P2P is not new (as several people here have pointed out). However, the recent attention brought to the idea has and will continue to spawn new notions of just how the internet can work. As is mentioned in "Peer-To-Peer: Harnessing the Power of Disruptive Technologies," the internet was originally designed as a P2P system of large (mainframe) academic and government computers. It was only later that today's trend of client-server applications appeared.
A move back to the original ideas behind the internet is not a bad idea, but due to the size and current structure of the net it will be difficult. Furthermore, as JonKatz mentions, there is the difficulty of finding applications which will be usable by and will appeal to a large group of people (thus making p2p apps potentially profitable). However, I think he goes too far in claiming that this cannot be done. Napster (though it is only a pseudo-p2p system) exemplifies this popular appeal. It seems necessary to make sure p2p applications are simple to use and designed in such a way as to be understandable to a newbie. This isn't always easy, but it is possible.
One method of bringing this about is to have lots of default settings and let users work within the application without ever knowing about what happens behind the scenes. Furthermore, the option to adjust those advanced settings can be appropriately labeled so the novice won't play with it. This is a good principle for UI design in general and it applies here as well.
To conclude, though p2p has both technical and user-related difficulties to be overcome before many new p2p apps will become common, it seems those difficulties can (and in some cases already have) been overcome.
Others believe, in Anabaptist fashion, that the only proper recourse is to completely withdraw from society and to hurl insults from afar.
I'd just like to comment that not all of us (hopefully very few, in fact) from the Anabaptist tradition hurl insults. I'm assuming you simply haven't had the opportunity to be acquainted with us and therefore may have a misconception. Don't worry, no hard feelings.
Slashdot Mirror
P2P is not new (as several people here have pointed out). However, the recent attention brought to the idea has and will continue to spawn new notions of just how the internet can work. As is mentioned in "Peer-To-Peer: Harnessing the Power of Disruptive Technologies," the internet was originally designed as a P2P system of large (mainframe) academic and government computers. It was only later that today's trend of client-server applications appeared.
A move back to the original ideas behind the internet is not a bad idea, but due to the size and current structure of the net it will be difficult. Furthermore, as JonKatz mentions, there is the difficulty of finding applications which will be usable by and will appeal to a large group of people (thus making p2p apps potentially profitable). However, I think he goes too far in claiming that this cannot be done. Napster (though it is only a pseudo-p2p system) exemplifies this popular appeal. It seems necessary to make sure p2p applications are simple to use and designed in such a way as to be understandable to a newbie. This isn't always easy, but it is possible.
One method of bringing this about is to have lots of default settings and let users work within the application without ever knowing about what happens behind the scenes. Furthermore, the option to adjust those advanced settings can be appropriately labeled so the novice won't play with it. This is a good principle for UI design in general and it applies here as well.
To conclude, though p2p has both technical and user-related difficulties to be overcome before many new p2p apps will become common, it seems those difficulties can (and in some cases already have) been overcome.
-mhorst
I'd just like to comment that not all of us (hopefully very few, in fact) from the Anabaptist tradition hurl insults. I'm assuming you simply haven't had the opportunity to be acquainted with us and therefore may have a misconception. Don't worry, no hard feelings.
(This Mennonite's Two Cents)