Thread: Which file transfering method will win? Torrent or files hosting like rapidshare?

I am not so sure about the history of how and when torrent speed has catched up with 3rd party files hosting like megaupload, rapidshare ....etc. But I am sure that my download speed from some private trackers is almost comparable to megaupload and rapidshare.

I remember the days when downloading a torrent was a nightmare due to slow speed and huge HUGE number of leechers. It may no longer be true in many private trackers. However, there are still many cons like:
+ You have to seed back at least 1/1.
+ You must rent a seedbox on site like SCT...
+ People are trading invite... etc.
+ Have your computer seed overnight...

Imagine that many trackers now a day asked for your donation as well. Site like SCC earn 2000 euro per month I believe SCT also has that income. 2000 euro is 3000 usd. hello!!!

3rd party file hosting service:
Rapidshare, megaupload etc..., only require you to pay for subscription. I meant you will get your max speed on those site with a premium account. And that's end of story. Further more, unlike torrent you only upload once... and that's it. So convenience.

Conclusion:
Who will win in the long run? Although P2P is more efficient, there must be a seeder somewhere seeding in order for you to grab anything. And if you saw a very old torrent... good luck. Conversely, most file hosting companies won't delete your files as long as the uploader is premium member.

I think that DDL might be the way of the future. I hate to say it but I think that's where it's leaning towards. Check out warez-bb if you don't believe me. It's a huge thriving forum with many many files.

Hasn't torrents won already?

DDL has been around for ages and it's not going anywhere.

Torrents are superior in many ways. Hence the reason that they have gained popularity so rapidly.

Originally Posted by dontdothat

1. You have to seed back at least 1/1.
2. You must rent a seedbox on site like SCT...
3. People are trading invite... etc.
4. Have your computer seed overnight....

1. Depends on what tracker(s) you are using. There are some very decent ratio-less trackers around that doesn't require this. Most trackers also has freeleech torrents that you can use to improve your ratio if you're on a slow connection.
2. Not true at all. It's definetely a plus, but not a requirement. Keeping up on SCT is actually pretty easy too (without a seedbox), because there are so many packs (which are all freeleech) you can use to build a buffer.
3. Not really *that* much of an issue in my eyes. The real problem is people who cheat or abuse the trackers, but these usually tends to get banned pretty quickly anyway.
4. Not true either. It may depend on what tracker(s) you are using, but I'm seeing many trackers these days that have rules like "Seed the torrent for 48 hours within 7 days" or similar. Also, if you rent a seedbox then there's no need to keep your computer running either.

Originally Posted by dontdothat

Imagine that many trackers now a day asked for your donation as well. Site like SCC earn 2000 euro per month I believe SCT also has that income. 2000 euro is 3000 usd. hello!!!

Nobody forces you to donate, that's completely optional. And those money goes towards keeping the tracker running + making improvements, so I don't really see a problem with it.

Originally Posted by dontdothat

3rd party file hosting service:
Rapidshare, megaupload etc..., only require you to pay for subscription. I meant you will get your max speed on those site with a premium account. And that's end of story. Further more, unlike torrent you only upload once... and that's it. So convenience.

Many of these services also limit your monthly download capacity. And there are far less content available, and illegal content often tends to get removed from the servers pretty quickly.

Originally Posted by dontdothat

Conclusion:
Who will win in the long run? Although P2P is more efficient, there must be a seeder somewhere seeding in order for you to grab anything. And if you saw a very old torrent... good luck. Conversely, most file hosting companies won't delete your files as long as the uploader is premium member.

I don't think one has to "win" nececarilly. There's more than enough room for both. :001_smile:

If these 3rd party services got as popular as torrents though, I'm pretty sure they'd be shut down pretty quickly. They are much easier to target and they are actually doing something illegal (because they host everything on their own servers), whereas trackers are merely indexing sites that allow users to share files between each other (so the tracker/torrent site in itself isn't doing anything illegal).


My two cents. :001_smile:

DDL is not really that new, it is true that it is picking up its popularity. Back to you question, I think torrent is winning and it will keep winning:
1. For 99% trackers out there, donations are optional if you just want to download, if you use it wisely, you will never need to donate to keep you ratio.
2. Sometimes you need a seedbox to have better torrenting experience. You always need to pay subscription if you want to have a decent DDL experience, sometimes there is a download limit even you have paid the subscription. A seedbox does not cost much more than the subscription, but you can download from as many trackers as you want, but subscription only gives you access to 1 service provider.
3. Speed. For torrent, I can reach 10MB easily on my seedbox, and 3MB when FTP files back to my PC. It is really hard to get such speed via DDL.
4. Scripts. I can download automatically using different scripts. It is hard for DDL to do this.
5. Trust. For all my private trackers, I trust the contents there. However, for RS, MU links, they can be dodge.

Just my 2 cents

I personally believe thathas completely hit the nail on the head Aeryn237. DDL has been aound and will stay around for a very long time but it is in a completely different league to torrents. With torrents everybody is sharing, each computer is giving a little to make a whole which is a far for efficient way of transferring files.

Also, limits do get filled fast and many people (like myself) do not want to pay for a premium to download from hosting sites. Torrents are the best way to go and soon the film industry is going to the same. There have been rumours to release films on dvd, blu-ray and torrent-like server downloads all at the same time.

torrent is way better. i am not going to pay to rapidshare

I completely agree with Aeryn237's "2 cents" here. Theres enough room for both, but if any one direct hosting service got very popular, it would be very easy to target. Also, torrents are free, so im all for them