Slyck.com
 
Slyck Chatbox - And More

Official BitTorrent Developer Releases Trackerless Client

Discuss Slyck's latest news
Forum rules
PLEASE READ BEFORE POSTING: Slyck Forum Rules

Postby zab » Thu May 19, 2005 2:27 pm

Nope, totally different implementations. Ours has actually been in development a lot longer than theirs.


Yes and no. They use the Khashmir (http://khashmir.sf.net) implementation, which has indeed been in development longer, but not by Bram. It uses the Twisted framework underneath.

We suspect that there are some serious problems with azureus's DHT, and are currently investigating.


That seems like total FUD to me; az's implementation has been tweaked to lessen the effect of hotspots, while the Khashmir is more or less a reference implementation.

Bram is pissing me off. He seems to be having sour grapes against Azureus based on some of his earlier comments; that or the usual "Java sucks, its impossible something written in Java to be better than what I wrote in Python" (don't get me wrong I love Python too)
User avatar
zab
 
Posts: 114
Joined: Fri Sep 24, 2004 10:20 pm

Postby TV-Slut » Thu May 19, 2005 3:31 pm

In fighting within the BT world would be so bad! This is exactly what the MPAA/RIAA would want.

AZ came later and since BT is still being developed, AZ should do the right thing and submit to BT, not the other way around. Lest you all forget, Bram created BT, not AZ. Show some respect to Bram!
User avatar
TV-Slut
 
Posts: 138
Joined: Sun May 15, 2005 9:47 am

Postby Solomon » Thu May 19, 2005 3:48 pm

I dont understand your logic.

Bram Cohen created something, and made it Open Source. The Azureus team took that something, altered it, and made it available.

Why should they conform to what Bram Cohen wants? If he didnt want people to alter and expand on the source code, he shouldnt have made it publically available.

Competition in the Bittorrent world could be a bad thing, but it could also be a good thing, which is what Im more inclined to think will happen. If two or more development teams are fighting to be "the best", then they'll both constantly work hard to be "the best", which means the end user gets better and better clients. If only one development team exists, the project will stagnate. Just look at Microsoft as an example.

I also cant see the concept on Bittorrent dying just yet, somehow. Its taking up, what, 30% of internet traffic? Thats a fairly sizeable chunk...
Last edited by Solomon on Thu May 19, 2005 4:48 pm, edited 1 time in total.
User avatar
Solomon
 
Posts: 464
Joined: Fri May 23, 2003 11:48 am
Location: In the Indri enclosure...

Postby marksman » Thu May 19, 2005 3:53 pm

zab wrote:
Bram is pissing me off. He seems to be having sour grapes against Azureus based on some of his earlier comments; that or the usual "Java sucks, its impossible something written in Java to be better than what I wrote in Python" (don't get me wrong I love Python too)


Yeah but java does suck.. I used to use Az, but it was such a ridiculous resource monster that I had to kill it.

Just about any other client out there is better... I can't see myself EVER using AZ again as long as it is in java.

Personally I use bit spirit and haven't given it a second thought since I switched... Does what I need and I have few problems with it... And it uses about 1% of the resources that Az did.
User avatar
marksman
 
Posts: 145
Joined: Sun Apr 17, 2005 2:06 pm

Postby jonne » Thu May 19, 2005 4:10 pm

TV-Slut wrote:In fighting within the BT world would be so bad! This is exactly what the MPAA/RIAA would want.

There's always been disagreements between developers, and that's not necessarely a bad thing. It keeps devs focused on making their apps better than the competition. After a while there will be a clear winner (which is when other clients start implementing either azureus' network or the 'official' network).

Bram does seem to like to spread FUD, however. I remember reading all kinds of weird things he said about Shareaza's BT implementation when Mike added decentralised tracking over G2 to Shareaza.
<freebase> for people that like magnet and ed2k links...
User avatar
jonne
 
Posts: 136
Joined: Wed Oct 13, 2004 4:38 am

Postby zab » Thu May 19, 2005 8:44 pm

jonne wrote:Bram does seem to like to spread FUD, however. I remember reading all kinds of weird things he said about Shareaza's BT implementation when Mike added decentralised tracking over G2 to Shareaza.


That I totally agree with - Shareassa's implementation is the worst thing that happened to bittorrent, its even worse than MPAA shutting websites down. Mike deserves to be tortured slowly for doing such a whackjob and even the die-hard MP fanbois do not use Shareassa for BT.

But the Azureus DHT? Puh-leeze, its been in production for less than a month and he's already "suspecting that it has serious problems". And an out-of-the-box third party implementation which to my knowledge has not been tested on large scale in the real world doesn't. Right.
User avatar
zab
 
Posts: 114
Joined: Fri Sep 24, 2004 10:20 pm

Postby kennyg101 » Fri May 20, 2005 3:11 am

The very fact that BT is open source is something for which Bram deserves alot of respect and appreciation.

He has enabled a fantastic amount of people to tweak and develop a whole range of programes and websites around his original code and concept.

Although it may be preferable if both DHT standards were compatible , even if they are competing we will have a net benefit that wasn't around six months ago.

I experienced this a week ago when a tracker went down and we all could seemlessly carry on the file transfer.
kennyg101
 
Posts: 106
Joined: Thu Nov 04, 2004 10:19 pm

Postby mpfenton » Fri May 20, 2005 3:32 am

So, how hard would it be for Azureus to migrate to the BT standard of DHT?
mpfenton
 
Posts: 619
Joined: Tue Apr 06, 2004 4:59 pm

Postby xena » Fri May 20, 2005 3:34 am

Azureus 2.3.0 sucks... damn slow...(not in 2.1.0.4)
xena
 
Posts: 38
Joined: Mon Feb 14, 2005 3:03 am

Postby jonne » Fri May 20, 2005 6:07 am

zab wrote:That I totally agree with - Shareassa's implementation is the worst thing that happened to bittorrent, its even worse than MPAA shutting websites down. Mike deserves to be tortured slowly for doing such a whackjob and even the die-hard MP fanbois do not use Shareassa for BT.

crap, i forgot that just naming shareaza here attracts trolls.

The point I was trying to make was that Bram tends to attack all attempts to make bittorrent better (regardless of merit). Shareaza was just an example, and there was no need to have the 'shareaza sux0rz' knee-jerk reaction.
<freebase> for people that like magnet and ed2k links...
User avatar
jonne
 
Posts: 136
Joined: Wed Oct 13, 2004 4:38 am

Postby zim » Fri May 20, 2005 8:05 am

Between the two of them... official and azureus..

i'd pick official anyday. for one reason above all else.

ITS NOT JAVA! (even if your piece of crap is the BEST piece of crap. its still crap)


Bet a dollar bit tornado adds the official dht way to their next version. yay :)
User avatar
zim
 
Posts: 5776
Joined: Wed Apr 20, 2005 10:01 am

Postby zab » Fri May 20, 2005 9:18 am

zim wrote:Bet a dollar bit tornado adds the official dht way to their next version. yay :)


Have fun waiting for the next version. In the meantime, those of us without prejudices against language X or Y will use the superior product.

And no, I haven't noticed azureus being slower, or faster, or more sociable than the official client on my box.
User avatar
zab
 
Posts: 114
Joined: Fri Sep 24, 2004 10:20 pm

Postby Psycho Ced » Fri May 20, 2005 9:22 am

Solomon wrote:I dont understand your logic.
Bram Cohen created something, and made it Open Source. The Azureus team took that something, altered it, and made it available.

Why should they conform to what Bram Cohen wants? If he didnt want people to alter and expand on the source code, he shouldnt have made it publically available.

Well said!
User avatar
Psycho Ced
Psycho+
 
Posts: 5892
Joined: Sun Oct 26, 2003 2:52 pm
Location: Relative to where?

Postby no_dammagE » Fri May 20, 2005 11:17 am

people talking about language X being slower than language Y just don't know what they are talking about.

Need an example?
Well, you can write a helloworld in ASM and it will be ass-fast and you can write a helloworld in C and it will be ass-slow. You can write a helloworld in ASM and it will be ass-slow and you can write a helloworld in C and it will be ass-fast.

A direct comparison between Java and Python is easily possible - both are interpreted languages with a just-in-time compiler. Thus, both should come to the same results while performing the same function. The results could vary a bit and the start-up times will differ from each other, too. The first depends how everything has been implemented and what is compiled by JITC, the second depends on how much time the JITC needs to compile the application.

So, the only really relevant factor is: is your code optimal or not. A simple example would be if you implement a for sequence from 1 to 10 or you create a sequence which does the same by using the number of pi. I think that the first way will be faster, but if you are good, the second way will work, too.

The speed of the application doesn't depend in most cases from the compiler/virtual machine/interpreter as much as from code's effeciency. If you use workarounds to achieve an aim while an easy way is possible (and that easy way is used in a concurrent application), then the easy way will clearly win.

A grand example is Gentoo Linux (stage 1) compared to an another common distribution: while every common distribution is compiled to run on every machine, you specify in Gentoo what you really want to have and it won't load anything except your choice, will recompile all the userland (plus all internal stuff) and optimize it specially for your box, not your neighbor's box.

I will eat my hat if you will never come across a Gentoo box which is slower than a common i586 distro. If the buider of the Gentoo installation did everything wrong he only could, his installation will be slower than e.g. SlackWare or Debian.

That's why telling Java is slow is wrong, better tell Azureus is slow, because else I wonder why java applications are so widely used on the server side ...
Windows? Blah. Linux? Blah. BSD? Blah.
Just make sure you have a computer licence and I can open your fsckin files.
Vorbis | Theora | LaTeX | OpenDocument
User avatar
no_dammagE
 
Posts: 652
Joined: Sat Jul 05, 2003 9:37 am

Postby zab » Fri May 20, 2005 11:28 am

@no_dammagE:

When was the last time a language X hater demonstrated the ability to think logically or read more than one paragraph? Your post is absolutely correct, but it falls on deaf ears.
User avatar
zab
 
Posts: 114
Joined: Fri Sep 24, 2004 10:20 pm

Postby zim » Fri May 20, 2005 3:26 pm

zab wrote:
zim wrote:Bet a dollar bit tornado adds the official dht way to their next version. yay :)


Have fun waiting for the next version. In the meantime, those of us without prejudices against language X or Y will use the superior product.

And no, I haven't noticed azureus being slower, or faster, or more sociable than the official client on my box.



you are either totally ignorant of the java language.

or are a programmer who learned java first and harbor some feelings for it since it was your "first".

<shrug> So long as you're happy with what you use. Some of us expect a little more i guess.


And. Since the source to both the original and bit tornado are avail. If i get tired of waiting i can build it myself. Open source is nice like that.
User avatar
zim
 
Posts: 5776
Joined: Wed Apr 20, 2005 10:01 am

Postby zab » Fri May 20, 2005 4:33 pm

whatever man, I'm glad you know so much about me.

But the at the end of the day, my client can use a DHT for backup when the tracker fails and yours can't. You can spend all day recompiling the supposedly superior C++ code but it won't do a thing.
User avatar
zab
 
Posts: 114
Joined: Fri Sep 24, 2004 10:20 pm

Postby Risky » Fri May 20, 2005 6:03 pm

no_dammagE wrote:A direct comparison between Java and Python is easily possible - both are interpreted languages with a just-in-time compiler.


Python doesn't include a just-in-time compiler.
Risky
 
Posts: 50
Joined: Thu Sep 23, 2004 7:25 pm

Postby zim » Fri May 20, 2005 7:27 pm

tornado isnt c.

its python. very c like. but not c by any standard.

read up on java and python a little.

Heres the classic hello world program example in both. Simplifyed. But drives home the point.


Java:
public class helloworld
{
public static void main (String[] args)
{
system.out.println("hello, world!");
}}

Python:
print "Hello, world!"



Java is good for many things. BT just isnt one of them. :lol:
User avatar
zim
 
Posts: 5776
Joined: Wed Apr 20, 2005 10:01 am

Postby Charles » Fri May 20, 2005 7:36 pm

As a mac user I appreciate that both Bittorrent and Azureus are cross platforms. The DHT complaints by Bram are just to lower Azureus credit because they did it first. Competition is good. They both rock, but Azureus gets my vote because more people are working on it and I like java -- the swing interface is so slow, the devs have to be great and efficient coders to get something feel right -- and Azureus devs are in that category.
Multinetwork apps are good for making every network they connect to less efficient. I think I hate them ;)
User avatar
Charles
 
Posts: 241
Joined: Mon Mar 08, 2004 8:04 pm

Postby zim » Fri May 20, 2005 7:39 pm

Charles wrote:As a mac user I appreciate that both Bittorrent and Azureus are cross platforms. The DHT complaints by Bram are just to lower Azureus credit because they did it first. Competition is good. They both rock, but Azureus gets my vote because more people are working on it and I like java -- the swing interface is so slow, the devs have to be great and efficient coders to get something feel right -- and Azureus devs are in that category.
_________________
Multinetwork apps are good for making every network they connect to less efficient. I think I hate them Wink



Your sig is very ironic in this case. :lol:
User avatar
zim
 
Posts: 5776
Joined: Wed Apr 20, 2005 10:01 am

Postby Charles » Fri May 20, 2005 7:45 pm

zim wrote:Your sig is very ironic in this case. :lol:


You = don't get it :roll:
Multinetwork apps are good for making every network they connect to less efficient. I think I hate them ;)
User avatar
Charles
 
Posts: 241
Joined: Mon Mar 08, 2004 8:04 pm

Postby zab » Fri May 20, 2005 8:21 pm

zim wrote:read up on java and python a little.


Dude, the example you gave shows how immensely clueless you are when it comes to software development and languages in general. Python is further away from C than java just by the fact that its dynamically typed. Some people here do program for a living and you're providing us with quality entertrainment, so I'm just going to stop answering and let you embarrass yourself at will.
User avatar
zab
 
Posts: 114
Joined: Fri Sep 24, 2004 10:20 pm

Postby zim » Fri May 20, 2005 10:50 pm

edit: My bad. Forgot what kind of users you get on general forums.



EDITED: Picture removed - HC
User avatar
zim
 
Posts: 5776
Joined: Wed Apr 20, 2005 10:01 am

Postby bkman » Sat May 21, 2005 1:29 am

zim wrote:Between the two of them... official and azureus..

i'd pick official anyday. for one reason above all else.

ITS NOT JAVA!


Wtf? Python is slower (on the whole) than Java, and Azurues uses less CPU than the mainline. The only thing the official client has over Azurues in terms of resource usage is it uses a good deal less ram.
User avatar
bkman
 
Posts: 338
Joined: Sun Jan 23, 2005 1:24 am

PreviousNext

Return to Slyck News

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 2 guests

cron
© 2001-2008 Slyck.com