BitTorrent Beefs Up Network Capabilities 164
1sockchuck writes "BitTorrent Inc. is boosting its network capacity as it prepares to become a centralized hub for legal video content. In May, BitTorrent announced a deal with Warner Brothers to distribute its TV and movie content via the BT platform. It has now lined up IP transit for streaming videos at one gigabit per second."
Now who will I choose... (Score:5, Insightful)
pft...1Gbit/s -1 FLAMEBAIT (Score:5, Insightful)
What I want to know is (Score:5, Insightful)
1GB/Sec (Score:2, Insightful)
Re:Bittorrent -- distro paid for by consumers (Score:5, Insightful)
If you don't wanna contribute to the upload, you gotta pay them more because they need a bigger out pipe.
Streaming? (Score:3, Insightful)
Any attempt to explain is appreciated. Thanks!
J
Solution looking for a problem (Score:3, Insightful)
I'm all for P2P where it is needed, but video over BitTorrent sounds like a solution looking for a problem.
Re:pft...1Gbit/s -1 FLAMEBAIT (Score:4, Insightful)
Re:Bittorrent -- distro paid for by consumers (Score:5, Insightful)
The endproduct of this will be more expensive or flaky internet connections. If the oversold bandwidth that was chugging along happily suddenly fills up, everyone connected is screwed. Until the ISP upgrades their stuff accordingly (which could well mean laying new/more fiber), everyone has a crappy connection. Someone's gotta pay for the upgrades, and you can bet that those costs are going to make it to the consumers, and most likely fairly quickly. Either by changing their pricing structure, molesting upload bandwidth into nothingness, or starting a per-bit charge. Or leading up to tiered connections.
However it happens, you pay twice.
Re:pft...1Gbit/s -1 FLAMEBAIT (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:pft...1Gbit/s -1 FLAMEBAIT (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:pft...1Gbit/s -1 FLAMEBAIT (Score:4, Insightful)
Re:I'd be really excited about this, if... (Score:3, Insightful)
FYI, I use Shaw as well and find that uTorrent [utorrent.com] can get around Ellacoya just fine using protcol encryption. Went from around 10k to hitting the caps with that one setting.
Cheers
Re:Solution looking for a problem (Score:2, Insightful)
If you download a nice encoded X264 file, plug your tv into computer, stereo into computer - you get lovely TV quality video with NO SKIPPING and BUFFERING. I just set up a few shows I want to watch, go to work, come home and watch them.
Now imagine a MythTV et all set top box with RSS feeds of bittorrents....
Re:pft...1Gbit/s -1 FLAMEBAIT (Score:3, Insightful)
BitTorrent, while requiring trackers, is a distributed network. There are no specific 'areas' where files are held that could possibly be subject to **AA lawsuits (and others). The problem with your newsgroup situation is that the files are hosted on a server, owned and operated by someone. People can connect to that server, and the copyright holders can flex the DMCA and have your ISP shut the connection down. Thus, BT is a very good way of sharing bandwidth on a P2P basis where it is totally impractical and very difficult to trace the people in a swarm. See? BitTorrent is really, really good for TPB stuff and illegal things -- hence it took off and became a buzzword of sorts.
Now that Hollywood are in on this hip-new-Bit-wave-thingy, the legal downloads will begin. Realistically, the Hollywood content providers couldn't give a rat's ass about the internet... they just want to save some cash on bandwidth and server costs by using BitTorrent, which (as you say, inefficiently) takes the bandwidth burden away and pushes it onto the users. It would probably cost the Hollywood guys a lot more to set up NNTP-type servers across the globe, hence that idea will never happen. Although, why they're too cheap to use something like Akamai beats me.
The Linux distros are in a similar position. They use BT as a means of serving large files like DVD ISO images, without costing a fortune in server and bandwidth costs. I mean, lets face it, there are many distros that are just a couple of guys in a basement... without BT they'd never be able to distribute their stuff. They certainly can't afford the infrastructure, server and bandwidth costs of NNTP-type global distribution.
Oh, and before I go. Your home DSL line will probably be capped at 1.5 Mbps download, but around 384 Kbps upload. Which do you think matters more for BT?
Re:pft...1Gbit/s -1 FLAMEBAIT (Score:2, Insightful)
Also the fact that most ISP's have already abandoned NNTP servers (in spirit if not in body). That's why everyone who is serious about Usenet now has to pay 10-15$ a month for a commercial service like Easynews, Giganews or Astraweb. I used to, back when I had a fat pipe because I did most of my binary xfers through Usenet and it was gorgeous. I still prefer it over Bittorrent for speed and reliability, but since BT is so simple and has tons of users I'd be foolish to ignore it, as I can reach a much larger audience with an easy-to-seed torrent, rather than uploading to a newsserver for hours, then having to honor fill requests for those sheep who are trying to use their ISP's broken NNTP server.
Re:pft...1Gbit/s -1 FLAMEBAIT (Score:2, Insightful)
What you'll really want is an akamai-approach, but that way the studios can't hand off the costs to the ISPs like a bittorrent download does.
It's a press release (Score:2, Insightful)