Rarred or Unrarred?

[integral]

Do you think trackers should keep using rarred torrents?

Personally, I don't like it. I mean, of course I understand the whole preservation of scene releases idea, as well as the race for great pre-times. But I really think it's be much easier to seed individual files rather than tons of rars, which is why I love BMTV so much. :happy:

[LoKaLiRi]

i dont like the rarred files ;)

[waeldiab]

me too i don't like it ;)

[bblogs]

Never been a huge fan of rars. But then I couldn't care less about pretimes either, so... :)

[lostdemon]

As long as I'm able to get what I want it doesn't matter to me if it comes rarred or not.

[sabre]

rar'ed = better pre times = better!

[midnightalker]

I really don't understand why do you RAR the files..Can someone please explain a little bit more than what sabre said?
And no matter whats the deal, I don't like RARs either.

[stupidcrab]

A unrared content is easy to view for yourself
But it is not easy to share.(small file transported faster)

That's why compression method are always needed.
It saves the bandwidth(even sometimes rared content have similar size even bigger)

I love rared content , it saves my hd space and I can download more. That's the reason

[kuracat]

As long as I'm able to get what I want it doesn't matter to me if it comes rarred or not.

thanks right!

[Bionic]

When it's rarred you get it faster because it's in a smaller file size. Why bother when it just takes a few seconds to unrar.

[spidey99]

also, when you download a rared content and somehow it gets damaged, you only need to redownload the damaged ones.otherwise, you would have to download the whole thing from the beginning.
another point, i burn the huge contents, like games sizing 8 gbs in the rar format and divide them into 2 dvds, it is practical...

[jasperr]

I really don't understand why do you RAR the files..Can someone please explain a little bit more than what sabre said?
And no matter whats the deal, I don't like RARs either.


it's the scene standard.. meaning this is the way its been done for a while.. the reasoning behind it, is to take full advantage of the bittorrent protocols. if you understand bittorrent at all, it simultaneously takes and transfers pieces of the torrent at once... by doing this it allows for a faster transfer of many files versus a transfer of a single file. and thats what sabre was talking about when he says faster speeds, pre-times and what knot

i know i didn't word it 100% correctly.... but thats the basic idea..

[stoi]

well i dont think it has anything to do with bittorrent tbh, im pretty sure the scene released this way before bittorrent was ever thought of, never mind released (i could be wrong though we are going back a few years)

Its because of FTP, and runners. (i think)

Lets say you have 1 huge file, you would have to transfer that 1 big file via FTP in full before you can send it to someone else.

But because its split up, you can download everything, and someone else can then grab parts 1-10 while your downloading part 11-30 and so on.

so it means its faster to spread around on the FTP networks.

another reason is Usenet does not allow files over 100meg (or did not use to) so if you wanted your release to spread to Usenet, then you had to multi rar it, and which is where par files comes in.

As for bittorrent, its got an ok error protection on it, but the problem is, it is not 100% infallable, just 2 weeks ago we seen an uploader upload a torrent, it unrared great on his PC, but all the downloaders, could not get it to extract at all. so he had to upload part 23 again and they snatched it again and as far as im aware it worked.

Also you have to think, that if that was an ISO, you would not know it was busted until you burnt it and tried to play it, so you have to waste a disc. this way if it doesnt unrar you know its fecked and to try to download the bit that is fecked again.

Its just a lot more practical with any errors that we may come accross, than single files.

[lovejj]

because scne use rars~~
and i accepted
rar can be easily part seed~~

[Polarbear]

rar files have absolutely nothing to do with bittorrent or an advantage for the bittorrent protocol. bittorrent splits any file in chunks. no matter whether it's rared or not.

the changes in file size are marginal to nothing, especially with movies.

it's a ftp scene relict. that's all.

[sabre]

the main reason the scene rar's is because if you have a 700MB file, only one person can upload the file to a FTP. But if you have 50 files of 14MB then you can have multiple people uploading different parts of the file at once which makes it faster to distribute the file around.

It also allows partial seeding on bit torrent as someone mentioned :)

[Sonnentier]

Basically I hate rar'ed torrents,
I would need 2x the space as I can't delete rar files while seeding.

It's only useful if you want to seed releases across other trackers,
or if you want to buffer your account by only downloading some of the splitarchives.

And yes, it's from the scene standards.
They split the files into 15 MB RAR or something,
this is more handy for transferring big files over FTP.

[soulreaper]

I hate rarred files because of CRC errors and redownloading them isn't exactly fun. I don't give a shit about pretimes so unrrared for me definetely.

[mbucari1]

A unrared content is easy to view for yourself
But it is not easy to share.(small file transported faster)

That's why compression method are always needed.
It saves the bandwidth(even sometimes rared content have similar size even bigger)

I love rared content , it saves my hd space and I can download more. That's the reasonI think your user name is rather fitting.

Yes, smaller files transport faster. However, if you look at the compression of any video, music or games, there's practically none! The only place you'll get any decent compression is with apps and text.

And when you extract the content, you're almost doubling the space taken up on your HDD.

In case anyone can't tell, I don't like rars.

[stoi]

well you can partial seed any file on bittorrent, download 300 meg or so, set your download to 1KBs, upload at whatever and your partial seeding.

I hate partial seeding, whats the point in downloading something if you dont want it.

and if gives a false impression to others that do want it.

10 seeders 100 leechers, ok i want this file and i can get a good ratio on it, they jump on, dl the lot, but those 100 leechers are partial seeders, they can never get back to a 1:1 ratio, so they get dumped on.

and imagine downloading a 10 gig Blu-Ray .mkv file. it downloaded ok, it even starts to play ok, but after 50 minutes it crashes, and every time you try it, it crashes. you would have to redownload that entire 10 gig file again.

but if 1 rar out of 100 is corrupt, just delete the rar and re-download that 1 rar, if it still corrupt, the uploader can reupload, only that 1 rar, you can grab it and hopefully 99 times out of 100 it will fix the problem.

Ok i admit, you dont get all that many corrupt downloads in bittorrent, but the fact is, it does still happen occasionally, so thats why i prefer rars.

I wont touch a 1 file torrent. I will go for rars 100% of the time.

[mbucari1]

I hate rarred files because of CRC errors and redownloading them isn't exactly fun. I don't give a shit about pretimes so unrrared for me definetely.
The great thing about bittorrent is that it has a built-in hash check, so there's no way that you can get corrupt data. You must have gotten some bad rars, and if the uploaders unrared the content before uploading, they'd see that they had a bad rar and we wouldn't have to download a rarfix.

[midnightalker]

You know, we won't change anything by discussing it, not even if we got 1000 post saying they hate rars but I really have to admit that I find this particularly comforting because I though I was the only one hated rars!!!

[mbucari1]

and imagine downloading a 10 gig Blu-Ray .mkv file. it downloaded ok, it even starts to play ok, but after 50 minutes it crashes, and every time you try it, it crashes. you would have to redownload that entire 10 gig file again.

but if 1 rar out of 100 is corrupt, just delete the rar and re-download that 1 rar, if it still corrupt, the uploader can reupload, only that 1 rar, you can grab it and hopefully 99 times out of 100 it will fix the problem.


The corruption happens between the topsite and the uploaders server. Bittorrent has hash checks, so there's NO WAY an intact file on the uploaders server could get corrupted during transfer.

[stoi]

well there is, ive seen it happen, on numerous occasions.

it may not have happened to you, but trust me on this one, it happened just 2 weeks ago like i said.

[mbucari1]

well there is, ive seen it happen, on numerous occasions.

it may not have happened to you, but trust me on this one, it happened just 2 weeks ago like i said.
what's that, corruption of files between the server and your computer? Did you re hash check?

[soulreaper]

I hate rarred files because of CRC errors and redownloading them isn't exactly fun. I don't give a shit about pretimes so unrrared for me definetely.
The great thing about bittorrent is that it has a built-in hash check, so there's no way that you can get corrupt data. You must have gotten some bad rars, and if the uploaders unrared the content before uploading, they'd see that they had a bad rar and we wouldn't have to download a rarfix.

The last rarred movie I dled from a quality site had CRC errors all over the place.Infact all the rars were bad. I guess the uploader had a field day.
You know what the worst part is? Now that I've dled it,I've to seed that POS!

[stoi]

If you didnt know i run a tracker, so NO i didnt download it, but we get to see a hell of a lot of fecked up torrents being uploaded which need to be nuked.

it was a home made rip, The uploader who ripped it, unrared it fine, Everyone that snatched it could not unrar ir at all, part 23 was fecked, he unrared it again and it still worked.

so he reuploaded it, and they got it to work.

and if you are getting lots of CRC errors in rars, its not the uploaders fault, its bad ram.

[jasperr]

well i dont think it has anything to do with bittorrent tbh, im pretty sure the scene released this way before bittorrent was ever thought of, never mind released (i could be wrong though we are going back a few years)

Its because of FTP, and runners. (i think)

Lets say you have 1 huge file, you would have to transfer that 1 big file via FTP in full before you can send it to someone else.

But because its split up, you can download everything, and someone else can then grab parts 1-10 while your downloading part 11-30 and so on.

so it means its faster to spread around on the FTP networks.

another reason is Usenet does not allow files over 100meg (or did not use to) so if you wanted your release to spread to Usenet, then you had to multi rar it, and which is where par files comes in.

As for bittorrent, its got an ok error protection on it, but the problem is, it is not 100% infallable, just 2 weeks ago we seen an uploader upload a torrent, it unrared great on his PC, but all the downloaders, could not get it to extract at all. so he had to upload part 23 again and they snatched it again and as far as im aware it worked.

Also you have to think, that if that was an ISO, you would not know it was busted until you burnt it and tried to play it, so you have to waste a disc. this way if it doesnt unrar you know its fecked and to try to download the bit that is fecked again.

Its just a lot more practical with any errors that we may come accross, than single files.

i knew it was somting to that effect... thats what happens when you try to think before you have your morning coffee.. :P

thanks for the correction stoi... seems i was a bit off base there

[nthpeter]

I like rarred content ;) I like to archive movies, games, etc... and if a piece of one archived rls is corrupted, then i need to dl only the corrupted rar file, not the whole avi file.

[integral]

Let's look at the BMTV view of it; it's only one file. Therefore, users are much more likely to keep seeding it. Let's say you download a tv cap, 300mb. With rarred, you'll be taking up ~600mb on your computer, if you want to keep seeding and have the extracted file at the same time. With unrarred, you'll only have the one file; 300mb. The issue gets much bigger than 300mb though; TV Seasons? DVD-DL/Bluray games? 1080p movies?

The scene is strict, and they have their rules of transferring files. But as tracker communities we should be more open, and stray away from the idea that we're part of the scene, because we aren't. In my opinion unrarred scene releases are much more practical than rarred.

[stoi]

thats your oppinion and i dont agree with it at all.

like i have said previously, Bittorrent Error Checking is good, but its not 100% good, until it gets to 100% good, the rars will stay.

And i never said we pretend to be part of the scene, but personally i think we should keep scene releases as is.

Not unrar them and then not give credit at all to the scene, or even worse, unrar, rerar and password protect the things.

and i do not understand why you have to keep both rars and unrared on your PC.

Unrar it, watch it, burn it, whatever then delete the unrared, while keeping the rared portion of it, its not hard.

[integral]

Don't get me wrong, I didn't mean to direct anything at you personally if that's what you thought, it's just my views and other trackers' views. There isn't really a right or wrong way to do things, it's just two different ways of going about it, and both ways work.

[robotpirate]

the rars of scene rls aren't compressed (to whoever wrote that, did you even look at the filesizes?), and rars aren't used 'to take advantage of the bittorrent protocol'. lol

i prefer unrarred for time and space reasons.

[Wildclaw]

Soo much misinformation. Really, half the people responding seems to be guessing or have incorrect ideas.

*** From whyrar.omfg.se (Which are the main advantages of original-releases?) ***

1. Because the releases consists of small parts you don't have to worry about re-downloading the whole release if something goes wrong and a file gets corrupted.

Not relevant. Bittorrent has built in error correction unlike the stone age ftp protocol.

2. You can control that everything has been downloaded correctly by checking against the SFV-file. Hence you will always know whether you've gotten a complete uncorrupt release of what you were downloading.

This means that you will have the exact same files on your computer, when you've downloaded and extracted the release, as the person who first ripped the movie and created the release. This instead of downloading an extracted version of the file which perhaps has been transfered a couple of hundred times from one person to another and where there is an overwhelming risk of transfer errors. This doesn't mean that the file won't work, but it can lead to colourdeviations or so called freeze-frames.

Not relevant. Same reason as above. A torrent actually contains all the functionality of an sfv file. Also generally misleading argument as you could just as easily generate an sfv file from unrared files.

3. You can download from multiple sources at the same time - ensuring comformt and maximizing your download speed.

Bittorrent can do this without having to split up files. Actually, a good ftp/http client could do it also. (although error correction wouldn't work in that case.

*** end whyrar text ***

To summarize, rars are used because of the inferior ftp/http protocols that really should have been replaced by something better a long time ago.

I actually neglected one argument which is that split rar files can be used to distribute files on free web accounts with limited account space. This was a very common practice in the old days. Also, when burning to cd/dvd, this same fact can be exploited.

Rar files (except when used for real compression or grouping together bigger collections of small files such an image collection) have a big disadvantages

You have to unrar them to use the content, thereby either doubling disk space requirements or having the user delete the original rars. This is hugely annoying for most end users and evidenced by many observations will drastically reduce the amount of long term seeders, because most people prefer to keep things in a usable format.

Finally some quoting



That's why compression method are always needed.
It saves the bandwidth(even sometimes rared content have similar size even bigger)

I love rared content , it saves my hd space and I can download more. That's the reason


Correct, and this is good for some compressable application ISOs. However, this is not applicable for most scene releases that are just stored, not compressed.

Also when using rar for compression together with bittorrent, a single rar file should be created, and not lots of small split files.



also, when you download a rared content and somehow it gets damaged, you only need to redownload the damaged ones.otherwise, you would have to download the whole thing from the beginning.


Not applicable for bittorrent



It's the scene standard.. meaning this is the way its been done for a while.. the reasoning behind it, is to take full advantage of the bittorrent protocols. if you understand bittorrent at all, it simultaneously takes and transfers pieces of the torrent at once... by doing this it allows for a faster transfer of many files versus a transfer of a single file. and thats what sabre was talking about when he says faster speeds, pre-times and what knot


Except for it being the scene standard, everything else you said was incorrect. You obviously don't understand the bittorrent protocol.

The bittorrent protocol does everything you said without having to deal with the primitive way of splitting it up into rar files and using sfv/crc to check for errors.



rar can be easily part seed~~


So can any file. Just stop downloading an unfinished file and you can keep seeding the parts of it you did download. You can also seed a partially downloaded file from one site on another site.

Only thing you can't do is download a rar file from usenet and part seed it on a torrent site that uses unrared files.



it was a home made rip, The uploader who ripped it, unrared it fine, Everyone that snatched it could not unrar ir at all, part 23 was fecked, he unrared it again and it still worked.

so he reuploaded it, and they got it to work.

and if you are getting lots of CRC errors in rars, its not the uploaders fault, its bad ram.


This is impossible as in the universe will end before it happens impossible.

Unless of course the uploader was stupid enough to upload files via the old crappy ftp protocol (which doesn't support error correction) to a seedbox. On that seedbox he then created the torrent file using some command line tool and seeded the thing.

An error with ftp, not with bittorrent. That is the only way the scenario you described makes any sense at all.

Also, the easy way to avoid the scenario above if you still for some reason have to first ftp to the seed box is simple. Just create the torrent locally, then ftp it and the file(s) to the seed box. Finally, connect the seed box and your own local computer to the same torrent and any errors that happened during the ftp transfer will be automatically fixed.

Easiest would of course be to simply avoid using ftp for data transfer and instead just use it to upload the torrent file, and use bittorrent for the actual data transfer.



I like rarred content I like to archive movies, games, etc... and if a piece of one archived rls is corrupted, then i need to dl only the corrupted rar file, not the whole avi file.


Can just as easily be done with avi and bittorrent. Just connect the corrupted file to a correct bittorrent copy and the protocol will automatically correct the incorrect parts.

Of course, maybe finding rar files is easier depending on your connections, but that is a question of availability, not protocol.



like i have said previously, Bittorrent Error Checking is good, but its not 100% good, until it gets to 100% good, the rars will stay.


Bittorrent error checking is 100%. Ok, not 100%, just the earth will be swallowed up by the sun before there is an error safe. (also, making an exception for possible intentional interfering, which may be possible if someone have access to the NSA computer farm and mathematicians)



the rars of scene rls aren't compressed (to whoever wrote that, did you even look at the filesizes?), and rars aren't used 'to take advantage of the bittorrent protocol'. lol

i prefer unrarred for time and space reasons.


Yup. Sceners should just distribute directly via bittorrent to avoid all the hell with crc errors that using the ancient ftp protocol causes. Hehe, like that would happen. :D

Finally, if I seemed to be a little unfair towards the ftp protocol, I should just feel that I have similar feelings towards the http protocol. Not having built in error correction is simply unacceptable for a modern protocol that is used to transfer files.

[integral]

Soo much misinformation. Really, half the people responding seems to be guessing or have incorrect ideas.

*** From whyrar.omfg.se (Which are the main advantages of original-releases?) ***

1. Because the releases consists of small parts you don't have to worry about re-downloading the whole release if something goes wrong and a file gets corrupted.

Not relevant. Bittorrent has built in error correction unlike the stone age ftp protocol.

2. You can control that everything has been downloaded correctly by checking against the SFV-file. Hence you will always know whether you've gotten a complete uncorrupt release of what you were downloading.

This means that you will have the exact same files on your computer, when you've downloaded and extracted the release, as the person who first ripped the movie and created the release. This instead of downloading an extracted version of the file which perhaps has been transfered a couple of hundred times from one person to another and where there is an overwhelming risk of transfer errors. This doesn't mean that the file won't work, but it can lead to colourdeviations or so called freeze-frames.

Not relevant. Same reason as above. A torrent actually contains all the functionality of an sfv file. Also generally misleading argument as you could just as easily generate an sfv file from unrared files.

3. You can download from multiple sources at the same time - ensuring comformt and maximizing your download speed.

Bittorrent can do this without having to split up files. Actually, a good ftp/http client could do it also. (although error correction wouldn't work in that case.

*** end whyrar text ***

To summarize, rars are used because of the inferior ftp/http protocols that really should have been replaced by something better a long time ago.

I actually neglected one argument which is that split rar files can be used to distribute files on free web accounts with limited account space. This was a very common practice in the old days. Also, when burning to cd/dvd, this same fact can be exploited.

Rar files (except when used for real compression or grouping together bigger collections of small files such an image collection) have a big disadvantages

You have to unrar them to use the content, thereby either doubling disk space requirements or having the user delete the original rars. This is hugely annoying for most end users and evidenced by many observations will drastically reduce the amount of long term seeders, because most people prefer to keep things in a usable format.

Finally some quoting



Correct, and this is good for some compressable application ISOs. However, this is not applicable for most scene releases that are just stored, not compressed.

Also when using rar for compression together with bittorrent, a single rar file should be created, and not lots of small split files.



also, when you download a rared content and somehow it gets damaged, you only need to redownload the damaged ones.otherwise, you would have to download the whole thing from the beginning.
Not applicable for bittorrent



It's the scene standard.. meaning this is the way its been done for a while.. the reasoning behind it, is to take full advantage of the bittorrent protocols. if you understand bittorrent at all, it simultaneously takes and transfers pieces of the torrent at once... by doing this it allows for a faster transfer of many files versus a transfer of a single file. and thats what sabre was talking about when he says faster speeds, pre-times and what knot
Except for it being the scene standard, everything else you said was incorrect. You obviously don't understand the bittorrent protocol.

The bittorrent protocol does everything you said without having to deal with the primitive way of splitting it up into rar files and using sfv/crc to check for errors.



rar can be easily part seed~~
So can any file. Just stop downloading an unfinished file and you can keep seeding the parts of it you did download. You can also seed a partially downloaded file from one site on another site.

Only thing you can't do is download a rar file from usenet and part seed it on a torrent site that uses unrared files.



it was a home made rip, The uploader who ripped it, unrared it fine, Everyone that snatched it could not unrar ir at all, part 23 was fecked, he unrared it again and it still worked.

so he reuploaded it, and they got it to work.

and if you are getting lots of CRC errors in rars, its not the uploaders fault, its bad ram.
This is impossible as in the universe will end before it happens impossible.

Unless of course the uploader was stupid enough to upload files via the old crappy ftp protocol (which doesn't support error correction) to a seedbox. On that seedbox he then created the torrent file using some command line tool and seeded the thing.

An error with ftp, not with bittorrent. That is the only way the scenario you described makes any sense at all.

Also, the easy way to avoid the scenario above if you still for some reason have to first ftp to the seed box is simple. Just create the torrent locally, then ftp it and the file(s) to the seed box. Finally, connect the seed box and your own local computer to the same torrent and any errors that happened during the ftp transfer will be automatically fixed.

Easiest would of course be to simply avoid using ftp for data transfer and instead just use it to upload the torrent file, and use bittorrent for the actual data transfer.



I like rarred content I like to archive movies, games, etc... and if a piece of one archived rls is corrupted, then i need to dl only the corrupted rar file, not the whole avi file.
Can just as easily be done with avi and bittorrent. Just connect the corrupted file to a correct bittorrent copy and the protocol will automatically correct the incorrect parts.

Of course, maybe finding rar files is easier depending on your connections, but that is a question of availability, not protocol.



like i have said previously, Bittorrent Error Checking is good, but its not 100% good, until it gets to 100% good, the rars will stay.
Bittorrent error checking is 100%. Ok, not 100%, just the earth will be swallowed up by the sun before there is an error safe. (also, making an exception for possible intentional interfering, which may be possible if someone have access to the NSA computer farm and mathematicians)



the rars of scene rls aren't compressed (to whoever wrote that, did you even look at the filesizes?), and rars aren't used 'to take advantage of the bittorrent protocol'. lol

i prefer unrarred for time and space reasons.
Yup. Sceners should just distribute directly via bittorrent to avoid all the hell with crc errors that using the ancient ftp protocol causes. Hehe, like that would happen. :D

Finally, if I seemed to be a little unfair towards the ftp protocol, I should just feel that I have similar feelings towards the http protocol. Not having built in error correction is simply unacceptable for a modern protocol that is used to transfer files.

Couldn't have said it better myself :D A great sum-up of the situation.

Though I disagree, sceners should stick with FTP. Hashing a torrent is time consuming, so FTP just works for them. But us torrenters could really do without all those rars...

And just to clear anything up, no scene release uses compressed rars, as compressing rars are against scene rules. They're just stored.

[DanielleD87]

i stream what I download from bt. i have my client set to auto prioritize the .r00 through .r04 files. i don't extract. I watch / use the content directly inside of the rar files. The BT protocol isn't setup for streaming and without some plugin I don't know about downloading 1 file means I have to wait for it to finish before I can watch / play / use it. With rar I have to wait for .r00 to finish and as long as I am downloading quicker than the rate of data the comp needs I can stream everything.

aka raring rlses makes it so I can use what I'm downloading a lot quicker. I can click on a 4 gig dvd, wait 30 seconds, then start watching it.

[integral]

i stream what I download from bt. i have my client set to auto prioritize the .r00 through .r04 files. i don't extract. I watch / use the content directly inside of the rar files. The BT protocol isn't setup for streaming and without some plugin I don't know about downloading 1 file means I have to wait for it to finish before I can watch / play / use it. With rar I have to wait for .r00 to finish and as long as I am downloading quicker than the rate of data the comp needs I can stream everything.

aka raring rlses makes it so I can use what I'm downloading a lot quicker. I can click on a 4 gig dvd, wait 30 seconds, then start watching it.

I guess that works for movies. There's lots of other media out there, though :whistling

[DanielleD87]

it works for almost everything for me. i guess my net is fast enough were even installing from a game ISO it works fine *shrugs*

[integral]

If we all were so lucky!
[[envy]]

:D

[DanielleD87]

hey, i uncapped my modem myself. no need for envy. figure it out and do it yourself.

[integral]

i was simply throwing a little new york sarcasm around, I'm satisfied with my puny time warner cable :o or maybe i'll move to sweden and bask in 100 women/mbits.

[Acumen]

Yup. Sceners should just distribute directly via bittorrent to avoid all the hell with crc errors that using the ancient ftp protocol causes.
I don't think the sceners would want to sacrifice their own security (FTP uses SSL, while Bittorrent only offers PE) for their file's integrity (Bittorrent checks for errors, while FTP doesn't).

[Ramus]

i prefer my files in rar's.

[bladesharp]

rar's should be ok , less size more content

[Acumen]

rar's should be ok , less size more content
But the scene's rar'd files are merely stored for the sake of integrity. They aren't compressed to any substantial degree.

Rars aren't ok. For the sceners, raring is useful, because it ensures file integrity, which is precisely what FTP lacks, however necessary the protocol is for security reasons.

For the torrenters, however, rar'd releases are cumbersome. There are programs that allow you to read archived files without extracting them, but we just shouldn't be expected to do that, when the alternative (unraring before uploading...) is so much simpler.

[invadercat]

rar's should be ok , less size more content
But the scene's rar'd files are merely stored for the sake of integrity. They aren't compressed to any substantial degree.

Rars aren't ok. For the sceners, raring is useful, because it ensures file integrity, which is precisely what FTP lacks, however necessary the protocol is for security reasons.

For the torrenters, however, rar'd releases are cumbersome. There are programs that allow you to read archived files without extracting them, but we just shouldn't be expected to do that, when the alternative (unraring before uploading...) is so much simpler.
i agree with you 100%

[Polarbear]

rar's should be ok , less size more content
But the scene's rar'd files are merely stored for the sake of integrity. They aren't compressed to any substantial degree.

Rars aren't ok. For the sceners, raring is useful, because it ensures file integrity, which is precisely what FTP lacks, however necessary the protocol is for security reasons.

For the torrenters, however, rar'd releases are cumbersome. There are programs that allow you to read archived files without extracting them, but we just shouldn't be expected to do that, when the alternative (unraring before uploading...) is so much simpler.

you are right. some people don't read threads or try to understand answers before they reply, so don't bother.

the players that play rar files are terrible and of course they unrar them as well. you just don't notice this step. they hardy have the ability to skip or shuttle. it's not worth it in my opinion.

rars give uploaders or trackers that extra second or minute (depending on the size) of pretime.

for those who didn't get it: they are not necessary nor do they have any advantage for bittorrent in general.

uploaders or even upload bots upload a lot and they want to do it fast. the only argument for rars is that they (uploaders) do the important job and one should allow them a certain laziness hence not to do the unraring for us. although i would accept the worse pretime with the benefit of saving 100% hd space when i watch the movie.

i prefer unrared. there isn't one really plausibel argument for rars on a bittorrent tracker. bitmetv or theconnection for instance made the right decision.

p.s. i like it that there are newcomers in this thread who understand bittorrent and make useful, informative posts. :)
some other n00bs should take this as an example.

[stoi]

simple then isnt it,

If you hate rars, dont use trackers that force rars, use trackers that have no rars, and unrar scene releases before uploading.

Bittorrent error checking is NOT 100% fool proof. Just because you have never seen it happen, does not mean it does not happen.

Like i said previously, i will not touch a torrent that is not multi rared, i have seen far to many go tits up in my time, but each to their own i suppose.

[fatcat69]

this is like the 100th time this subject has been debated here at FST..


please search the forums before postingggggggg! ahh

almost as bad as the favicon threads!

[DoobieSnacks]

I prefer unrared also. I do not mind using trackers that use rar files though. I'm used to it now. Plus, when getting a rar'd file, I can re-seed it to either a place that requires rar, or a place that doesn't. Only having the un-rar'd file, you can't re-seed it (or I haven't figured it out anyway).
Either way, computers are fast enough that I dont mind waiting a few to watch/play/listen to something. I usually either move the extracted copy to my xbox or burn whatever it is, then delete the unrar'd copy.

[SaviouR]

both have their advantages and disadvantages tho i personally prefer unrared .

the only problem is that incase the file gets corrupted u gotta download the whole thing again which would be a pain . this is where rar files really help .

but one thing i cant understand that why the scene still opts for rar and zip small apps ? way too much unnecessary compressions used for small apps of 5-10 mb softwares . its basically just the .exe file , crack/keygen file and the .nfo but still both rar and zip compressions used for them .

[stoi]

I have to agree with that one, i hate the way they do that with apps, and i think that way we can do without.

I used to extract every single one indibidually and it was a right pain, now though i just selct the lot and unrar here and it works a treat lol

[Tokeman]

I don't know if they are 'scene' apps or not, but I HATE the multi rar each inside its own rar, all inside yet another rar. WTF is up with that crap?!? I've seen it more and more lately...

[Wildclaw]

I don't think the sceners would want to sacrifice their own security (FTP uses SSL, while Bittorrent only offers PE) for their file's integrity (Bittorrent checks for errors, while FTP doesn't).

Yup, I know. That last part was kind of half joking.

It is too bad that ftp (and http) doesn't have any strong error detection built into them. The error detection in tcp and underlying layers is simply too weak and prone to error when dealing with large amounts of data transfer. Even allowing a single error to slip by is too much.

[jayz707]

my personal preference is unrared. IMHO bittorrent don't need rared stuff... its just a waste of electricity.

[Wildclaw]

Bittorrent error checking is NOT 100% fool proof. Just because you have never seen it happen, does not mean it does not happen.


This isn't some weak 32bit crc32 checksum we are talking about. It is a strong 160bit (1.46×10^48 combinations) sha checksum. If your bittorrent client has checked the file(s) and says that it is correct, it means that it is a byte for byte replica of the file(s) that the torrent file was created on.

If you have completed a bittorrent download with an incorrect file, there are two reasons, neither which you can blaim on the bittorrent protocol.

First, Your bittorrent client didn't actually check the files to see that they are correct. This is easily detected by right clicking a torrent and selecting force recheck. If the completed percentage changes from 100% to something else, that is what happened. As bittorrent clients automatically checks anything downloaded, the reason for this happening is most likly a combination of a bad hard drive (buy a new one quickly before the old one crashes completly) and having turned off double checking after download is completed (which is an automatic forced recheck).

More likely however, you did the above and it is still at 100%. In that case there is only one explanation. The incorrect file was already incorrect when the torrent file was created. The creator should have made sure that the file was correct before creating the torrent file.

Ok, I admit, I am ignoring the possibility that you won the national lottery several times in a row, and fate now wants to even things out.

[stoi]

so how come i seen it happen not 2 weeks ago like i have said 3 times in this god for saken post now.

Uploader rared a torrent. he tested it, he extracted it, he made the torrent, he hash checked it, it got to 100%, he uploaded it. members snatched it, so got to 100% and were seeding.

They went to unrar it, and it wouldnt unrar for any of them, never mind 1 or 2.

so he unrared it again and it unrared fine.

so it cant be that good (and this isnt just a 1 off either, its happened to me personally on more than 5 occasions over the past 4 years), and we must see this on our tracker at least 20 times a year.

[Krvaric]

a small paste from: The iso rules agreed upon by CIFE, RiSCiSO, and RAZOR ISO.


7. All RAR's will be listed as ".001 -> .0xx" as opposed to ".RAR ->
.RXX", for the directory listing's sake. RAR is the official standard.


Section III: Archive Creation
The fastest and most efficient archive program is RAR. Once you have used
CDRwin to create your .bin and .cue files, or EZ-CD Pro to create an .iso
file (*** see note above), then you want to use RAR or WinRAR to break up
the image file into workable pieces that can easily be spread on the
Internet. If you try and upload a 700 meg single file to an FTP site,
you're going to have trouble. If your connection dies in the middle of
the connection, you're screwed. Some FTP programs have resume features,
but it usually doesn't work, therefore we advocate using RAR. You can find
shareware versions of RAR and WinRAR by searching the web, it is available
everywhere.

Here are the rules for using RAR:

-- If possible, use the maximum available compression. However, if you
are racing a release, or you simply don't have the time to wait for
maximum compression, then use default to light compression. This all
depends on how much time you have available to sit around. Higher
compression will save a LOT of hard drive space, but it can take a very
LONG time, even on a fast Pentium-II processor with 64 megs of ram.

-- Use 15 megabyte segment splits. Thus, you want to break that 700 meg
.bin file into smaller pieces, each of size 15 megabytes.

-- Turn *OFF* solid archive mode. In both WinRAR and DOS RAR, solid
archive mode is defaulted on. You must go into preferences and turn it
off. For DOS RAR you must turn solid mode off as well by using the menu
options or command-line options. In either case, be sure that you are not
creating a solid archive, because if you do, the FTP sites will not be
able to test the CRC integrity of each of the individual 15 meg segment
file.
-- Include the .bin, .cue, (or .iso) and "risciso.nfo" inside the RAR
archive. Be sure that you have filled out the risciso.nfo file to include
all of the details of the release, including how many CD-ROM discs it is,
a general description of the program, any necessary OEM or serial numbers,
and any other details you like (keyboard shortcuts, game hints, web site
to see screen-shots, etc).

the way it is and the way it always will be.

[Swift]

I like them unrared but then again I don`t really care about who they are

[kondrae]

i sometimes use Dziobas Player to play rar'd movies
that way you can preview/stream without unpacking

[integral]

a small paste from: The iso rules agreed upon by CIFE, RiSCiSO, and RAZOR ISO.


This, of course, has 0 to do with torrents.

[Krvaric]

back ground information m8.

and since when has anything to do with torrents?

[ih55m]

hello, does anyone know any private general 0day tracker with unrarred content?

[integral]

back ground information m8.

and since when has anything to do with torrents?

The OP ( :) ) was concerned with trackers using unrarred scene releases, not the scene. And that whole block of text you pasted stated that uploading a 700mb iso to an FTP server was a no-no. Well, we use the Bittorrent protocol on trackers, not FTP protocol.

[Krvaric]

back ground information m8.

and since when has anything to do with torrents?

The OP ( :) ) was concerned with trackers using unrarred scene releases, not the scene. And that whole block of text you pasted stated that uploading a 700mb iso to an FTP server was a no-no. Well, we use the Bittorrent protocol on trackers, not FTP protocol.

lol

Well, we use the Bittorrent protocol on trackers, not FTP protocol.

where do you think your so precious torrent file is coming from...?


ok gonna spill it all out for you....... background information as in history...where did it come from...why rar it up etc.....need more explanation?

but who gives a shit anyways?

peace out.


why fix it when it ain't broken.

[SgtMajor]

hello, does anyone know any private general 0day tracker with unrarred content?

Yes, yes I do, thanks for asking.

[ih55m]

hello, does anyone know any private general 0day tracker with unrarred content?

Yes, yes I do, thanks for asking.

So good to know that you know :w00t:

[djkamikaze]

When it's rarred you get it faster because it's in a smaller file size. Why bother when it just takes a few seconds to unrar.
not all the time. rar is inefficient compression tool, and most sites are just trying to keep it in it's "original" format. (just look for yourself... many unpacked rar's are the same size or smaller than the rar'd version, particularly movies & tv shows) The main purpose seems to be so that the rar's can be checked for errors, but the bittorrent protocol does that itself, so rars are redundant and un-needed. It's basically just fanboys of the scene trying to keep thing the way they always have been.

[Eargasm]

hello, does anyone know any private general 0day tracker with unrarred content?

Yes, yes I do, thanks for asking.

Agree, this would be awesome if it existed.

RARs are the plague of internet media.

[SgtMajor]

RARs are the plague of internet media.

It will never change though, it's only P2P that complain about RARs.

Every tried racing a release with an autoscript from a seedbox, now imagine that on a nix box where you had to go in, unrar, create a new torrent, then upload to the site, you would be last in the race for releases and that wouldn't do for most sites.

RARs are here to stay, no point bitching about it, just have to find the sites that don't do rars then :D

[Eargasm]

Fortunately I've got a special treatment for RARs. It's called 7zip; however, the RARs stay present on the system for the duration of seeding, which could be a year or longer.

But I do understand their benefit when using FTP.

[Krvaric]

still no complaint about the way 0day releases are packed
that must be a real head turner :shutup:

[lukee]

noobs noobs noobs... rars are essential when transferring large amounts of data. avoids corruption. RARS <3

[integral]

noobs noobs noobs... rars are essential when transferring large amounts of data. avoids corruption. RARS <3

Not with Bittorrent.

[stoi]

Yes with Bittorrent.

i can tell you havnt read the entire thread.

Corruption, does happen with Bittorrent, we see it quite often actually.

just because it does not happen to you, does not mean it does not happen, ever.

[lukee]

noobs noobs noobs... rars are essential when transferring large amounts of data. avoids corruption. RARS <3

Not with Bittorrent.

It doesn't matter what protocol you are using. If the group badly packed the release you wouldnt have to redownload the entire file. if it got corrupted on your harddrive you'd have to redownload the whole file again. i just find it safer to use rars. The only thing i hate about the scne rules for packing is the 0day shit. Zip a rar file? fuck thats so stupid.

[integral]

I've read most of my thread, including your stories of how Bittorrent can corrupt files.

It's not right for everyone or every tracker, there will always be people who have their feet stuck in cement.

[stoi]

well i would much prefer to download a 50 meg rar again, than a 25 gig PS3 game ISO say. or a 50 gig Blue ray movie.

[walkman79]

rar files are very useful in newsgroup communities because they usually need to check the contents, but not that useful in bittorrent communities because bittorrent architecture already handle pieces. So, you are not saving any bandwidth when you download rar files and you don't need to redownload the whole file again if your client or system crashes.
The only thing which benefits users with rar files is the maximization of storage space.

[Polarbear]

Not with Bittorrent.

It doesn't matter what protocol you are using. If the group badly packed the release you wouldnt have to redownload the entire file. if it got corrupted on your harddrive you'd have to redownload the whole file again. i just find it safer to use rars. The only thing i hate about the scne rules for packing is the 0day shit. Zip a rar file? fuck thats so stupid.

if the release had been unpacked, tested and uploaded unrared there wouldn't have been a badly packed torrent on the tracker in the first place.

there would have been one unpacked repack version. one torrent less and a lot of saved bandwith.

your argument says rars make sense because rars might be uploaded corrupted which is kind of a contradiction. no rars on a tracker, no need for repacks on a tracker.

if you read the whole thread you'd see that rars are not needed for bittorrent because of the way the protocol handles files. chunks, checksums and verification are the keywords.

the only reason to tolerate them is faster pretimes and less work for the uploader.

it has nothing to do with errors whatsoever.

[stoi]

It doesn't matter what protocol you are using. If the group badly packed the release you wouldnt have to redownload the entire file. if it got corrupted on your harddrive you'd have to redownload the whole file again. i just find it safer to use rars. The only thing i hate about the scne rules for packing is the 0day shit. Zip a rar file? fuck thats so stupid.

if the release had been unpacked, tested and uploaded unrared there wouldn't have been a badly packed torrent on the tracker in the first place.

there would have been one unpacked repack version. one torrent less and a lot of saved bandwith.

your argument says rars make sense because rars might be uploaded corrupted which is kind of a contradiction. no rars on a tracker, no need for repacks on a tracker.

if you read the whole thread you'd see that rars are not needed for bittorrent because of the way the protocol handles files. chunks, checksums and verification are the keywords.

the only reason to tolerate them is faster pretimes and less work for the uploader.

it has nothing to do with errors whatsoever.

I give up. why do i even post in this forum, no one ever frigging listens

[jonepb]

every private tracker have something special about it :D

[SgtMajor]

every private tracker have something special about it :D

Kwality addition to the debate there jonepb, pure kwalitee.

[jonepb]

every private tracker have something special about it :D

Kwality addition to the debate there jonepb, pure kwalitee.

lolol :D:D ty m8. :happy:

[400]

if it's a torrent that i only want a file or two from. i prefer it to be unrarred. but if i want the whole torrent. i prefer it to be rarred. another downside of rar files is the occassional crc error i get.

[Polarbear]

if the release had been unpacked, tested and uploaded unrared there wouldn't have been a badly packed torrent on the tracker in the first place.

there would have been one unpacked repack version. one torrent less and a lot of saved bandwith.

your argument says rars make sense because rars might be uploaded corrupted which is kind of a contradiction. no rars on a tracker, no need for repacks on a tracker.

if you read the whole thread you'd see that rars are not needed for bittorrent because of the way the protocol handles files. chunks, checksums and verification are the keywords.

the only reason to tolerate them is faster pretimes and less work for the uploader.

it has nothing to do with errors whatsoever.

I give up. why do i even post in this forum, no one ever frigging listens

well stoi, i read your posts, but i tend to disagree with you on that subject which is no big deal. "i've seen it happen.." is just a weak argument when millions of bittorrent transfers happen flawless everyday and the protocol is as it is.

if you tell me a hash MD5 check can fail, then you'd have to explain to me how and why to convince me. you can't simply say you've seen a hashing algorithm not work.

nothing is a 100% and even a 4096 bit encryption can be hacked.

the question is does this justify the disadvantages of rars. in my opinion it doesn't.

[lukee]

It doesn't matter what protocol you are using. If the group badly packed the release you wouldnt have to redownload the entire file. if it got corrupted on your harddrive you'd have to redownload the whole file again. i just find it safer to use rars. The only thing i hate about the scne rules for packing is the 0day shit. Zip a rar file? fuck thats so stupid.

if the release had been unpacked, tested and uploaded unrared there wouldn't have been a badly packed torrent on the tracker in the first place.

there would have been one unpacked repack version. one torrent less and a lot of saved bandwith.

your argument says rars make sense because rars might be uploaded corrupted which is kind of a contradiction. no rars on a tracker, no need for repacks on a tracker.

if you read the whole thread you'd see that rars are not needed for bittorrent because of the way the protocol handles files. chunks, checksums and verification are the keywords.

the only reason to tolerate them is faster pretimes and less work for the uploader.

it has nothing to do with errors whatsoever.

i see what your getting to and im not trying to start a flame war ;)

I think its perfectly fine to upload a release that has 1 or 2 corrupted rars. you download the non corrupted ones and wait for the rarfix instead of waiting until the uploader gets the rarfix, extracts the file etc... If the uploader fucks up the unrarred file and hashes it and posts it..then that would waste bandwidth.

[stoi]

well imo there are no disadvantages to rars lol

[JROQuinn]

http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3241/2532850401_b91af23b22.jpg?v=0

[Ali-g]

if the release had been unpacked, tested and uploaded unrared there wouldn't have been a badly packed torrent on the tracker in the first place.

there would have been one unpacked repack version. one torrent less and a lot of saved bandwith.

your argument says rars make sense because rars might be uploaded corrupted which is kind of a contradiction. no rars on a tracker, no need for repacks on a tracker.

if you read the whole thread you'd see that rars are not needed for bittorrent because of the way the protocol handles files. chunks, checksums and verification are the keywords.

the only reason to tolerate them is faster pretimes and less work for the uploader.

it has nothing to do with errors whatsoever.

I give up. why do i even post in this forum, no one ever frigging listens

I listen :unsure: : P
PolarBear I seem to disagree with u in everything. Sorry dude but I cant tell u how completely wrong u are.
The main function of rars (great resource in big files) is so if u have a corrupted file, u DL only the file that is corrupted(the rar piece), u dont have to DL the whole thing again.

[Polarbear]

The main function of rars (great resource in big files) is so if u have a corrupted file, u DL only the file that is corrupted(the rar piece), u dont have to DL the whole thing again.

i know but i don't use ftp. i prefer bittorrent.

[Eargasm]

well i would much prefer to download a 50 meg rar again, than a 25 gig PS3 game ISO say. or a 50 gig Blue ray movie.

I'd rather redownload a 50GB Bluray movie once in a 3 years than download every Bluray movie RAR'd, and have to deal with extra time and processing and wasted HDD space.

That said, I've only had a corrupt file one time out of thousands, and it was part of a RAR set dl via usenet. Never had anything corrupt via Bittorrent that wasn't already corrupt on the seeder's system.

[stoi]

well thats why you use Pars on Usenet, it fixes them.

and hmm extra time and processing, 5 minutes tops to unrar, HDD space is really cheap these days. so i dont see the problem at all.

[Eargasm]

well thats why you use Pars on Usenet, it fixes them.

and hmm extra time and processing, 5 minutes tops to unrar, HDD space is really cheap these days. so i dont see the problem at all.

5 minutes of my life gone, lets say per week, equals a total of about two weeks lost in a lifetime. Considering that, statistically, I'm less than halfway through my life... I could very well lose more than a week of my life this way.

That said, I'm sure I'm wasting much much more by hanging out here(avoids the math). :whistling

[lukee]

This might sound weird. but i refer to rars as packaging. Here's a good metaphor: When i buy a DVD i always keep the case to store my DVD in. i don't simply take the disc out and put in in a CD holder. (rar's being the casing, dvd being the file)

[Eargasm]

This might sound weird. but i refer to rars as packaging. Here's a good metaphor: When i buy a DVD i always keep the case to store my DVD in. i don't simply take the disc out and put in in a CD holder. (rar's being the casing, dvd being the file)

I always hate packaging. It's extra crap. That said, I actually sold or gave away all of my DVDs because I hated the idea of having that extra garbage around - I prefer to just have it in digital format on a more efficient storage platform, takes up less space that way. Yes, I'm a minimalist.

[walkman79]

The Bittorrent protocol already has its ways to check the data which is being transferred. FTP doesn't have integrity check and it doesn't handle pieces as bittorrent, so if you get a corrupted file or the transfer is interrupted you must download the whole file again because the receiver has no way to know if the received file is complete or not. Usenet is even older than FTP and that's why the standard method of uploading binary content to Usenet is to first archive the files into RAR archives then create some parchive files. That's why RAR files exist, because most of the warez were/are created by their providers for either FTP sites or Newsgroups.

http://wiki.theory.org/index.php/BitTorrentSpecification#Metainfo_File_Structure


The peer distributing a data file treats the file as a number of identically-sized pieces, typically between 64 kB and 4 MB each. The peer creates a checksum (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Checksum) for each piece, using the SHA1 hashing algorithm (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SHA_hash_functions), and records it in the torrent file. Pieces with sizes greater than 512 kB will reduce the size of a torrent file for a very large payload, but is claimed to reduce the efficiency of the protocol


Corruption of files could happen even with torrents. But it's pretty annoying to unrar my files after I download something. I don't have any problem to check the pieces of a torrent if it would ever be needed. Actually, I think I did it a couple of times, but I have had to unrar hundreds of times :(

[lukee]

This might sound weird. but i refer to rars as packaging. Here's a good metaphor: When i buy a DVD i always keep the case to store my DVD in. i don't simply take the disc out and put in in a CD holder. (rar's being the casing, dvd being the file)

I always hate packaging. It's extra crap. That said, I actually sold or gave away all of my DVDs because I hated the idea of having that extra garbage around - I prefer to just have it in digital format on a more efficient storage platform, takes up less space that way. Yes, I'm a minimalist.

omg lmao same here i gave away all my DVD's to charity and shit :P

[yakz091]

personally imho the files should be rared especially the video files, apart from efficiency and security, there are many problems u can come across if video files are not rared.

[TP635]

Rarred or Unrarred? It does not matter at all to me.

[Sanka113]

Rarred is annoying but since i've been FTP'ing from my server I do see why people do it

[Jrunna21]

If you are using BT then unrarred but if you are going on good old ftp then rarred all the way. There are checks that happen in the course of a torrent "transaction" that don't happen within other protocols natively so there is a much higher chance for corrupted data.

[respawn40]

If you don't need to FTP it, then I don't see why you should need it RAR'd. When it's RAR'd and you want it to continue seeding, you have to have extra spaces on your HD to extract the movie. When it's just the movie, you can watch it while it's seeding.

[lukee]

The main function of rars (great resource in big files) is so if u have a corrupted file, u DL only the file that is corrupted(the rar piece), u dont have to DL the whole thing again.

i know but i don't use ftp. i prefer bittorrent.

NOBODY prefers BT over FTP (only if they have good sources)

[walkman79]

i know but i don't use ftp. i prefer bittorrent.

NOBODY prefers BT over FTP (only if they have good sources)


I think he was referring to the protocols. Bittorrent protocol is much more superior than FTP protocol indeed

[Eargasm]

i know but i don't use ftp. i prefer bittorrent.

NOBODY prefers BT over FTP (only if they have good sources)


I prefer BitTorrent, at some point the student became the master. :cool:

[kondrae]

emule never has rar'd files, and everything seems fine there

[Polarbear]

noobs noobs noobs...





i know but i don't use ftp. i prefer bittorrent.

NOBODY prefers BT over FTP (only if they have good sources)

the bittorrent protocol differs from ftp and http in that it makes downloading a large file more efficient, as individuals downloading the same file will assist each other in the download process.
it clearly outperforms ftp when distributing large files or files to a high number of nodes.
bt is currently the best protocol for the transfer of files to many simultaneous downloaders.
bt is a robust protocol, ftp has robust servers.

yes, i'm NOBODY and we're all noobs.

[puckface]

Really, If you're too fucking lazy to unrar SOMETHING YOU GOT FOR FREE, you have serious fucking problems.

[Cheeseman1208]

i know but i don't use ftp. i prefer bittorrent.

NOBODY prefers BT over FTP (only if they have good sources)

the bittorrent protocol differs from ftp and http in that it makes downloading a large file more efficient, as individuals downloading the same file will assist each other in the download process.
it clearly outperforms ftp when distributing large files or files to a high number of nodes.
bt is currently the best protocol for the transfer of files to many simultaneous downloaders.
bt is a robust protocol, ftp has robust servers.

yes, i'm NOBODY and we're all noobs.
/Agreed.

FTP is an old and outdated protocol (in fact, it was created in 1985 by Reynolds), and it sucks for downloading lots of files quickly. Plus an FTP is only as good as it's connection speed, and when there are 50 or 60 people trying to download something at once, things tend to bog down. While on P2P, when you have 60 people downloading, speeds increase as the swarm starts sharing more of the file.

Back on topic, I preferred unrarred, so I don't wind up with a rarred and unrarred copy of something on my HDD.

[Krvaric]

FTP is an old and outdated protocol
LMFAO!

common dude get real.

[Cheeseman1208]

FTP is an old and outdated protocolLMFAO!

common dude get real.

I can't tell if your being sarcastic, or if you really think that FTP is an efficient protocol. :dry:

[walkman79]

Well, the bittorrent protocol is far more superior indeed (). But to be more precise they are different things:
FTP is a server-client based protocol.
Bittorrent a p2p based protocol with a tracker as part of the medium.

So, they are aimed to different contexts. Also, NNTP which is the protocol used for Usenet is not p2p either, but it's aimed to provide communication between equivalent peers or clients.

That is, if we talk about File Sharing Bittorrent is the most prolific protocol IMO. Because it's achieved its goal which is provide an efficient protocol for the masses to share their stuff.

[Snake91]

Unrarred, it's easier to seed

[Catcher]

With a good processor and a lot of HD space I really don't care as long as I have the files.
With my old computer [celeron D, 40 GB HD] it was a nightmare.

[eram]

unrared ftw!When you are about to watch a movie and you still have to unpack the whole thing its just annoying!I dont see the reason for rared files in the bittorrent world!

[vergo]

And just to clear anything up, no scene release uses compressed rars, as compressing rars are against scene rules. They're just stored.
You've obviously never downloaded a packed application or game.

[xtrem3]

I dont like rar files.

[kaiser]

When you are about to watch a movie and you still have to unpack the whole thing its just annoying!I dont see the reason for rared files in the bittorrent world!
+1! That's so true. Even hough I have enough HDD space i hate see inefficient usage of HDD space and especialy my time.

[mievmo]

i don't give a **** bout that rarity stuff :/

[kaiser]

i don't give a **** bout that rarity stuff :/
And what's that supposed to mean? :blink:

[integral]

This thread has a lot of bashing rarred or unrarred, so I'd just like to stress that there's nothing dangerously or horribly wrong with rarred or unrarred release on trackers: obviously, both work. I just wanted to say that as BT trackers aren't the scene, we aren't bound to the scene rule of rarred files. Some trackers have acknowledged that and allowed scene releases to be uploaded rarred, and some trackers prefer the untouched scene upload. Again, both work, and there's obviously pros and cons for both.

[Tokeman]

I posted before saying I really didn't care, but after having to unrar 2 complete tv series, I'm changing my vote to unrarred.
Each episode was its own archive, so it took forever...
Never minded unrarring movies and such, but whole series, thats ridiculous and tedious.
I used to only unrar what I wanted to watch, but now I have my ps3, and I want my media ready to be streamed so I can view it whenever I want.
Good thing I get most of my tv from Bitmetv...

Scene standards are just that: standards that are good for 'the scene', not standards of p2p.

[Squizzle]

RAR'd please. Scene packing makes me hard.

[hitman51]

RAR'd please. Scene packing makes me hard.

:blink:..what does he fap to?

[fOrUmAs]

of course rarred!!

[SgtMajor]

RAR'd please. Scene packing makes me hard.

:blink:..what does he fap to?

A spanking session with you?

/there's some questions you just don't ask :D

[deadalive1]

:blink:..what does he fap to?

A spanking session with you?

/there's some questions you just don't ask :D

Agreed, I sometimes wish I didn't read half of what I read in some of these threads. :O:noes:

[Fr33don]

I prefer unrar'd because I don't use programs to watch RAR'D videos and plus after I unrar a file I basically get double what I originally got and I'm limited on harddrive space. :>

[maxpowersin]

I also prefer unrared coz of the same reason as above.. also takes too much time unraring big files.. :P

[deadalive1]

I can see unrar'd if you have a slow PC but if you have the processor speed it doesn't matter. At least in my case it doesn't. I prefer rar'd, if a rar file is bad you only need to download the fix for that 1 file.

[deadalive1]

I prefer unrar'd because I don't use programs to watch RAR'D videos and plus after I unrar a file I basically get double what I originally got and I'm limited on harddrive space. :>
That's why you delete the rar files after you unpacked them (of course after you have seeded said file back).

Edit: damn lag caused double post. :S

[SgtMajor]

When you think about it, it's not whether we prefer RARd or not, it's whether we want 0day or not.

0Day from general 0day trackers will always be RARd, no getting away from that, it's how it is, racers from FTPs take it direct from scene FTPs and up it as fast as they can to their trackers, and guess what, it's in RARs. No choice. Most trackers will ergo want their upped stuff to be as it was meant to be when released, much easier to fix a scene release later than a non-scene release.

The only choice we have is where we get our stuff from, and if you look around, there are now plenty of non 0day sites offering torrents not in RARd format, it's just a matter of matching your tastes to the tracker that can supply them, if you are fussy with what you are looking for, then ask and see if any tracker can supply unRARd files that suit your needs.

[stoi]

Another reason, and dont hold me to this, im 70/30 on this one but i think its correct.

If you download an Avi, your ISP can see its an Avi.

If you download an MP3, your ISP can see you downloaded an MP3.

If you download a rar, thats all your isp can see, its a rar file, they have no idea whats actually in that rar.

so if that is true, then raring is safer for everyone concerned. (i read it somewhere, cant remember where now though, so i may be wrong, just before i get bashed for being wrong lol)

[Dr0]

Unrar'd for bit-torrent, rars for ftp.

I'll give you a good example of why I like them unrar'd, I'll download an unrar'd movie to my seedbox, then start ftp. I can start watching the movie while its still downloading (stream).

Rar's for the scene though are important, dupe scripts are run on the files, if a .avi is uploaded, dupe script prevents anyone else joining the race, pre times would suck, and racers would never gain credit. Hence the main reason for split files. Are more good reasons too, but that's good enough for now.

Bit torrents CRC, its flawless (SHA1). If an uploader goes for pre times and misses out a simply sfv check before making the torrent, blame him, not bit torrent.


If you download an Avi, your ISP can see its an Avi.

Scene rar's are named *.001 etc. So they could see you downloading a scene release just as easy.

As for trackers keeping files rar'd, it makes life easy for uploaders, but can cause issues for the end user.

[stoi]

um not all scene releases come like that, and not all rars that are like that are scene releases.

you cant get a letter off your ISP and they say

"you were downloading files with .001 on the end, which is copywrited material, we know because scene rars come like that".

if you download a .MP3 they can then say you were downloading an illegal album.

But like i said, im not 100% sure on this one, so im not going to argue the toss over it.

and i have already coverd that its not 100% flawless, 99% maybe but not 100%, so i wont go down that route again.

[tknaught]

What does it matter if your ISP can tell if you are downloading an MP3 or an AVI or a RAR? There's nothing illegal about MP3 or AVI.

[stoi]

well if your in the UK atm probably a hell of a lot.

But anyway, im starting to see the benefits of torrentzip, if you have the same file on your PC, you can just torrentzip it up and you have already completed that file.

it still doesnt get around the fact you need 2 of the same thing on your PC, but it does seem a lot more practical than rars (especially for things like NDS/PSP packs.

[Dr0]

um not all scene releases come like that, and not all rars that are like that are scene releases.

you cant get a letter off your ISP and they say

"you were downloading files with .001 on the end, which is copywrited material, we know because scene rars come like that".

if you download a .MP3 they can then say you were downloading an illegal album.

But like i said, im not 100% sure on this one, so im not going to argue the toss over it.

and i have already coverd that its not 100% flawless, 99% maybe but not 100%, so i wont go down that route again.

.mp3 can be downloaded in all places, the BBC website for example has sections of the news from radio shows you can listen to, they are in .mp3 format. ISP's have no technology to determine if a part file is legal or not. Its all 1's and 0's at the end of the day.

My point above was, your no more protected from snooping whether you are downloading a .avi, .mp3 or .rar. The way a letter gets sent is simply; someone is logging your IP address while your connected to the swarm, they send a letter to the IP address owner (your isp). So your wrong, it makes no difference at all to rar files on bit torrent. You'll still get caught, don't spread crap that people may start to think they are safe because they only download rar's.

Your also wrong about bit torrents CRC, because it checks each of the little pieces, its much less likely to fail than an SHA1 hash on a full file. For it to pass a failed piece the corruption would have to match the original SHA1 hash. To become corrupt in transfer, on all members of the swarm, and match the original SHA1 hash is impossible! Your uploader made the mistake!

[hotshot6473]

Everything should be compressed because in the event that something can actually be reduced in size it is all worth it. Plus the compatibility with other sites is a great plus

[`Dr. Nick Riviera`]

When you compress already compressed audio/video file you won't achieve anything... ;)

[hijump]

rarred

[SliDer5]

of course rar'ed, that's the concept: easy sharing plus safe transfer

[Elecktricity]

I would hate to download scene releases from a torrent site and they come down unrarred.

Downloads being rarred just seem the norm to me now and I wouldn't have it any other way.

[goodboss]

Rarred !!
can't be Damaged :D

[Eargasm]

Unrar'd - Less filing tastes great.

[Sweetiepie]

rarred ftw. First of all it's times more easy to hold a good ratio when you can just DL a couples of files to seed and not have to DL the whole shiiet. And then, when it's rarred it feels new and fresh. Noone have made something it just the scenegroup. That's why i prefer rarred before UN-rearred


:wub:

[bilkenter]

rar'ed = better pre times = better!
I couldnt care less about pretimes at all, i can wait one month more for a game or tv series to be uploaded to a tracker... I definitely would prefer unrarred version why? Because when you download a huge game file, and unrar it, if it requires you to keep it mounted, then you will have to keep both files in the hd which causes you to have less place etc...This may cause in return to burn some packs or games to a dvd which means ceasing seeding... In the end, you wont be able to seed much cuz of this rared version...

[sovaz]

It doesn't really matter if a release is rared or not as long as the quality is good. Scene standards are not really important imo.

[The Flying Cow]

I like my pussie rarred, so I can unrar it myself.


-Sherman :clown:

[oKo]

Some good soft for packed scene rls (.r00 ... .rar and .sfv)

- Par-N-Rar - g00gle it :)

- Dziobas RAR Player - g00gle it :)

- SCRU - http://codebyte.org/scru.php

Enjoy dudes....

[`Dr. Nick Riviera`]

Also, when rarred, there's a chance that a torrent will be missing a part... =]