P2P -- Engadget

P2P posts

Wi-Fi Direct enabling P2P communications amongst WiFi wares, scaring Bluetooth half to death

by Darren Murph posted Oct 14th 2009 at 12:01AM

Hear that Bluetooth? That's the sound of competition... finally. After years of waiting for some sort of serious rival in the short-range communication realm, the Wi-Fi Alliance is doing what it should've done eons ago. Starting sometime in mid-2010 (if all goes to plan, of course), a Wi-Fi Direct specification will be published, enabling WiFi'd devices to connect to one another without some sort of WLAN hotspot nearby. Previously, the standard was codenamed Wi-Fi peer-to-peer, as it gives printers, mobile handsets, human interface devices, cameras, laptops and a host of other wireless wares the ability to talk to one another without first consulting an access point. We're told that devices will be able to make "one-to-one" connections or talk amongst a group, and WPA2 security will be bundled in to keep the ill-willed sniffers at bay. Call us crazy, but we get this feeling we're going to dig this protocol -- now, if only we could actually count on seeing shipping products before we're too old to enjoy it, we'd be set.

Continue reading Wi-Fi Direct enabling P2P communications amongst WiFi wares, scaring Bluetooth half to death

FCC to propose new net neutrality rules disallowing data discrimination

by Darren Murph posted Sep 18th 2009 at 4:42PM

Based on what we're hearing, a slate of soon-to-be-proposed FCC rules may stop the likes of Comcast from discriminating against P2P applications on their networks, and AT&T sure will have a tougher time justifying why it won't let the iPhone's version of SlingPlayer run on 3G while giving WinMo and BlackBerry users all the bandwidth they can handle. Julius Genachowski, the new chairman of the entity, is slated to discuss the new rules on Monday, though he isn't expected to dig too deep into the minutiae. Essentially, the guidelines will "prevent wireless companies from blocking internet applications and prevent them from discriminating (or acting as gatekeepers) [against] web content and services." We know what you're thinking: "Huzzah!" And in general, that's probably the right reaction to have as a consumer, but one has to wonder how network quality for all will be affected if everyone is cut loose to, well, cut loose. Oh, and if this forces telecoms to deploy more cell sites to handle the influx in traffic, you can rest assured that the bill will be passed on to you. Ain't nuthin' free, kids.

[Thanks to everyone who sent this in]

Pirate Bay owners announce give-and-take model, proclaim "filesharers are our best friends"

by Darren Murph posted Jul 18th 2009 at 4:58PM

When the Pirate Bay was suddenly and unexpectedly commandeered by Global Gaming Factory late last month, only a few clues were dropped as to how the new site would proceed as a legally acceptable entity. Now, however, the owners are speaking up, and their business plan sure sounds unorthodox, if not fatuous in nature. In a new report, we're told that the new face of TPB should appear in around a month, and with the refresh will come a handful of "give-and-take" pay models that will somehow please both customers and the top brass within the music industry. Here's how Hans Pandeya, the chief executive of GGF, explains things:

"The more you give, the more you get. For the great majority, [the new service] will be free of charge, for a minority it will actually make them money, and for a small portion it will cost them. We know that unless we're able to create revenues for the filesharers they'll just move on to the next free site. Filesharers are our best friends."

Mr. Pandeya also affirmed that his outfit was currently in negotiations with some of the music industry's biggest players, and while he wouldn't list 'em by name, he did note that things have been "positive" so far. Another interesting aspect of all this is how it expects to generate revenue outside of actual music consumers. Reportedly, the new site will raise cash "through advertising and by making network data traffic cheaper and more efficient for internet service providers, which would be done by making the filesharing more local, allowing users in the same city to be interconnected as opposed to swapping data across multiple borders." Is P2P 2.0 upon us? Is the conventional subscription model about to be turned upside down by a most unlikely source? If Hans' dreams come true, it sure seems possible.

Compro showcases VideoMate T1000W network media streamer

by Darren Murph posted Apr 26th 2009 at 6:33PM

We can't tell you precisely how much we've been yearning for an L-shaped media streamer, but we can tell you that Compro has made the hopes, dreams and wishes of quite a few content junkies come true with the debut of its VideoMate T1000W. Showcased late last week at SecuTech Expo 2009, this network media streamer is an all-in-one solution that handles content shuffling, TV tuning, internal storing of files, expansion ports, WiFi access, support for USB DVD players and even BitTorrent files. As expected, pretty much any file format you could think of is supported here, though the DVB-T tuner won't do us Yanks much good in the homeland. Fudzilla asserts that the unit should hit shelves overseas this May, though the £200 ($293) price tag just might scare away most potential buyers.

[Thanks, TheLostSwede]

Datto gets official with Box 2 Box specs, pricing

by Donald Melanson posted Jan 24th 2009 at 6:09AM

Datto dropped a few details about its Box 2 Box peer-to-peer network attached storage device at CES earlier this month, but it's only now actually dished out the complete specs for the device, and the all-important pricing details. As we had heard, the P2P NAS is available in 250GB, 500GB, and 1TB versions, which'll set you back $350, $380 or $480 if you pre-order them now, or $620, $660 or $850 if you go for the twin-pack of each (non pre-order prices are a bit higher). Each of those are effectively computers in their own right, and come equipped with a 1.6GHz Atom processor, 1GB of DDR2 RAM, four USB 2.0 ports, 7,200 rpm 3.5-inch hard drives with up to 32MB cache, and a Linux-based OS of some sort. Hit up the link below to get your order in, and look for them to start shipping in the first week of March.

[Thanks, Austin]

Myka's BitTorrent-friendly home media player now in production

by Darren Murph posted Jan 18th 2009 at 5:38AM

It's been just about ten full months since Myka's BitTorrent box was formally introduced to Earthlings, but it seems like the wheels are finally turning on production way across the way in China. According to a promising update on Myka's official website, "production is in full swing," which means that boxes should start arriving to eager consumers in around four to six weeks. For those unaware, this here box pulls down torrents as you sleep and then plays 'em back nicely on your connected HDTV. Users can also load up additional media on the inbuilt 80GB, 160GB or 500GB hard drive, but first you'll need to hand over $299, $349 or $459 depending on just how capacious you like your media servers.

[Thanks, Julio]

AT&T tells the FCC it'll cut off wireless P2P users

by Donald Melanson posted Jul 30th 2008 at 12:39PM

It looks like the FCC's investigation into Comcast's questionable traffic management is turning up a number of interesting details, the latest of which comes from AT&T's Robert Quinn, who told FCC Commissioner Robert McDowell that, "use of a P2P file sharing application would constitute a material breach of contract for which the user's service could be terminated." Quinn was apparently quick to add, however, that AT&T hasn't yet kicked anyone off the network for using P2P. Still, Commissioner McDowell apparently intends to use AT&T's statement to argue against the FCC's forthcoming order that contends Comcast secretly downgraded P2P traffic, saying that Comcast's throttling of traffic isn't as bad as AT&T blocking it all together. The merits of that argument aside, as TechDirt points out, given that AT&T's beef with P2P is that it makes use of "continuous (rather than bursty) transmissions at high data rates," their position does open up a number of interesting questions about streaming apps like Pandora, which are similarly data-intensive but, last we checked, still working just fine on AT&T's network.

[Via Tech Dirt]

Qtrax announces deal with Universal for free music downloads

by Nilay Patel posted May 7th 2008 at 2:02PM

It's taken a few months for Qtrax to actually score a contract with one of the major labels after announcing in January that it would offer free, legal downloads of over 25 million tracks, but it looks like the company has finally succeeded in spearing itself a whale. Universal is the first major on board, joining bankrupt indie TVT, and Qtrax says the deal is for "all" of Universal's music. Of course, in true Qtrax form, there might not actually be a contract yet -- Universal spokespeople would only confirm an "agreement," but "declined to elaborate or to say whether a contract has been signed." Sigh. Well, the first one's always the hardest, right?

[Thanks, Steve Z.]

QNAP delivers BitTorrent-lovin' TS-109 Pro II and TS-209 Pro II NAS drives

by Darren Murph posted Apr 24th 2008 at 2:15PM

QNAP's TS-109 / TS-209 NAS drives weren't anything to sneeze at, but the company's looking to improve overall responsiveness and speed up BitTorrent download performance with a pair of successors. The one-bay TS-109 Pro II and two-bay TS-209 Pro II both include a potent 500MHz Marvell processor and 256MB of DDR2 RAM, which is double the memory stuffed within the prior iterations. You'll also find a new and improved BT engine that promises "the [same] level of P2P download speed as PC-based BT downloads," built-in Joomla! CMS 1.5.1, scheduled backup / logging applications, DivX-friendly TwonkyMedia v4.4.4 and support for DLNA / NFS / SMB multimedia sharing. Sorry, no pricing deets to share at the moment.

Comcast backs off BitTorrent, will continue to manage internet traffic

by Darren Murph posted Mar 27th 2008 at 10:06AM

Although Comcast has been beating around the proverbial bush about its data-meddling ways, it seems the pressure from the recent FCC investigation efforts have forced it to play nice. Reportedly, the firm is getting set to (begrudgingly, we presume) announce that it will "stop targeting BitTorrent on the internet." More specifically, the cable company will purportedly "boost broadband capacity" in order to make things speedier all around, but details on this tidbit were unsurprisingly absent. Nevertheless, BitTorrent has also agreed to make its software "more efficient," but those hoping that Comcast would leave well enough alone are in for even more disappointment. The outfit still plans on managing traffic on the 'net (standard practice, we know), but Tony Werner, executive VP and CTO, noted that it was "working hard on a different approach that is protocol-agnostic during peak periods."

[Thanks, Mike and Kenneth]

Verizon gloms onto "P4P," doubles up on the competition

by Paul Miller posted Mar 14th 2008 at 9:43AM

We're guessing we're not the only one to have never heard of P4P before now, but there's probably a good reason for that: it doesn't exist yet. See, P4P is designed to speed up peer-to-peer file transfers and alleviate network strain by using information about network conditions and network topology in order to increase routing efficiency -- more bits, less work. The problem is that you're going to need service provider cooperation to pull that off (P4P stands for Proactive network Provider Participation for P2P) and now Verizon has signed on to take the concept to the next level. What's not clear yet is whether only specific, commercial P2P apps will be able to benefit from this tech, so that carriers can make sure everything is on the up and up, but with tested performance improvements as high as 600 percent, we sure hope this is coming soon to a torrent client near you.

[Thanks, Ehren]

Qtrax announces deals with EMI and Sony / ATV, still can't distribute content

by Nilay Patel posted Mar 4th 2008 at 5:34PM

Man, Qtrax just can't stop over-hyping and under-delivering, can it? The company's trumpeting new deals today with EMI Publishing, Sony / ATV Music Publishing, and TVT Records, but of the three deals, only TVT will actually have music available for download. The deals with EMI and Sony / ATV are for publishing rights only, and since publishing companies only represent songwriters, and don't actually own the rights to the song recordings, Qtrax still can't offer songs to consumers. It's confusing, but Qtrax needs both types of deals to make things work. Still, considering that the EMI and Sony agreements are extensions of existing agreements, it's a little strange for Qtrax to hype them up -- if you're keeping score at home, this is essentially the same sort of half-truth Qtrax launched under, so it's pretty ballsy of the company to try and pull it again. On the other hand, getting TVT on board is no small feat -- TVT artists include Lil Jon, Ambulance LTD, Dude 'N Em, The Polyphonic Spree, and The Cinematics, so it looks like Qtrax might be getting better at this whole "signing actual deals with labels" thing.

Update: We had said in an earlier version of this post that several major labels had denied having deals in place with Qtrax -- while that's still true, the information was a few weeks old. The deals announced today are for real, but until Qtrax sorts out actual content-distribution rights, nothing's really changed.

[Via Tech Digest]

Qtrax goes "live," tracks nowhere to be found

by Paul Miller posted Jan 28th 2008 at 11:30PM

Sorry to disappoint, but Qtrax is falling just a bit short of its promised 25 million tracks at launch. Qtrax busted out its software in "beta" this evening, but isn't offering a single song -- or even a working music browser. The application is a barely skinned version of the open source Mozilla-based Songbird music player, which has certainly come a long ways since its infancy, and which means Qtrax has done just about nothing for you yet -- other than lie about label deals. When you launch the application it helpfully points you to a placeholder page from a Oracle application server, and that's all you'll be getting until Qtrax manages to get label deals sorted, which isn't looking likely at this point.

Update: 4 hours later and we can see music. About 10 million tracks by their count. However, clicking download results in an error message, "Downloads coming soon!!" How soon, exactly? Would that be after the contracts are signed?

[Thanks to everyone who sent this in]

Read - Qtrax
Read - Music labels say no deal

Qtrax promises unlimited, legal P2P downloads from all major labels. Probably too good to be true.

by Paul Miller posted Jan 28th 2008 at 10:35AM

You know what your mother always used to say about things that seem too good to be true, but the deafening amount of hype and hyperbole being thrown about in reference to the "game changing" Qtrax with "25 million tracks" is quite distracting enough to take note of. According to the Qtrax website, the P2P client -- Windows only, a Mac version is slated for March 18th -- will be available at midnight EST, but while Qtrax is confident of its supposed deals with the majors, a few of those labels claim to be short of an actual deal with Qtrax. The business model is simple enough: DRM'd tracks count the number of times they're played and then report back to the mother ship -- which will divvy up revenue based on ad sales. It sounds like there's PlaysForSure under the hood, and Qtrax claims it'll have an iPod-friendly version ready before too long, but there's a disturbing lack of detail on the official site. There is $30 million of VC funding behind the venture, so they clearly expect some results, but $30 million and high hopes certainly is no guarantee of label support of a crazy -- and perhaps entirely overdue -- scheme like this. We'll be certainly watching for what happens at midnight.

[Thanks to everyone who sent this in]

Read - Qtrax
Read - Times Online (It's a go)
Read - NEWS.com.au (Labels back away)
Read - ZDNet UK (Rupert Goodwins weighs in)

MPAA admits it overstated the effects of college piracy, times it made a beer run

by Nilay Patel posted Jan 23rd 2008 at 4:04PM

The MPAA has never been too high on college kids -- remember the dishonor roll? -- but it looks like Hollywood set is bummed about not being invited to that last kegger, because the MPAA is now admitting that it drastically overstated the effect of college downloading in previous studies. Back in 2005, the MPAA claimed that a whopping 44 percent of revenue losses came directly at the hands of carefree coeds nationwide, and used that number to pressure colleges into enforcing harsher downloading policies and even propose legislation currently before Congress that would tie federal education funds to copyright enforcement requirements. We're not sure why the industry is now backing off that 44 percent number, but it's now saying that "human error" resulted in a miscalculation, and the revenue loss from college piracy is more like 15 percent -- a number which is further disputed by campus IT groups, who say it should be more like three percent. Of course, while it's good to see the MPAA take an upfront stance on this, simply admitting you're sleazy doesn't actually wipe the slime off, so let's see how the industry approaches future studies, shall we?