Missing P2p Networks

Overviewing the new sections I noticed that Direct Connect and Newsgroups are 'missing' from this subforum.

If you look at the 'big' p2p-networks currently having a section, those are:
-Kazaa (Fasttrack network)
-Edonkey
-Bittorrent
-IRC
-SoulSeek

and in my opinion also:
-Direct Connect
-Gnutella
-Newsgroups

Gnutella is partly covered in 'Shareaza' but that also includes Edonkey and Bittorrent.

I think it's best to either divide this section in either the networks OR the p2p apps. Seems more logical to me.

Let's hear what you guys think...

i agree. i dont know why shareazaa or soulseek got their own section

personally, i'd like for newsgroups to have a sub-section, but not a lot of people use them currently due to the low (if not non-existent) free binary support

Well, that's the problem with Newsgroups. The best servers are often the ones you have to pay for, but if you got a good one it's the fastest way to get the newest releases.

i pinned this one because i think this is a very good debate we need to have !

Quote:

---

Originally posted by cpumaster1@13 December 2003 - 01:20
i agree. i dont know why shareazaa or soulseek got their own section

---

I dunno about Soulseek becuase I've never used it, but Shareaza is a very advanced program and growing really fast which is why it has its own forum, and it can't be put into one network forum because it conects to four networks.

But it isn't the best in neither of the networks it connects too.
Also in itself it isn't a network.

Since it's pinned I've put some more thought into it and if we want to be REALLY comprehensive then I propose the following structure

Filesharing Networks, Clients & Tools
|
|-->Bittorrent
||-->Original Client
||-->Shadow's
||-->Azureus
||-->Etc.
|
|-->Direct Connect
||-->NMDC
||-->DC++
|
|-->E-donkey
||-->Ed2k
||-->E-Mule
||-->Etc.
|
|-->Etc.

However that may be a bit too comprehensive and might fragment the forum too much.
Also for example Shareaza would come back in 4 forums.
But I do feel that would be the best solution.

Either that or sort by network and possibly use pinned topics for the different clients.

I think is was simpler before
Other P2P Programs

Now I gotta jack all over this board...
:P :P

Any more opinions or is this a typical 'couldn't care less' topic?

why not leave as is ? in the other p2p file sharing progs forum we already have some threads about dc++ . I find that they are good when kept there as there arent that many topics about dc++ , splitting it up and making another forum is a bit exagerated as we already have so many forums for each p2p network

I think there are more DC topics than Shareaza.
There always used to be more DC topics than Shareaza in the old forum layout.

I think having a BT section with subs for each client is overkill. Same with shareza etc.

We can't keep people posting in the proper catagory as it is and I think this will only add to the confusion.

In fact I think I just saw a kazaa post in the bt section a minute ago.

Keep it the way it is. Except maybe add sections for dc, newsgroups and shareza(or whatever they were in the first post)

TD

EDIT: and the good thing about each main program having it's own section is that we don't need to wade through topics to read about what interests us like we did before with the all inclusive other p2p apps. Wd can just go to BT and IRC if that's what interests us.

EDIT 2: If you wanna move BT and IRC to just below about this website and forum, I would have no problem with that ;) :lol:

DC++
How about a small forum just for this great app ? Its mostly overlooked but it has really great potential as we have quit a few posts about it going. B)


**merged this topic about DC++ into this excisting post**

I like it as well

I guess not many people are interested in this.

Jetje I think you can close this one.
However I still petition for adding sections for Direct Connect and Newsgroups... B)

Quote:

---

Originally posted by NotoriousBIC@13 December 2003 - 03:12
But it isn't the best in neither of the networks it connects too.
Also in itself it isn't a network.

---

Actualy Shareaza has it's own network Gnutella2.

I quite like the layout as it is. :D

I would probably be in favour of this. Although I don't use DC++ myself I have heard it is an excellent program (even if some of the hubs have ridiculous requirements to gain entry). Fore more information check out the page on direct connect over at the slyck P2P news website.

Quote:

---

Originally posted by cpumaster1@13 December 2003 - 02:20
i agree. i dont know why shareazaa or soulseek got their own section

---

Because there are many ppl on this forum who use soulseek ;)

bah.
gnuntella blows.

i changed my mind , we do need a subforum for dc++ :)

Perhaps a poll could help?

How can you guys forget about WinMx?????????????


It has a ton of users and there a lot of real files on it but the only problem is the ques :(

WinMx is a BIG p2p client tho

Forums should be organized by p2p client by speed then by content.

Quote:

---

Originally posted by Tyruis@4 February 2004 - 02:39
Forums should be organized by p2p client by speed then by content.

---

How can you quantify which networks/protocols/programs are the fastest though?

Soulseek is a great p2p, however it is mostly mp3's (that's a good thing, personally.)

I say give a forum to each network, not necessarily each client. For those that have no network, per se, or more than one--well, unless there's more than five or so of them, give each their own forum. One might categorize all multiple-network apps together, or all direct-connectors, etc.

I think what's most important is that the forums do not suffer so much fragmentation from the change that 1. regular or dedicated posters are not dislocated, and 2. the casual poster can find his/her needs. So a minimalist approach is probably best.

add dc++ back pls.