tedgyz writes "Wired has an article describing a high definition video service from Azureus. It looks like many of the highlights of our previous discussion about service commercialization are panning out. The new Zudeo site, made by the masterminds behind the bittorrent service, aims to be a platform for movie-makers and professionals. Will distancing itself from the homespun efforts of YouTube prove successful, or lead to the service being ignored?" From the article: "With high-definition video cameras available for less than $1,000, and with the rapid adoption HDTVs in the home, it's clear that high-definition entertainment has a future. But the visual clarity of internet video tends to be less than stellar, mostly because the bandwidth costs associated with serving large, high-quality video files is prohibitively expensive. However, the BitTorrent protocol enables content distributors like Azureus to share large files using much less bandwidth."
But the visual clarity of internet video tends to be less than stellar, mostly because the bandwidth costs associated with serving large, high-quality video files is prohibitively expensive. However, the BitTorrent protocol enables content distributors like Azureus to share large files using much less bandwidth.
Such a beautiful idea, but with such a high chance of failure.:(
The key issues I see are:
1. Who's going to keep videos seeded? On Youtube, if the video is available, the video is viewable. Not so for Azureus! The video could be only partially intact (no seeders with not enough downloaders) or it could just be gone. The Bittorrent network has already lost several fan films due to this issue. Will Zudeo keep a seed of every video they've ever carried? Will they be able to afford the bandwidth when the viewers start trickling to videos rather than assisting each other with their downloads?
2. Like it or not, Youtube is often used in workplace camaraderie. Many corporate firewalls whitelist business appropriate ports rather than blacklisting P2P clients. Youtube uses regular HTTP, so it works. Azureus uses the Bittorrent protocol which requires more esoteric ports.
3. Will the bandwidth usage be acceptable for the average user? When you view a Youtube video, you use only the bandwidth necessary to download the video. This active form of downloading means that bandwidth usage stops as soon as the video is completely downloaded. With Bittorrent, users will both upload and download while waiting for the video to complete. They also are recommeneded to leave the client open while going about other tasks. Which can have a negative impact on their other Internet activities.
4. Zudeo breaks up your workflow by launching an external program. This not only breaks up the user's workflow, but it also presents a more confusing interface. If the user wants to view the video, he has to open the torrent tab, click on "Files", then double click the correct file. This action is non-obvious to someone who simply wants to view the show. In addition, Azureus may not even launch when the Zudeo link is clicked! Magnet links are intended as a generic P2P descriptor, and are often claimed by programs other than Azureus.
5. Perhaps the most important point of all: Bittorrent cannot stream files. The viewer must wait until the file is completely downloaded. With Youtube, they can simply watch their show with no intermediary steps.
IMHO, the best bet for Zudeo is to reinvent themselves as an iTunes competitor. If they created a frontend program to Azureus that did all the dirty work, they could at least compete in an arena where they're more likely to succeed. Streaming will still be an issue, but consumers may be willing to wait for High Def content.
you missed an impoartant part that youtube has and this cant have.
I can click play and decide in a few seconds if the video is garbage,gross,or not interesting and go on to the nest. With this Hd offering I haveto wait until I downloaded the whole damned thing before seeing it's crap or even broken. This has a huge problem inside Bitrottents already. you dont know if the video is even playable until you get a 100% download and try it. Unless they are offering as well as the HD content a LD clip showing you 30 seconds of it (or the whole thing if less than 30 seconds) that can be viewed instantly.
Most people will bail on using a service if after 10 times they view a video and it's bad, or they are not interested in seeing it as it was mis-labelled.
IIRC, one can prioritize the first segment of a file in Azeurus for specifically that reason - viewing the first part of a movie file. It would seem like a trivial excercise to enable this by default along with a a little viewer for previewing.
Ratings can easily be astroturfed and some on youtube currently suffer from that. If a piece of content is old enough to have real ratings on it then that could be useful but it's still not as fast as clicking play, saying "ewwww!" and going on to the nest one as most internet users do. The other problem is their "streaming" still does not work. I tried it on 4 of their HD content clips and they do not stream, they download just like a normal torrent with pieces all random every clip would with not play or
You make some excellent points, which illustrate why this service shouldn't really be compared to YouTube. It's a lot like comparing email to SMS. Both are very similiar on the surface, but both are also very successful because they serve slightly different purposes. As you pointed out, it's lack of streaming is the reason why it can't directly compete with YouTube. But because YouTube chooses to stream, they can't offer the same high-quality video as Zudeo. I think it's way to soon call this idea dead in the water. I mean, the iPod was just another MP3 player when it came to market. We'll have to see how well the idea is executed first.
IMHO, the best bet for Zudeo is to reinvent themselves as an iTunes competitor. If they created a frontend program to Azureus that did all the dirty work, they could at least compete in an arena where they're more likely to succeed. Streaming will still be an issue, but consumers may be willing to wait for High Def content.
Check out their beta app. I think they were aiming for the iTunes feel.
Such a beautiful idea, but with such a high chance of failure.:(
Here's a suggestion as to the solution to their problems:
Bars.
That's right - as in "establishments that serve alcoholic beverages". All of 'em have these huge screen, high-def monitors all over the place to show sporting events. What do they use 'em for when there are no sporting events? Nothing, largely. Just filler (stick it on ESPN News or CNN and go).
These places have *paying* customers that would rather watch stupid teenagers smashing cans of WD40 with a sledgehammer. You could even install a little controller at each table so that the viewership could vote on the videos (make it simple like "thumbs up", "thumbs down" and "replay" - enough people voting for replay would cause the video to run again).
Install a kiosk for people to download the videos to mobile phones in exchange for the purchase of [INSERT FOOD OR BEVERAGE PRODUCT HERE]. A portion of the money goes back to feed the victims in said videos.
1) The company will. The other seeders are just to reduce load, if they exist.
2) Yeah, major problem.
3) Average user doesn't know jack about bandwidth and won't care.
4) Yeah, this is bad.
5) Not true. There are BT clients that prioritize the beginning of the file and tend to download it first. It could be used to stream, just not as nicely as normal streaming.
1) The company will. The other seeders are just to reduce load, if they exist.
That still doesn't address the issue of being nipped at by old videos. Let's say that they have 500 old videos that only get one user downloading every 12 hours. These users shut down their PCs at night, so their clients won't be able to assist the next downloader. For HD video, the result would be a rather massive drain on their bandwidth. I sincerely hope they're planning for such massive increases.
1. Who's going to keep videos seeded? On Youtube, if the video is available, the video is viewable. Not so for Azureus! The video could be only partially intact (no seeders with not enough downloaders) or it could just be gone. The Bittorrent network has already lost several fan films due to this issue. Will Zudeo keep a seed of every video they've ever carried? Will they be able to afford the bandwidth when the viewers start trickling to videos rather than assisting each other with their downloads?
What they're doing really isn't all that cool. They're basically running a BT tracker, but rather than loading it up with all the content that people actually want -- and which also happens to be illegal to distribute -- they're going to only put stuff they have the rights to distribute on it. This tracker will have a fancy web interface, but really it's no different than ThePirateBay, from a technical aspect. So here's the "underpants gnomes" breakdown of their business plan, as I see it:
1. Who's going to keep videos seeded? On Youtube, if the video is available, the video is viewable. Not so for Azureus! The video could be only partially intact (no seeders with not enough downloaders) or it could just be gone. The Bittorrent network has already lost several fan films due to this issue. Will Zudeo keep a seed of every video they've ever carried? Will they be able to afford the bandwidth when the viewers start trickling to videos rather than assisting each other with their downloads?
> Bittorrent cannot stream files. The viewer must wait until the file is completely downloaded.
Well, to be hon...buffering. est, I usu...buffering. ally wait unt...buffering. il the fi...buffering. le has comp...buffering. letely downl...buffering. oaded before I st...buffering. art to watc...buffering. h it anywa...buffering. y, otherwise it j...buffering. ust gets frus...buffering.
They could make this work if for every video they also had a low quality clip that could be streamed. Then if it's good, someone could download the whole thing, store it in their movie selection, show it to their friends, etc.
I really don't think there's that much of a demand for HD quality home movies. I'd be happy if everyone on YouTube just uploaded TV quality stuff, rather than the jittery cell phone video that appears to be the bulk of uploads. Sure, the demand is there for full length movies, bu
5. Perhaps the most important point of all: Bittorrent cannot stream files. The viewer must wait until the file is completely downloaded. With Youtube, they can simply watch their show with no intermediary steps.
I wonder if this is so much of an issue. I mean, people who use devices like TiVo very often don't watch things "live" anyway. They just let the TiVo record all the shows they want and then they go back and watch them at their leisure. So you let your Azureus client (assuming you have it set to au
5. Perhaps the most important point of all: Bittorrent cannot stream files. The viewer must wait until the file is completely downloaded. With Youtube, they can simply watch their show with no intermediary steps.
Since it's a custom client and they'll likely have at least a few I imagine they can combine direct download with bittorrent--streaming what's actively playing while bittorrent grabs what pieces it can to reduce the load. Once a viewer subscribes to a program, they can deliver video pod-cast st
As someone that has been experimenting with a commercial venture based on bit torrent I can say that seeding isn't an issue because YOU seed the feeds. I have a server files are uploaded to that stores the files on another server which seeds to only other of my servers and essentially seeds the file all the time. My other seeding servers seed on demand by simply running a BT client that can take orders from the server so that when someone requests a download one of the seeds will grab a copy of the file and
It seems that Azureus intend on using P2P for the file 'Downloads'. One of the advantages that YouTube has currently is that you hit the 'Go' Button and the video streams straight from a persistent data source. As far as P2P goes, availability becomes an important issue, it's all well and good uploading a HD video, but you wont be able to stream it, and will have to wait for it to download and eat your bandwidth whilst you share to others.
I can't see this taking off in the same way that YouTube did, some of us just don't have the bandwidth
Exactly. Most YouTube videos are what... a couple of megabytes? HD Video, even compressed, is going to be a lot larger. To the point where most people are going to hit bandwidth caps fairly quickly, if they are downloading even a few movies
Positioning such a service as YouTube like is a little inane. Now, if they positioned it as a reasonable way to distribut indie films in High Def, they might find people a lot more receptive. I dont know what mastering a Blu-Ray or HD-DVD costs, but for some indie folk, it might just be too much... wheras this will let people get their films out in high quality at a reasonably low (well, free) cost.
There used to be another service that worked like that, called Veoh. Im not even sure it still exists, I stopped using it when they changed their term of services and forbid the posting of p0rn.
Doesn't this mean that the service will digress into an advertising platform for studios, etc.? If it's "professionals only", I believe this will cause it to collapse in the same way that mp3.com ate it when they sold out and quit hosting amateur music.
...that doesn't care about HD video or HDTV. I am too cheap to pay for cable and my DVDs look just fine on my TV. I can tell a difference but for me it isn't worth paying anything to switch. As for posting HD videos of myself on the internet, please, no one wants to see me in low res let alone HD.
I have no idea why they're pushing the site as Azureus 3.0 but that's a legitimate download link, the same one offered on the SourceForge site. Interestingly while Zudeo is handling the press, the sf page has taken a dive.
nyud.net:8080 shows they've got a prominent ad for Zudeo on the mainpage though.
I'm not interested. Why? Because on P2P, as other posters have said, I'm the the webserver. But who does the advertising money go to? Not me.
I get a slower weblink, and a slightly higher electricity bill. My broadband ISP charges me for excessive uploading and demands that I sign up to a commercial package -- and I can't argue, as I'm supplying a commercial service. And I still have to sit through five minutes of ads for every 10 minutes of program.
My broadband ISP charges me for excessive uploading and demands that I sign up to a commercial package -- and I can't argue, as I'm supplying a commercial service.
One solution to this part of the equation is to get an ISP without such assanine rules (like the one I use [speakeasy.net], for instance). Of course, that's a solution for you, not for the service, because they're unlikely to have a successful internet business model that begins, "First, get all your customers to switch their ISP..."
As noted above, flash sends you the first bits of the video, ready to play within seconds if not immediately. Bittorrent files don't work that way, you get whatever bits are sent to you, and not in any particular order either. That also means having to have files on the drive, when I leave YouTube and close the browser, the files are generally gone.
Not only that, just about any digital camera is able to capture video that's better than what YouTube offers, the problem is that YouTube is using a fairly old codec. They can get better video with less bandwidth by switching to OnTo's latest codec.
HD Cameras for less than $1000??? Where are these guys shopping?
The Cannon HV10 is available for $999 from Tiger Direct [tigerdirect.com] and other outlets. Described as the world's smallest HD camcorder. 1920x1080 CMOS sensor. 10x optical zoom, image stabilization, etc.
The Sanyo HD1A records 720p MPEG-4 video on SD cards. Sells for around $600-$700. Froogle is your friend.
However, the BitTorrent protocol enables content distributors like Azureus to share large files using much less bandwidth.
Content distributors? Since when is Azureus a content distributor? Is that some sort of entity? I thought Azureus was just a software program implementing a specific internet protocol.
I would think the "content distributors" would be the websites hosting the trackers, etc.
Oh well, maybe it's just a semantic misunderstanding on my part.
I predict a fork in Azureus-the-bittorrent-client as Azureus-the-Company tries to take it and turn it into something else. From the "About Azureus Inc. [zudeo.com]" page:
Azureus 3.0 (launching later this year) joins movie and music fans with filmmakers and artists to create a rich, social, and completely new entertainment experience.
Yeah, because that sounds like exactly what I'm looking for in my cross-platform bittorrent client. Or not.
Unfortunately I suspect that Azureus-the-company probably already has the "Azureus"
It depends how you look at it. I use Azureus (of course to download LEGAL stuff, of course) and have no problems whatsoever with it. It's crappy in a way of programming language (Java) but except of it it's really nice and configurable. And all memory holes of the past have been gone for a long time...
Very cool. Very unlikely to succeed. (Score:5, Insightful)
Such a beautiful idea, but with such a high chance of failure.
The key issues I see are:
1. Who's going to keep videos seeded? On Youtube, if the video is available, the video is viewable. Not so for Azureus! The video could be only partially intact (no seeders with not enough downloaders) or it could just be gone. The Bittorrent network has already lost several fan films due to this issue. Will Zudeo keep a seed of every video they've ever carried? Will they be able to afford the bandwidth when the viewers start trickling to videos rather than assisting each other with their downloads?
2. Like it or not, Youtube is often used in workplace camaraderie. Many corporate firewalls whitelist business appropriate ports rather than blacklisting P2P clients. Youtube uses regular HTTP, so it works. Azureus uses the Bittorrent protocol which requires more esoteric ports.
3. Will the bandwidth usage be acceptable for the average user? When you view a Youtube video, you use only the bandwidth necessary to download the video. This active form of downloading means that bandwidth usage stops as soon as the video is completely downloaded. With Bittorrent, users will both upload and download while waiting for the video to complete. They also are recommeneded to leave the client open while going about other tasks. Which can have a negative impact on their other Internet activities.
4. Zudeo breaks up your workflow by launching an external program. This not only breaks up the user's workflow, but it also presents a more confusing interface. If the user wants to view the video, he has to open the torrent tab, click on "Files", then double click the correct file. This action is non-obvious to someone who simply wants to view the show. In addition, Azureus may not even launch when the Zudeo link is clicked! Magnet links are intended as a generic P2P descriptor, and are often claimed by programs other than Azureus.
5. Perhaps the most important point of all: Bittorrent cannot stream files. The viewer must wait until the file is completely downloaded. With Youtube, they can simply watch their show with no intermediary steps.
IMHO, the best bet for Zudeo is to reinvent themselves as an iTunes competitor. If they created a frontend program to Azureus that did all the dirty work, they could at least compete in an arena where they're more likely to succeed. Streaming will still be an issue, but consumers may be willing to wait for High Def content.
Re:Very cool. Very unlikely to succeed. (Score:5, Informative)
guaranteeing that the file will always be available.
Parent
Re:Very cool. Very unlikely to succeed. (Score:4, Insightful)
I can click play and decide in a few seconds if the video is garbage,gross,or not interesting and go on to the nest. With this Hd offering I haveto wait until I downloaded the whole damned thing before seeing it's crap or even broken. This has a huge problem inside Bitrottents already. you dont know if the video is even playable until you get a 100% download and try it. Unless they are offering as well as the HD content a LD clip showing you 30 seconds of it (or the whole thing if less than 30 seconds) that can be viewed instantly.
Most people will bail on using a service if after 10 times they view a video and it's bad, or they are not interested in seeing it as it was mis-labelled.
Parent
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
If a piece of content is old enough to have real ratings on it then that could be useful but it's still not as fast as clicking play, saying "ewwww!" and going on to the nest one as most internet users do.
The other problem is their "streaming" still does not work. I tried it on 4 of their HD content clips and they do not stream, they download just like a normal torrent with pieces all random every clip would with not play or
Re:Very cool. Very unlikely to succeed. (Score:5, Insightful)
You make some excellent points, which illustrate why this service shouldn't really be compared to YouTube. It's a lot like comparing email to SMS. Both are very similiar on the surface, but both are also very successful because they serve slightly different purposes. As you pointed out, it's lack of streaming is the reason why it can't directly compete with YouTube. But because YouTube chooses to stream, they can't offer the same high-quality video as Zudeo. I think it's way to soon call this idea dead in the water. I mean, the iPod was just another MP3 player when it came to market. We'll have to see how well the idea is executed first.
Parent
Re: (Score:2)
Check out their beta app. I think they were aiming for the iTunes feel.
Re:Very cool. Very unlikely to succeed. (Score:5, Interesting)
Such a beautiful idea, but with such a high chance of failure.
Here's a suggestion as to the solution to their problems:
Bars.
That's right - as in "establishments that serve alcoholic beverages". All of 'em have these huge screen, high-def monitors all over the place to show sporting events. What do they use 'em for when there are no sporting events? Nothing, largely. Just filler (stick it on ESPN News or CNN and go).
These places have *paying* customers that would rather watch stupid teenagers smashing cans of WD40 with a sledgehammer. You could even install a little controller at each table so that the viewership could vote on the videos (make it simple like "thumbs up", "thumbs down" and "replay" - enough people voting for replay would cause the video to run again).
Install a kiosk for people to download the videos to mobile phones in exchange for the purchase of [INSERT FOOD OR BEVERAGE PRODUCT HERE]. A portion of the money goes back to feed the victims in said videos.
The possibilities are endless.
Parent
Re:Very cool. Very unlikely to succeed. (Score:4, Interesting)
2) Yeah, major problem.
3) Average user doesn't know jack about bandwidth and won't care.
4) Yeah, this is bad.
5) Not true. There are BT clients that prioritize the beginning of the file and tend to download it first. It could be used to stream, just not as nicely as normal streaming.
Parent
Re: (Score:2)
That still doesn't address the issue of being nipped at by old videos. Let's say that they have 500 old videos that only get one user downloading every 12 hours. These users shut down their PCs at night, so their clients won't be able to assist the next downloader. For HD video, the result would be a rather massive drain on their bandwidth. I sincerely hope they're planning for such massive increases.
Re: (Score:2)
Malware
It's a BT tracker. (Score:3, Interesting)
So here's the "underpants gnomes" breakdown of their business plan, as I see it:
1) Release buzzword
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
While you do have some good points, I'd like to point out a couple of things from TFA:
Isn't it possible that they've figured a way around the streaming issue by requiring the chunks downloaded to be sequential?
Re: (Score:2)
I'm as
6. Azureus (Score:3, Insightful)
(Yes, I realize you can probably use other clients. I'm just being offensive.)
Re: (Score:2)
Re:Very cool. Very unlikely to succeed. (Score:4, Funny)
Well, to be hon...buffering.
est, I usu...buffering.
ally wait unt...buffering.
il the fi...buffering.
le has comp...buffering.
letely downl...buffering.
oaded before I st...buffering.
art to watc...buffering.
h it anywa...buffering.
y, otherwise it j...buffering.
ust gets frus...buffering.
oh sod this, I'll go and do something else.
Parent
Re: (Score:2)
I really don't think there's that much of a demand for HD quality home movies. I'd be happy if everyone on YouTube just uploaded TV quality stuff, rather than the jittery cell phone video that appears to be the bulk of uploads. Sure, the demand is there for full length movies, bu
Re: (Score:2)
I wonder if this is so much of an issue. I mean, people who use devices like TiVo very often don't watch things "live" anyway. They just let the TiVo record all the shows they want and then they go back and watch them at their leisure. So you let your Azureus client (assuming you have it set to au
Re: (Score:2)
Since it's a custom client and they'll likely have at least a few I imagine they can combine direct download with bittorrent--streaming what's actively playing while bittorrent grabs what pieces it can to reduce the load. Once a viewer subscribes to a program, they can deliver video pod-cast st
If done right it will succeed. (Score:3, Interesting)
Who let Phil Collins in the room (Score:3, Funny)
P2P Streaming? (Score:5, Insightful)
I can't see this taking off in the same way that YouTube did, some of us just don't have the bandwidth
Re:P2P Streaming? (Score:5, Insightful)
Positioning such a service as YouTube like is a little inane. Now, if they positioned it as a reasonable way to distribut indie films in High Def, they might find people a lot more receptive. I dont know what mastering a Blu-Ray or HD-DVD costs, but for some indie folk, it might just be too much... wheras this will let people get their films out in high quality at a reasonably low (well, free) cost.
Parent
mm...like Veoh? (Score:3, Funny)
for professionals - so it will only be ads? (Score:2)
Am I the only one... (Score:3, Interesting)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Bullshit (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
The download link on Zudeo is http://torrents.aelitis.com:88/files/Azureus_2.5. 0 .0_linux.tar.bz2 [aelitis.com].
I have no idea why they're pushing the site as Azureus 3.0 but that's a legitimate download link, the same one offered on the SourceForge site. Interestingly while Zudeo is handling the press, the sf page has taken a dive.
nyud.net:8080 shows they've got a prominent ad for Zudeo on the mainpage though.
"Paying" twice...? (Score:4, Insightful)
I'm not interested. Why? Because on P2P, as other posters have said, I'm the the webserver. But who does the advertising money go to? Not me.
I get a slower weblink, and a slightly higher electricity bill. My broadband ISP charges me for excessive uploading and demands that I sign up to a commercial package -- and I can't argue, as I'm supplying a commercial service. And I still have to sit through five minutes of ads for every 10 minutes of program.
No thanks.
HAL.
Re: (Score:2)
If your ISP charges you for excessive uploading you may need to switch ISPs. Unless you're using commercial grade broadband instead of home.
Re:"Paying" twice...? (Score:4, Insightful)
Face it: youtube is right on the verge of being unwatchably-low quality. This would be HD.
Parent
Re: (Score:2)
One solution to this part of the equation is to get an ISP without such assanine rules (like the one I use [speakeasy.net], for instance). Of course, that's a solution for you, not for the service, because they're unlikely to have a successful internet business model that begins, "First, get all your customers to switch their ISP..."
In HD (Score:4, Funny)
Azureus: Watch boy smash face into ground in excruciating detail
HD, ho hum... I'll pass until Smell-o-vision comes around.
Not the same and other things (Score:4, Informative)
Not only that, just about any digital camera is able to capture video that's better than what YouTube offers, the problem is that YouTube is using a fairly old codec. They can get better video with less bandwidth by switching to OnTo's latest codec.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
I don't use BitTorrent much these days but when I did, I always got my client to request small files like NFOs, SFVs, JPEGs and AVI samples first.
There's nothing to stop the client asking for the blocks in order.
HD Cameras for less than $1000??? (Score:3, Insightful)
Canon HV10 $999 (Score:3, Informative)
The Cannon HV10 is available for $999 from Tiger Direct [tigerdirect.com] and other outlets. Described as the world's smallest HD camcorder. 1920x1080 CMOS sensor. 10x optical zoom, image stabilization, etc.
The Sanyo HD1A records 720p MPEG-4 video on SD cards. Sells for around $600-$700. Froogle is your friend.
Please seed! (Score:5, Funny)
content distributors? (Score:2)
Content distributors? Since when is Azureus a content distributor? Is that some sort of entity? I thought Azureus was just a software program implementing a specific internet protocol.
I would think the "content distributors" would be the websites hosting the trackers, etc.
Oh well, maybe it's just a semantic misunderstanding on my part.
XBMC plugin? (Score:2)
I've tried the YouTube Xbox Media Center plugin which kinda works, but the videos are almost unwatchable on a TV.
A Zudeo XBMC plugin would be cool...
BTW, has anyone else noticed that searching for "zudeo" on google results in like ZERO applicable links? Weird...
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
Firefox != World Wide Web
See what I did there? Azureus did not invent Bit Torrent. They weren't even the first clone.
I predict a fork. (Score:2)
From the "About Azureus Inc. [zudeo.com]" page:
Yeah, because that sounds like exactly what I'm looking for in my cross-platform bittorrent client. Or not.
Unfortunately I suspect that Azureus-the-company probably already has the "Azureus"
Re: (Score:2, Interesting)
It's crappy in a way of programming language (Java) but except of it it's really nice and configurable.
And all memory holes of the past have been gone for a long time...
Re:YouTube can kill this in an instant... (Score:4, Funny)
Parent