Shareaza Sux Balls

[RealitY]

[i]Originally posted by uNz[i]+10 January 2004 - 01:50--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (uNz @ 10 January 2004 - 01:50)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'> <!--QuoteBegin-REALITY@10 January 2004 - 14:01
Thing is Shareaza World here is a waste of board space, there could be a bathroom here instead or something because Shareaza really Sux Balls.

If people want to use Shareaza, they have every right to do just that.

If you don&#39;t like Shareaza World, then don&#39;t come in here. [/b][/quote]
Well you may be right but Shareaza still Sux Balls...

[Nobelium]

I never used it much for music since I find SoulSeek much better...

how is it much better if u never used it for music ?

I bet u started both progs at same time and raza just got the bandwith that was left over ( not much i guess and your other progs hogging all of it)

You probly just dont know how to configure your crap to download from multiple networks simultaneoulsy , that is the main thing i like about raza.

Start a BT download and if the same file is on G2 its a breeze....

Dont like it dont use it, negative comments wont help anything but ur ego.

[RealitY]

Originally posted by Nobelium@10 January 2004 - 07:09
I never used it much for music since I find SoulSeek much better...

Agreed.

how is it much better if u never used it for music ?

I said I never used it for music much, try reading.

I bet u started both progs at same time and raza just got the bandwith that was left over ( not much i guess and your other progs hogging all of it)

When I tested the two programs on the EDK2 network EMule never got beyond 10K and Shareaza never got beyond 15K, most of the time neither of them were downloading anything and were both quened. Considering the maximum bandwidth for this test was at 25K I don&#39;t think either program would be hogging anything since my downstream is cablable of 400K. It was just apperant that EMule was more steady perhaps because most EDK2 clients are EMule and may better reward other EMule clients through the credit system even on just the partial sharing of that one file which Shareaza may not reward or be rewarded or be regonized against other EDK2 clients perhaps. Thus Shareaza Sux Balls.

As for testing torrents I started Shareaza first since Shadow does max out my connection at times. On a popular torrent Shadow can run around 150K while Shareaza never gets beyond 40K on the same torrent, even if I pause Shadow to allow the extra bandwith to Shareaza it still never got beyond 40K. Not sure why though there are a few theroys, although I do know Shareaza Sux Balls.

Also when testing I never had anything else running, so your ASSumptions are just wrong. Also keep in mind between these test I have tested both popular and rare files. Why shall you all get so offeneded by the simple truth that compared to the individual clients, with the exception of G2, that it just Sux Balls.

You probly just dont know how to configure your crap to download from multiple networks simultaneoulsy , that is the main thing i like about raza.

Just another empty headed ASSumption that I have already answered, so it still Sux Balls.

Start a BT download and if the same file is on G2 its a breeze....

Even when I got sources off G2 for torrents it was still slower than Shadow, though that may change with the growth of the G2 network. I am also concerned that when a torrent is comlpeted on Shareaza and the "Clear Completed" tab is clicked the file at that point will only be shared on the G2 network and no longer shared to other torrent clients, this make the Shareaza client a bit of a leech, and yes I did test this recently. Thus another situation where it just Sux Balls

negative comments wont help anything but ur ego.

Perhaps my ego is slightly inflated, I can admit to that, although my comments are well based in the facts and are intended to show that the individual clients have better preformance than Shareaza does, with the possible exception of G2. I am simply here to enlighten those that do not know that they could get better results with other clients since Shareaza really Sux Balls.

Dont like it dont use it

Well I don&#39;t much anymore since it Sux Balls and if you or anyone else wish to use it feel free, after all if you wish to Sux Balls feel free to do so as well...

[Sparkle1984]

Shareaza is for lazy folk and for those on dial up.
&nbsp;

Lazy?&#33; Well I have a life to lead as well (studies and work); I can&#39;t spend all day hunting around for files on separate programs &#33;

[RealitY]

Originally posted by Sparkle1984@10 January 2004 - 16:03

Shareaza is for lazy folk and for those on dial up.

Lazy?&#33; Well I have a life to lead as well (studies and work); I can&#39;t spend all day hunting around for files on separate programs &#33;

Hay a point well made...

[aserty]

Originally posted by REALITY+11 January 2004 - 04:27--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (REALITY @ 11 January 2004 - 04:27)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'> <!--QuoteBegin-Sparkle1984@10 January 2004 - 16:03

Shareaza is for lazy folk and for those on dial up.

Lazy?&#33; Well I have a life to lead as well (studies and work); I can&#39;t spend all day hunting around for files on separate programs &#33;

Hay a point well made...
[/b][/quote]
Silly sponge, hay is for horses.

[junkyardking]

I use to be a shareaza fan on 56k, but now having adsl what seems to happen is the speeds may start of ok but then slip to crap.

I&#39;ve tried emule and thats pretty much crap as well with 10000 long queues and having to share 24/7 to build up any kind of credit with other users.

I&#39;m now using overnet for ed2k files and i&#39;m getting great speeds the gui may look crap but as along as the files come in at a decent speed i&#39;m happy.

[jackc]

I am also a Shereaza user who is hugley disappointed by its speed, but I cannot yet condemn it to a "sux balls" level. The reasons are the huge availability of its files, the multi-network support, and the absence of fakes. Moreover, I think that the speed problem is ed2k-related, so mabe one should say that EDONKEY SUX BALLS???

Even when I got sources off G2 for torrents it was still slower than Shadow, though that may change with the growth of the G2 network. I am also concerned that when a torrent is comlpeted on Shareaza and the "Clear Completed" tab is clicked the file at that point will only be shared on the G2 network and no longer shared to other torrent clients, this make the Shareaza client a bit of a leech, and yes I did test this recently. Thus another situation where it just Sux Balls

Although the leech issue is an undeniable drawback of Raza, the fact that it can accelerate the BT d/ls is a benefit.

Well I don&#39;t much anymore since it Sux Balls and if you or anyone else wish to use it feel free, after all if you wish to Sux Balls feel free to do so as well...

Well, I am male, and sucking balls is definitely not my type&#33;

[tree_for]

I tooo think that Shareaza really suckzz....
It most of the time queued&#33;&#33;&#33;&#33;
and pple uploading from me always......
Thats wat happening no router nor firewall&#33;&#33;&#33;
Three days (abt 50 hrs com on) still havent finished a movie yet, and I&#39;m only d/l one movie only.....

[Sparkle1984]

I am also concerned that when a torrent is comlpeted on Shareaza and the "Clear Completed" tab is clicked the file at that point will only be shared on the G2 network and no longer shared to other torrent clients, this make the Shareaza client a bit of a leech, and yes I did test this recently.

But you can turn off the auto-clear facility, and then it will still share to other torrent clients.