Windows 7 Beta Rollout Fails Without BitTorrent

[SonsOfLiberty]

Subject Goes Here

Microsoft ran into major bandwidth problems when they released the latest Beta of Windows 7 to the public. The company decided to delay the release while they added some more servers, citing “very heavy traffic”. If they had only used BitTorrent, this heavy traffic would have actually speeded up distribution, instead of slowing it down.



With an official Windows 7 torrent, Microsoft would not have had problems at all. In fact, BitTorrent would have helped to get the Beta out faster than Microsoft servers are technically capable of.

The larger the demand and the greater numbers of people active on a torrent, the faster a file can potentially be distributed with BitTorrent, saving Microsoft money too.

This is not the first time that Microsoft has failed to see the benefits of BitTorrent though. This is merely a replay of what happened two years ago when the Vista Beta was posted, but obviously they haven’t learned from that earlier failure. At the time Microsoft said that “legal and privacy issues,” had prevented them from posting a torrent, but they didn’t explain why this was the case.

BitTorrent would have been the wise choice though. During recent years BitTorrent has proved itself as the ideal tool to get large files from A to B (C, D…) on the Internet. Linux distros all use BitTorrent, EA used BitTorrent to distribute the Warhammer Online Beta earlier this year, and even NASA embraced BitTorrent.

Although there is no official Microsoft torrent published, Windows 7 Beta is widely available on BitTorrent sites. And since people generally don’t like to wait for something that is already available elsewhere, many have turned to BitTorrent for this Beta, whether Microsoft likes it or not.

Source: Windows 7 Beta Rollout Fails Without BitTorrent

[Brenya]

While I like bashing Microsoft for their inadequacies as much as the next guy, there must be a reason why they chose not to release the beta of their OS on Bittorrent for the second time.

They are a frugal company. There is a blatant contradiction that this article has pointed out: the Bittorrent protocol would save them money and get the beta out to everyone faster, and yet they refuse to use it.

The article accounts for this contradiction by insinuating that Microsoft is unwittingly stubborn and unaware of the advantages of Bittorrent. I think the giants at Microsoft got where they are today not on pure luck. They are smart, many with PhD's; so there must be a flaw in this article's argument.

I can think of two possible reasons to account for their aversion to the protocol:
(1) They don't want to endorse a protocol that is widely used to steal their software and are willing to fork out a few extra dollars for the HTTP servers.
(2) They want to control the distribution of their software for a good reason.

Also, I got shitty speeds on the Windows 7 torrent on mininova. The article's characterization of Bittorrent is idealistic. After an hour of downloading at 150Kb/s, I finally stumbled across the previous article about Windows 7 on this site, and downloaded it from Microsoft at 6Mb/s.

The writer of this article just hates Microsoft, and loves Bittorrent. It's from torrentfreak, ffs. How more biased can you be?

[Cabalo]

While I like bashing Microsoft for their inadequacies as much as the next guy, there must be a reason why they chose not to release the beta of their OS on Bittorrent for the second time.

They are a frugal company. There is a blatant contradiction that this article has pointed out: the Bittorrent protocol would save them money and get the beta out to everyone faster, and yet they refuse to use it.

The article accounts for this contradiction by insinuating that Microsoft is unwittingly stubborn and unaware of the advantages of Bittorrent. I think the giants at Microsoft got where they are today not on pure luck. They are smart, many with PhD's; so there must be a flaw in this article's argument.

I can think of two possible reasons to account for their aversion to the protocol:
(1) They don't want to endorse a protocol that is widely used to steal their software and are willing to fork out a few extra dollars for the HTTP servers.
(2) They want to control the distribution of their software for a good reason.

Also, I got shitty speeds on the Windows 7 torrent on mininova. The article's characterization of Bittorrent is idealistic. After an hour of downloading at 150Kb/s, I finally stumbled across the previous article about Windows 7 on this site, and downloaded it from Microsoft at 6Mb/s.

The writer of this article just hates Microsoft, and loves Bittorrent. It's from torrentfreak, ffs. How more biased can you be?

man, i totally agree with what you are saying!
i couldn't have said it any better.
Lots of MS haters out there!

[SonsOfLiberty]

Actually you missing it, so Linux supports BitTorrent so that makes Linux evil? And Windows is GOD? The article is 100% correct, if they would have had a torrent or hell even a nzb added, you would'nt even hear about bandwidth trouble.

Microsoft on Win7 Beta: 'The download experience was not ideal'

http://www.betanews.com/article/Micr...eal/1231774724

[aktiv8]

The article is 100% correct, if they would have had a torrent or hell even a nzb added, you would'nt even hear about bandwidth trouble.

Disagree with that...

They certainly wouldnt do a NZB, but the torrent, although being a good distribution means (e.g. see Linux distros etc) would be slow for a lot of people what with traffic shaping, blovking of P2P apps on networks, people refusing to use it etc

Whilst it would ease the load, I don't believe it would have taken enough of the load from those wishing to download direct from MS

[tesco]

Here's some reasons I can think of that they wouldn't use it:
1) They don't want to have to provide support for bittorrent
2) They don't want to be affiliated with bittorrent because of it's 'bad image' (used for piracy; just think of the headlines)
3) They don't want to affiliate with something used to pirate their own software
4) Possibly just a conspiracy threory: They're paid by RIAA/MPAA/whatever organization to NOT endorse bittorrent... if they introduce it to just a few more people that didn't know about it then that's a few more people that may end up pirating music/movies/whatever... Just a theory

[SonsOfLiberty]

Here's some reasons I can think of that they wouldn't use it:
1) They don't want to have to provide support for bittorrent
2) They don't want to be affiliated with bittorrent because of it's 'bad image' (used for piracy; just think of the headlines)
3) They don't want to affiliate with something used to pirate their own software
4) Possibly just a conspiracy threory: They're paid by RIAA/MPAA/whatever organization to NOT endorse bittorrent... if they introduce it to just a few more people that didn't know about it then that's a few more people that may end up pirating music/movies/whatever... Just a theory

Well doesn't that make Linux look evil then?

http://users.softlab.ece.ntua.gr/~si...itchlinux3.swf

[1000possibleclaws]

edit

[vic]

ignoring file sharing is ignorance.

[tesco]

Here's some reasons I can think of that they wouldn't use it:
1) They don't want to have to provide support for bittorrent
2) They don't want to be affiliated with bittorrent because of it's 'bad image' (used for piracy; just think of the headlines)
3) They don't want to affiliate with something used to pirate their own software
4) Possibly just a conspiracy threory: They're paid by RIAA/MPAA/whatever organization to NOT endorse bittorrent... if they introduce it to just a few more people that didn't know about it then that's a few more people that may end up pirating music/movies/whatever... Just a theory

Well doesn't that make Linux look evil then?

http://users.softlab.ece.ntua.gr/~sivann/pub/swf/switchlinux3.swf

It is, isn't it?