Informative

      The download link on Zudeo is http://torrents.aelitis.com:88/files/Azureus_2.5.0 .0_linux.tar.bz2.

      I have no idea why they're pushing the site as Azureus 3.0 but that's a legitimate download link, the same one offered on the SourceForge site. Interestingly while Zudeo is handling the press, the sf page has taken a dive.

      nyud.net:8080 shows they've got a prominent ad for Zudeo on the mainpage though.

  13. I predict a fork. by Kadin2048 · · Score: 1
    I predict a fork in Azureus-the-bittorrent-client as Azureus-the-Company tries to take it and turn it into something else.

    From the "About Azureus Inc." page:
    Azureus 3.0 (launching later this year) joins movie and music fans with filmmakers and artists to create a rich, social, and completely new entertainment experience.
    Yeah, because that sounds like exactly what I'm looking for in my cross-platform bittorrent client. Or not.

    Unfortunately I suspect that Azureus-the-company probably already has the "Azureus" name trademarked, so any fork would have to come up with a new name...but better to be the 'IceWeasel' of torrent programs than to turn into some bloated 'rich social client' mess.
    --
    "Ladies and gentlemen, my killbot features Lotus Notes and a machine gun. It is the finest available."
    1. Re:I predict a fork. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I expect a fork every night .. but a fold often happened.

  14. "Paying" twice...? by Half-pint+HAL · · Score: 3, Insightful

    I'm not interested. Why? Because on P2P, as other posters have said, I'm the the webserver. But who does the advertising money go to? Not me.

    I get a slower weblink, and a slightly higher electricity bill. My broadband ISP charges me for excessive uploading and demands that I sign up to a commercial package -- and I can't argue, as I'm supplying a commercial service. And I still have to sit through five minutes of ads for every 10 minutes of program.

    No thanks.

    HAL.

    --
    Got them moderator blues I blieve I walk out the do', With these mod-points I been gettin', I 'most never post no mo'
    1. Re:"Paying" twice...? by EmperorKagato · · Score: 1

      "My broadband ISP charges me for excessive uploading and demands that I sign up to a commercial package"

      If your ISP charges you for excessive uploading you may need to switch ISPs. Unless you're using commercial grade broadband instead of home.

      --
      ----- You know you have ego issues when you register a domain in your name.
    2. Re:"Paying" twice...? by Lord+Ender · · Score: 3, Insightful

      You are paying more for a better product.

      Face it: youtube is right on the verge of being unwatchably-low quality. This would be HD.

      --
      A slashdotter who didn't build his own computer is like a Jedi who didn't build his own lightsaber.
    3. Re:"Paying" twice...? by internic · · Score: 1
      My broadband ISP charges me for excessive uploading and demands that I sign up to a commercial package -- and I can't argue, as I'm supplying a commercial service.

      One solution to this part of the equation is to get an ISP without such assanine rules (like the one I use, for instance). Of course, that's a solution for you, not for the service, because they're unlikely to have a successful internet business model that begins, "First, get all your customers to switch their ISP..."

      --
      "You call it a new way of thinking; I call it regression to ignorance!" -- Operation Ivy
    4. Re:"Paying" twice...? by quakeroatz · · Score: 1

      Increased electricity costs? Excessive uploading charges? If you can find data to support #1 I'd be surprised and as for #2 this would only happen in a corporate setting. Set your seeding limits 1:1 and throttle your upload speed, problem fixed, if it ever existed.

      As for ads? That's utter bullshit, you clearly haven't even tried the service! There are no ads in the videos!

      Next time try using the service before you make shit up.

    5. Re:"Paying" twice...? by LoudMusic · · Score: 1

      I'm not interested. Why? Because on P2P, as other posters have said, I'm the the webserver. But who does the advertising money go to? Not me.

      No, but you're also getting high definition entertainment that you didn't have to pay for.

      I guess we've moved on from wanting everything for free to wanting to get paid for something you're not physically doing. Yay America!

      The advertising money doesn't go to the bandwidth - it goes to the service of organizing the community and building awareness of the service. The point of BT is that the users do all the work. No free lunches.

      --
      No sig for you. YOU GET NO SIG!
    6. Re:"Paying" twice...? by quakeroatz · · Score: 1

      Another uninformed, bullshit comment gets +5.

      After years of posting here, I think I've had it.
      If FOX had a geek news site, Slashdot would be an excellent model.

      See ya!

    7. Re:"Paying" twice...? by Half-pint+HAL · · Score: 1

      As for ads? That's utter bullshit, you clearly haven't even tried the service! There are no ads in the videos!

      I don't need to try the service -- I read TFA:

      The company plans to give users the ability to attach pre-roll or post-roll advertisements to uploaded videos. Videos are currently shared with no advertising, but an opt in, ad-sharing program is under development.

      There are no ads in the videos yet. What you have is the system in it's early stages, using free content. What's the future?

      Azureus has inked distribution deals with 12 television, film and media companies

      You can bet your bottom (US) dollar that these deals include advertising, and that the DRM employed will do its best to stop you skipping them.

      HAL.

      --
      Got them moderator blues I blieve I walk out the do', With these mod-points I been gettin', I 'most never post no mo'
  15. In HD by Beek+Dog · · Score: 4, Funny

    YouTube: Watch boy smash face into ground

    Azureus: Watch boy smash face into ground in excruciating detail

    HD, ho hum... I'll pass until Smell-o-vision comes around.

    1. Re:In HD by se7en11 · · Score: 1

      I don't think a boy's smashed face would smell very good...

  16. It's a BT tracker. by Kadin2048 · · Score: 2, Interesting

    What they're doing really isn't all that cool. They're basically running a BT tracker, but rather than loading it up with all the content that people actually want -- and which also happens to be illegal to distribute -- they're going to only put stuff they have the rights to distribute on it. This tracker will have a fancy web interface, but really it's no different than ThePirateBay, from a technical aspect.

    So here's the "underpants gnomes" breakdown of their business plan, as I see it:

    1) Release buzzword-laden ("social!" "video!" "peer-to-peer!") press release; attract investors and capital.
    2) Use capital to broker deals with content providers to allow you to use some of their stuff.
    3) Start bittorrent tracker with fancy web interface, using content from 2.
    4) Hope that users will upload videos of themselves doing dumb things, thus creating more content than you can afford to license.
    5) ???
    6) Profit.

    Somewhere between 3 and 4, they also create a new version of their established product, which attempts to turn it from a lowly bittorrent client into a steaming pile of featuritis, in order to make it more 'iTunesy.'

    --
    "Ladies and gentlemen, my killbot features Lotus Notes and a machine gun. It is the finest available."
  17. Not the same and other things by Jeff+DeMaagd · · Score: 3, Informative

    As noted above, flash sends you the first bits of the video, ready to play within seconds if not immediately. Bittorrent files don't work that way, you get whatever bits are sent to you, and not in any particular order either. That also means having to have files on the drive, when I leave YouTube and close the browser, the files are generally gone.

    Not only that, just about any digital camera is able to capture video that's better than what YouTube offers, the problem is that YouTube is using a fairly old codec. They can get better video with less bandwidth by switching to OnTo's latest codec.

    1. Re:Not the same and other things by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I don't know about other BitTorrent clients, but Azureus has had an option to prioritize packets at the beginning of a file. So, if you have 100 peers available, but are only going to connect to 10 at any given time, Azureus would pick the ones that have available data from the beginning of the file over those who did not. It's my guess that this is how they will allow streaming of the files. If everyone does this, it also ensures that the beginning portions of the file will be the most available in the swarm.

      As for storing it on your hard drive, it's trivial for a program to delete them when you close it. I'm surprised you think this is an insurmountable problem with the BitTorrent protocol.

    2. Re:Not the same and other things by Inda · · Score: 2, Insightful

      I don't think that's strictly true.

      I don't use BitTorrent much these days but when I did, I always got my client to request small files like NFOs, SFVs, JPEGs and AVI samples first.

      There's nothing to stop the client asking for the blocks in order.

      --
      This post contains benzene, nitrosamines, formaldehyde and hydrogen cyanide.
  18. HD Cameras for less than $1000??? by Temsi · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Where are these guys shopping?

    --
    -- This sig for rent.
  19. 6. Azureus by mattgreen · · Score: 2, Insightful

    At least in my book. Nothing like needing 300 megabytes of memory to be used just to download files!

    (Yes, I realize you can probably use other clients. I'm just being offensive.)

    1. Re:6. Azureus by RKBA · · Score: 1

      No problem, that's leaves 3.7 gigabytes of my 4 gigabytes of RAM free. :-)

      --
      9/11 Eyewitnesses to Explosive WTC Demolition 1 of 2
    2. Re:6. Azureus by EmperorKagato · · Score: 0

      Nothing like wating mod(+) points on a troll.

      Azureus requiring 300 Mb of RAM is ridiculous. The program has changed very much since then.

      --
      ----- You know you have ego issues when you register a domain in your name.
  20. Please seed! by stile99 · · Score: 5, Funny

    I tried reading the article, but it looks like a lot of us are stuck at 98.3%, will someone please seed?

  21. Unstable by Mooga · · Score: 0, Offtopic

    The Azureus Client that the site download was very unstable for me.
    When I when into the settings my computer would panic and explode. After 2 BsoDs & Re-boots I'm never touching that site again :-P

    --
    ~ Mooga
  22. content distributors? by radarsat1 · · Score: 1
    However, the BitTorrent protocol enables content distributors like Azureus to share large files using much less bandwidth.


    Content distributors? Since when is Azureus a content distributor? Is that some sort of entity? I thought Azureus was just a software program implementing a specific internet protocol.

    I would think the "content distributors" would be the websites hosting the trackers, etc.

    Oh well, maybe it's just a semantic misunderstanding on my part.
    1. Re:content distributors? by tepples · · Score: 1

      Content distributors? Since when is Azureus a content distributor? Is that some sort of entity? I thought Azureus was just a software program implementing a specific internet protocol.

      I would think the "content distributors" would be the websites hosting the trackers, etc.

      The point of the article is that the developer of Azureus software now maintains a "website[] hosting the trackers". Clearer?

  23. XBMC plugin? by updog · · Score: 1
    I think I'm willing to put up with the downside of this service to get watchable content on my TV.

    I've tried the YouTube Xbox Media Center plugin which kinda works, but the videos are almost unwatchable on a TV.

    A Zudeo XBMC plugin would be cool...

    BTW, has anyone else noticed that searching for "zudeo" on google results in like ZERO applicable links? Weird...

    1. Re:XBMC plugin? by EmperorKagato · · Score: 1

      It hasn't been crawled by Google yet.

      --
      ----- You know you have ego issues when you register a domain in your name.
    2. Re:XBMC plugin? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yes, which is interesting because it shows how brand spankin' new this service is...

  24. Bittorrent and Streaming by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Most folks seem to be stuck on the fact that you can't stream bit torrent. While this is true, there is no reason that bit torrent clients couldn't be written to serve the chunks in non-random order. In fact, if the clients shared them sequentially, you would have the added benefit of much higher chunk availability in the early stages of distribution, so the system could actually work a bit better.

    And think about it: this wouldn't even break protocol compatibility with non-streaming clients.

  25. SEP/SEB by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    >However, the BitTorrent protocol enables content distributors like Azureus to share large files using much less bandwidth."

    So you make it Someone Else's Problem by using Someone Else's Bandwidth. That's what P2P is all about. :)

  26. BT clients should facilitate "streaming" by BitHive · · Score: 1

    While it's true that BT doesn't send you the bits sequentially, I don't see any reason why the protocol couldn't prioritize on a chunk level instead of a file level. Most clients already let you specify which files in a set to download, and with what priority. While this wouldn't always make streaming possible, in the cases where there are enough seeds to sustain the necessary aggregate transfer rate, you could start watching before the file has finished downloading. There's probably a reason why this goes against the philosophy of BT, so please educate me rather than flame me for being an idiot.

    1. Re:BT clients should facilitate "streaming" by mhall119 · · Score: 1

      Azureus already has an option to prioritize the beginning of a file.

      --
      http://www.mhall119.com
  27. Too Slow To Playback Warren Miller Movie! by Rick+Richardson · · Score: 1

    AMD 64-bit 3GHz...
    Warren Miller M720P. 2min/135MB, mplayer

    Result:

                          **** Your system is too SLOW to play this! ****

    1. Re:Too Slow To Playback Warren Miller Movie! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Make sure you're using the XV (XVideo) mplayer video output instead of X11.

  28. But how easy is it to get working for the HD users by heroine · · Score: 1

    One thing about BitTorrent is it's one of the most hyped concepts that doesn't look like it's working except to the most educated user. Unless you're an expert in networking and file sharing, you're going to see a scrambled file downloading at 0.2kb/sec and give up.

    The most educated people aren't the ones who are into HD. They live in Europe and prefer low definition in higher quantity. The least educated people are the ones who are into HD. They are in Uneducated Shipwreck and prefer high definition in lower quantity. They don't have a clue how BitTorrent works, they hate anything not involving hierarchy, and they're just going to give up and go back to shoveling cash at Comcast.

    The one model which is going to work for the Uneducated Shipwreck is the single server download model, no matter how slow and uneconomical it is.

  29. Re:Masterminds? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Azureus != "clone" of BitTorrent
    Azureus = implementation of BitTorrent client protocol

    See what I did there? BitTorrent, as an OpenSource project, does not have "clones". I think maybe you meant "They weren't even the first third party client".

  30. Open Source Alternative by jasko · · Score: 1

    What about Democracy Player and their Broadcast Machine? We've been able to do this ourselves for some time now.

  31. Reel Now seems a little better by dustinthewind · · Score: 1

    Well, there's another web site for High Definition Movie Trailers at http://www.reelnow.com./ That's where I watch my trailers:) Could provide more services but it's getting there.

  32. Reel Now seems a little better by dustinthewind · · Score: 1

    Well, there's another web site for High Definition Movie Trailers at http://www.reelnow.com/ [www.reelnow.com] That's where I watch my trailers:) Could provide more services but it's getting there.

  33. HDD Capacity by oO+Peeping+Tom+Oo · · Score: 1

    While "normal users" won't normally understand/notice bandwidth usage, i'm pretty sure they would notice a lack of "hard drive space". This won't fly, IMHO.

  34. If done right it will succeed. by MikeFM · · Score: 2, Interesting

    As someone that has been experimenting with a commercial venture based on bit torrent I can say that seeding isn't an issue because YOU seed the feeds. I have a server files are uploaded to that stores the files on another server which seeds to only other of my servers and essentially seeds the file all the time. My other seeding servers seed on demand by simply running a BT client that can take orders from the server so that when someone requests a download one of the seeds will grab a copy of the file and make it available to any users out there. Using a Java-applet based client users are running BT pretty much all the time when they are connected to my website so once they've downloaded the file they contribute to others downloading the file, taking a lot of bandwidth load off my servers, without even thinking about it. My client will track files even if users move them around so unless they modify or delete them they'll still be seeding those files.

    BT can be ran over an http port, in part, so it's unlikely that users would be completely unable to use the service at work - it might just take off some features that make it faster for them. Besides, as more and more legitimate uses are made for BT I think we'll see less blocking.

    BT clients often can detect bandwidth over use and throttle down so that users can use their connection normally. It's not a perfect solution but it works pretty well.

    Zudeo doesn't have to use another program. They're crazy if they don't bundle in at least a lite version that works as a Java applet. You have to use a signed applet but it's not a big deal - most users okay it to run without a second thought.

    BT can certainly stream files. You just need to tweak it to prefer it to do so. If you can provide your own seeds that can guarentee a minimum speed and availability then it's not a huge problem to stream. Besides, I hate streaming. I can't stand using YouTube because I have to watch 5 seconds, wait, watch another 5 seconds, wait, etc. Just download the whole damn file or at least a sizable chunk and then stream. I regually get 100+ kB/s on individual files I download with BT. I don't get that from YouTube.

    The biggest reason YouTube has succeeded is that they make it easy to play any file. You don't have to figure out what codec it needs, what player will work best, etc. That is the area Zudeo needs to make sure they kick YouTube's ass in if they want to succeed.

    --
    At what price learning? At what cost wisdom? The price is a man's peace of mind, and the cost is his life.
  35. I have 0.125 GiB, you insensitive clod by tepples · · Score: 1

    No problem, that's leaves 3.7 gigabytes of my 4 gigabytes of RAM free. :-)

    Plan on sharing the wealth? ;-)

  36. Are you buying? by tepples · · Score: 1

    I'd be happy if everyone on YouTube just uploaded TV quality stuff, rather than the jittery cell phone video that appears to be the bulk of uploads.

    Except a camera phone is more affordable to a lot of YouTube users (that is, paid for by parents) than a USB 2.0 composite video input box.

  37. Duopoly by tepples · · Score: 1

    If your ISP charges you for excessive uploading you may need to switch ISPs.

    And spend $440 on finishing out the 12-month minimum commitment? Besides, what would you do if both the cable company and the phone company TOSsed you?

    1. Re:Duopoly by EmperorKagato · · Score: 1

      Ouch. I now understand your hardship.

      --
      ----- You know you have ego issues when you register a domain in your name.
  38. whatever by JustNiz · · Score: 1

    >> However, the BitTorrent protocol enables content distributors like Azureus to share large files using much less bandwidth."

    Sure if you don't want to watch it today.

  39. In other words... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    People want a lot of content for not a lot of money; same as anything else.

    What exactly do you think would constitute a "fair" commercial offering involving P2P technology?

    What the providers want in this system is the exact opposite of what the typical Slashdotter wants: subscription fee, advertising, protection, and shifting distribution costs. If you can come up with something both sides can agree on then you are worthy of a Nobel prize. Thankfully these people don't have to satisfy Slashdot; they just have to satisfy the general public.

  40. Underseeded last blocks by tepples · · Score: 1

    There's nothing to stop the client asking for the blocks in order.

    Other than that the last blocks become dangerously underseeded, causing the video to stop playing?

    1. Re:Underseeded last blocks by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Not when you can keep dedicated servers to make sure nothing ever goes stale.
      Why can't people understand this? The idea isn't to move ALL the bandwidth usage to the users, just most of it.

  41. Canon HV10 $999 by westlake · · Score: 2, Informative
    HD Cameras for less than $1000??? Where are these guys shopping?

    The Cannon HV10 is available for $999 from Tiger Direct and other outlets. Described as the world's smallest HD camcorder. 1920x1080 CMOS sensor. 10x optical zoom, image stabilization, etc.

    The Sanyo HD1A records 720p MPEG-4 video on SD cards. Sells for around $600-$700. Froogle is your friend.

    1. Re:Canon HV10 $999 by Temsi · · Score: 1

      The HV10 has a MSRP of $1350. If they're selling for $999 (plus s/h and tax), that means they're skimping on accessories and/or warranties.

      The HD1A just barely even qualifies as consumer HD, seeing as it records to MPEG4. That one would be considered "one for the kids".

      But your point is well taken.

      --
      -- This sig for rent.
  42. YouTube resolution gives me a headache by ogewo · · Score: 1

    Not sure why everyone thinks this is a guaranteed failure. All it needs to get going is money. All it needs to stay going is a userbase whose content needs to be viewed in higher quality than youtube can provide, and maybe even HD.

    Has no one here ever stopped a youtube video after a few seconds NOT because they deemed the content uninteresting, but because the quality was just too piss poor?

    As far as bandwidth is concerned, one poster already mentioned that downloaders need not diligently maintain a minimum 1.0 ratio. They need only ease the burden and let Zudeo money cover the gap. I would even support monitoring users ratio like most good bittorrent sites do. People are more than eager to upload on such sites.

    There's video out there without a home. Zudeo should at least be a good halfway house.

  43. The problem is download speeds by syncrotic · · Score: 1

    Every major consumer ISP in the world now has some form of traffic shaping in place to degrade bittorrent traffic. When BT was first launched, speeds of 200kB/s weren't uncommon; today, most torrents putter along at about 30-50kB/s. Despite my connection being able to easily sustain 55kB/s uploads, I never upload faster than 20 over BT.

    While torrents have made file sharing far more widespread, accessible to basically anyone with a client and a few braincells, ISPs have succeeded in making sure that the transfer speeds are firmly in the realm of previous-generation file sharing technologies.

    YouTube's appeal is that it runs in the browser and it's fast - you start playing a video and it just downloads in the background while you watch. It fulfills a promise that realnetworks, apple, and microsoft had been trying to deliver on for years: it makes streaming media easy and reliable.

  44. Re:Masterminds? by trupoet · · Score: 0

    And you're right Firefox didn't invent the Internet

    Al Gore did.

  45. A free service already does this. by tokuchan · · Score: 1

    This idea has been had before. There is already a free service that provides a simple and usually fast way to share and watch video torrents. Check out http://participatoryculture.org/ for a player and a broadcaster of your very own.