It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Microsoft P2P to replace Bit Torrent? Enter the Avalanch

page: 1
0
<<   2 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jun, 18 2005 @ 04:59 AM
link   
Well well well. I never thought I'd see this happen but it does seem that M$ has decided if you can't beat em join em, this is gonna piss alot of record and movie execs off i'm sure but what can they do about it? It's Microsoft a virtual monopoly. They claim to improve upon Bit Torrent by solving the scheduling problems that crop up when thousands of peers try to download the same file at the same time. They claim an 20-30 % improvement in coded information and a 200-300 % improvement in unencoded information.

www.theregister.com...

www.research.microsoft.com...




posted on Jun, 18 2005 @ 06:20 AM
link   
hmmmmmmm?????????

I don't think the record and movie companies will be that p'd off. If M$ have monopoly over the Torrent traffic, they may be able to control the content or at least watch over it.

Also according to the MPAA a third of Inet traffic is torrent activity. Given the amount of time bit torrent has been around It's highly possible.

Maybe they'll use it to distribute service packs, critical updates and OS updates with less need for bandwidth therefore cheaper server & bandwidth rates.


M$ has decided if you can't beat em join em


They ain't joining them they're gonna wipe the floor with bit torrent. Another corporate takeover, even though it will have bugs at first Microsoft could potentially have very profitable jobs for their new protocol. Interesting find.



posted on Jun, 18 2005 @ 06:30 AM
link   
M$ has already pissed them off by dropping support for Trusted Computing DRM in Longhorn
And how are they gonna lock it down? Track Record, XP was hacked within a week of it's release. They only care about people infringing on their own products not other peoples products. I doubt they will wipe the floor with Bit Torrent as it's open source and always improving, they are right now testing trackerless torrents right now in beta. I do hope they offer a high speed viable alternative though for High Quality(DVD Quality) stuff I'd be willing to pay for that but will I give up on BT? Prolly not.

And as for the 1/3rd of Internet traffic comment that is BS, that is only Backbone traffic not overall traffic which falls around 1/10th of all traffic. Search for the thread on www.slashdot.org...

[edit on 18-6-2005 by sardion2000]



posted on Jun, 18 2005 @ 06:32 AM
link   
Believing MPAA and RIAA information about internet traffic is about the last thing you should do ...

Anyway, "replace" "take over" ?

BT and P2P networks will always be around, even if MS's product clears to be clean and snooping free. And if MS's product turns out to bring the spying eye upon everyone, the old networks will take the upper hand again.

And yeah, MS is most likely going to use this tech to distribute SP's, updates and other MS downloads.

The popularity of BT is it being opensource which is 1 thing I'm nearly 100% sure of MS won't do with their product. So its rather unlikely that the product will ever be used as a P2P app and will be used for MS and its clients intended purpouses.



posted on Jun, 18 2005 @ 06:33 AM
link   
Download Microsoft Longhorn over Microsoft P2P - I hear Bill saying (insert black cape and funky face-shield) "I have you now"

Damn thing is, there will be a LOT of gullable people out there that will do just that. Kinda like, stealing a cop car while telling the cop at the window "ssshhh".

Ugh

On the other hand, what if this is not the case, can MS actually see a profit somewhere in this? Offering Microsoft P2P to download pirated Microsoft OS's & apps (along with all the others, of course)? Makes me go "huh?"

The latter scenario would be indicative of MS finally admitting that the "supposed" profit losses don't exist, as a finite number of loss is within the resale, the massive downloading is for fun, a hobby, a game of "we did it first". Ya can't lose money on what would have never been bought. (no, I'm not about to start citing sources, go learn like I did; far too many to list to make one understand the pirate vs vendor scenario).

Misfit



posted on Jun, 18 2005 @ 07:21 AM
link   
Great Find Sardion!!
If MS does replace the p2p network then won't it be easier for companies to sue MS for giving their product away and also won't other companies complain about MS monoply if they start handing their products over for cheap? Who's gonna buy anything?
I think MS has a card up its sleve which its goning to reveal at the last moment
and sucker us all!
With MS already sued in so many places i think poor Bill is losing it! This will surely end in the courts, me thinks!
Also what is the response of the record companies to this ? Are they just gonna ante up and sit!

Quoting Master Yoda:
"The Dark side clouds everything", LOL so true in this case !!



posted on Jun, 18 2005 @ 07:45 AM
link   
ahhhhhhhhhh.......................

Imagine M$ asked you to pay a monthly fee for your OS instead of one lump charge, for this your OS is secured with a firewall, spyware remover, anti-virus among many, many other features of the new OS Codename: Longhorn.

All of the Longhorn stuff will be able to update itself easier consuming less bandwidth, therefore a lower need for centralised servers. All the machines update themselves on a p2p level rather than connecting to M$ servers.

M$ would not have to invest in massive server farms for updating facilities as the entire M$ network would act as a star topology.

Sooooooo that equates to M$ making another boom in the stock market.



posted on Jun, 18 2005 @ 11:55 AM
link   
this is a terrible day for the seeders if this i is true a global big company such as microsoft
they will easily make it free for the first couple of years or less then put a monthly fee on it

on the other hand this will ensure that hackers have somthing to get around and tech will evolve

NOTE:if there was no hackers where would the world be? think how many times you update your firewall for new viruses this is a very good thing it means our tech is constantly evolving



posted on Jun, 18 2005 @ 12:06 PM
link   
Micro$ofts game plan has always been "embrace, extend and extinguish." They've tried that with Java, Macintosh, and other technologies.

This is nothing more than a farce to extinguish a technology they don't like.

[edit on 6/18/2005 by djohnsto77]



posted on Jun, 18 2005 @ 02:09 PM
link   

Originally posted by djohnsto77
Micro$ofts game plan has always been "embrace, extend and extinguish." They've tried that with Java, Macintosh, and other technologies.

This is nothing more than a farce to extinguish a technology they don't like.

[edit on 6/18/2005 by djohnsto77]


embrace, extend was that a joke with java



posted on Jun, 18 2005 @ 05:08 PM
link   

Originally posted by klain
this is a terrible day for the seeders if this i is true a global big company such as microsoft
they will easily make it free for the first couple of years or less then put a monthly fee on it


Exactly. I don't trust Microsoft to stay true to the trade. Mainy because they can't, as a giant international software company, start promoting "free trade." Next thing you know they'll be offering Longhorn on SF.


I don't think it was meant that way, klain but it was funny.



posted on Jun, 18 2005 @ 05:08 PM
link   

Originally posted by klain
embrace, extend was that a joke with java


To be honnest, the MS Java Virtual Machine runs about 1000 times better then the real SUN one. The MSVM might lack features, but runs most of the used internet java applets without trouble and much faster(with less of a resource kick) then Sun VM



posted on Jun, 18 2005 @ 08:01 PM
link   
Microsoft running a P2P app is like Michael Jackson running a kindergarten.



posted on Jun, 19 2005 @ 02:07 AM
link   

Originally posted by Flyer
Microsoft running a P2P app is like Michael Jackson running a kindergarten.


In what way. Do you mean Bill will ring me and ask if I want to go to bed with him?



posted on Jun, 19 2005 @ 02:32 AM
link   
Hmm, I think it is good thing. It will bring torrent technology to the mainstream users (many of them don't even know what it is or fear to download some "unknown"). Also the technology can be incorporated directly to the Internet Explorer not only for downloads like movies or big files but also for example for pictures from the websites - the bandwith costs for website owners could go down dramatically, and no more would some webpages run slow because of high traffic. Also don't fool yourself that P2P traffic cannot be controlled. It can be controled quite easily.



posted on Jun, 19 2005 @ 03:05 AM
link   


It can be controled quite easily.


How? They have not succeeded yet so I don't think it's quite so easy as you think it is



posted on Jun, 19 2005 @ 03:06 AM
link   
torrent will definatly take over from P2P if it has'nt already hackers will invent new tech which they have already done to avoid being caught like making each seeder/downloader a tracker

its a little unfortunate that people are bringing down a few torrent sites like suprnova.org but more sites and tech crop up to stop this power to the seeders!!!



posted on Jun, 19 2005 @ 03:47 AM
link   

Originally posted by sardion2000



It can be controled quite easily.


How? They have not succeeded yet so I don't think it's quite so easy as you think it is


Through internet service providers. Ever heard about the server based content filtering? Just issue a few laws to force the ISP to let's say "fully cooperate with RIAA". Of course not all traffic can be controlled that way, but the access to the large(publicly known) sources could be disabled within hours.



posted on Jun, 19 2005 @ 04:01 AM
link   

Originally posted by longbow

Originally posted by sardion2000



It can be controled quite easily.


How? They have not succeeded yet so I don't think it's quite so easy as you think it is


Through internet service providers. Ever heard about the server based content filtering? Just issue a few laws to force the ISP to let's say "fully cooperate with RIAA". Of course not all traffic can be controlled that way, but the access to the large(publicly known) sources could be disabled within hours.

Might happen in America, but remember the Net is not just an american phenomenon
And also such laws will probably be challenged by the ISP as it does seem unconstitional, ISP's are also in the process of becoming decentralized through WiFi and soon WiMax you see technology will always be two steps ahead of legislation.



posted on Jun, 19 2005 @ 04:27 AM
link   

Originally posted by sardion2000
Might happen in America, but remember the Net is not just an american phenomenon
And also such laws will probably be challenged by the ISP as it does seem unconstitional, ISP's are also in the process of becoming decentralized through WiFi and soon WiMax you see technology will always be two steps ahead of legislation.


Why should be blocking the access to the stolen material, child pornography, etc be unconstitutional? Just because it's not prakticized on the internet (because it's still basically lawless territory) doesn't mean it is unconstitutional or unlawfull. If the internet piracy continues to grow I think there will be similar laws not only in USA but also in EU, Canada etc.



new topics

top topics



 
0
<<   2 >>

log in

join