why have trackers at all then if thats the case, just put the files on the G2 network an do it that way. [/b][/quote]Originally posted by stoi+4 November 2003 - 22:52--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (stoi @ 4 November 2003 - 22:52)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'>Originally posted by REALITY@4 November 2003 - 07:56
Originally posted by stoi@3 November 2003 - 22:36
Originally posted by REALITY@3 November 2003 - 09:46
<!--QuoteBegin-junkyardking@3 November 2003 - 01:38
The good thing with bittorent in shareaza is that if the tracker is down it will continue to download the file off the Gnutella2 network and if you seed on Gnutella2 you no longer even need a tracker as the network acts like a tracker.
This is what in the end may make Shareaza the better BT client perhaps...
well if that is true (which i am sceptical about) then i think it will be the death of bittorrent.
Why...
I think the point is that a BT client that can be trackerless would seem a benifit...
As far as i know it actualy acts like bittorent on the network that's why it good, while if you share a file on G2 your subject to the normal rules e.g. queues. Just think of it like this
Files on G2 = Files on g2 e.g the queues and what not and sharing with shareaza bittorent users
Bittorent on G2 = the bittorent protacol e.g. great speeds, partial filesharing, no queues plus getting sources of non bittorent g2 users as well
Before i was under the impression that the partial filesharing of bittorent was getting shared with G2 non bittorent users but as was pointed out by someone else i was mistaking the client listing for the actual queue, these were actualy other shareaza clients on the tracker.
Reply With Quote
Bookmarks