Company of heroes patch download

[tigersty1e]

So the new Company of Heroes patch downloader forced me to download some bittoreent.

I never hear good things about these things.

How's the virus or anything you've heard about this?

 

[Andrew1990]

Its fine. Torrents are safe as long as you know how to protect yourself. Also, I am sure they made sure no one can interfere with the transmission of data.

I was kind of mad though having to upload a game patch with no other alternative.

 

[tigersty1e]

It's not necessarily the interfereing of data.

I'm sort of disturbed that I have to "waste" data stream to upload data.

And someone can have some malware invested files that transmit to my computer.

 

[soccerballtux]

Originally posted by: tigersty1e
It's not necessarily the interfereing of data.

I'm sort of disturbed that I have to "waste" data stream to upload data.

And someone can have some malware invested files that transmit to my computer.

No, they can't, because the files are MD5'd.
You drank the coolade, bittorrent is secure and much faster/more reliable than trying to find some mirror. It's as secure as you make it. IE don't download and run "Wolverine movie (full unrleased).exe" and you'll be fine.

If Filefront had gone down we'd see a lot more of this. It's about time anyways, I don't see why Filefront should have to host some 500MB patch when bittorrent will do just fine. You're not "wasting" bandwidth anyways, most people have unlimited and the caps are something new that is probably going to get legislated away.

What they should do to minimize costs is release a patch on bittorrent, wait a week, and then release it on their mirrors. That would force people to learn about this bittorrent thing instead of just being lazy and heading to Filefront. There's a million people that would happily seed the patches, I know I would; because nobody has any problem seeding legitimate files (take a look at Linux CD torrents, there's 100 seeders and about 8 leachers at any given moment; and I can download the disk at anywhere from 700kBytes to ~3MBytes/second depending on the torrent. With an HTTP I'm usually limited to 1.3MBytes/s if I'm lucky; if it's from a sub par mirror (IE not filefront) then it usually runs at like 300-450kBytes/s (molasses when you're talking about 800mByte patches).

 

[Fenixgoon]

Originally posted by: soccerballtux

Originally posted by: tigersty1e
It's not necessarily the interfereing of data.

I'm sort of disturbed that I have to "waste" data stream to upload data.

And someone can have some malware invested files that transmit to my computer.

No, they can't, because the files are MD5'd.
You drank the coolade, bittorrent is secure and much faster/more reliable than trying to find some mirror. It's as secure as you make it. IE don't download and run "Wolverine movie (full unrleased).exe" and you'll be fine.

If Filefront had gone down we'd see a lot more of this. It's about time anyways, I don't see why Filefront should have to host some 500MB patch when bittorrent will do just fine. You're not "wasting" bandwidth anyways, most people have unlimited and the caps are something new that is probably going to get legislated away.

What they should do to minimize costs is release a patch on bittorrent, wait a week, and then release it on their mirrors. That would force people to learn about this bittorrent thing instead of just being lazy and heading to Filefront. There's a million people that would happily seed the patches, I know I would; because nobody has any problem seeding legitimate files (take a look at Linux CD torrents, there's 100 seeders and about 8 leachers at any given moment; and I can download the disk at anywhere from 700kBytes to ~3MBytes/second depending on the torrent. With an HTTP I'm usually limited to 1.3MBytes/s if I'm lucky; if it's from a sub par mirror (IE not filefront) then it usually runs at like 300-450kBytes/s (molasses when you're talking about 800mByte patches).

the good part is that fileplanet, filefront, etc. could still act in their current capacity as hubs for these types of files, but having the torrents instead of the files themselves would dramatically reduce their costs.

the only downside is that there are so many files (especially old games and whatnot) that more obscure things might never have a seeder, so HTTP would be the only way of obtaining them.

 

[Lonyo]

Originally posted by: soccerballtux

Originally posted by: tigersty1e
It's not necessarily the interfereing of data.

I'm sort of disturbed that I have to "waste" data stream to upload data.

And someone can have some malware invested files that transmit to my computer.

No, they can't, because the files are MD5'd.
You drank the coolade, bittorrent is secure and much faster/more reliable than trying to find some mirror. It's as secure as you make it. IE don't download and run "Wolverine movie (full unrleased).exe" and you'll be fine.

If Filefront had gone down we'd see a lot more of this. It's about time anyways, I don't see why Filefront should have to host some 500MB patch when bittorrent will do just fine. You're not "wasting" bandwidth anyways, most people have unlimited and the caps are something new that is probably going to get legislated away.

What they should do to minimize costs is release a patch on bittorrent, wait a week, and then release it on their mirrors. That would force people to learn about this bittorrent thing instead of just being lazy and heading to Filefront. There's a million people that would happily seed the patches, I know I would; because nobody has any problem seeding legitimate files (take a look at Linux CD torrents, there's 100 seeders and about 8 leachers at any given moment; and I can download the disk at anywhere from 700kBytes to ~3MBytes/second depending on the torrent. With an HTTP I'm usually limited to 1.3MBytes/s if I'm lucky; if it's from a sub par mirror (IE not filefront) then it usually runs at like 300-450kBytes/s (molasses when you're talking about 800mByte patches).

Most people in the US may have unlimited bandwidth, but not everyone is in the US.

 

[soccerballtux]

Originally posted by: Fenixgoon

Originally posted by: soccerballtux

Originally posted by: tigersty1e
It's not necessarily the interfereing of data.

I'm sort of disturbed that I have to "waste" data stream to upload data.

And someone can have some malware invested files that transmit to my computer.

No, they can't, because the files are MD5'd.
You drank the coolade, bittorrent is secure and much faster/more reliable than trying to find some mirror. It's as secure as you make it. IE don't download and run "Wolverine movie (full unrleased).exe" and you'll be fine.

If Filefront had gone down we'd see a lot more of this. It's about time anyways, I don't see why Filefront should have to host some 500MB patch when bittorrent will do just fine. You're not "wasting" bandwidth anyways, most people have unlimited and the caps are something new that is probably going to get legislated away.

What they should do to minimize costs is release a patch on bittorrent, wait a week, and then release it on their mirrors. That would force people to learn about this bittorrent thing instead of just being lazy and heading to Filefront. There's a million people that would happily seed the patches, I know I would; because nobody has any problem seeding legitimate files (take a look at Linux CD torrents, there's 100 seeders and about 8 leachers at any given moment; and I can download the disk at anywhere from 700kBytes to ~3MBytes/second depending on the torrent. With an HTTP I'm usually limited to 1.3MBytes/s if I'm lucky; if it's from a sub par mirror (IE not filefront) then it usually runs at like 300-450kBytes/s (molasses when you're talking about 800mByte patches).

the good part is that fileplanet, filefront, etc. could still act in their current capacity as hubs for these types of files, but having the torrents instead of the files themselves would dramatically reduce their costs.

the only downside is that there are so many files (especially old games and whatnot) that more obscure things might never have a seeder, so HTTP would be the only way of obtaining them.

You can set up a server as a full time seeder for torrents. IE, the client/leacher (your computer) checks it out and sees a seeder (the server that would have been serving files via http) and downloads it over the bittorrent protocol.

 

[soccerballtux]

Originally posted by: Lonyo

Originally posted by: soccerballtux

Originally posted by: tigersty1e
It's not necessarily the interfereing of data.

I'm sort of disturbed that I have to "waste" data stream to upload data.

And someone can have some malware invested files that transmit to my computer.

No, they can't, because the files are MD5'd.
You drank the coolade, bittorrent is secure and much faster/more reliable than trying to find some mirror. It's as secure as you make it. IE don't download and run "Wolverine movie (full unrleased).exe" and you'll be fine.

If Filefront had gone down we'd see a lot more of this. It's about time anyways, I don't see why Filefront should have to host some 500MB patch when bittorrent will do just fine. You're not "wasting" bandwidth anyways, most people have unlimited and the caps are something new that is probably going to get legislated away.

What they should do to minimize costs is release a patch on bittorrent, wait a week, and then release it on their mirrors. That would force people to learn about this bittorrent thing instead of just being lazy and heading to Filefront. There's a million people that would happily seed the patches, I know I would; because nobody has any problem seeding legitimate files (take a look at Linux CD torrents, there's 100 seeders and about 8 leachers at any given moment; and I can download the disk at anywhere from 700kBytes to ~3MBytes/second depending on the torrent. With an HTTP I'm usually limited to 1.3MBytes/s if I'm lucky; if it's from a sub par mirror (IE not filefront) then it usually runs at like 300-450kBytes/s (molasses when you're talking about 800mByte patches).

Most people in the US may have unlimited bandwidth, but not everyone is in the US.

That'd change if enough people, aka the gaming community, started fussing. That's part of my push for it over here, too; to hopefully cut off the ISPs before they can start doing what they're doing to you guys. If bittorrent became the defacto standard for patch deliveries (Windows Update, games, new map packs for your games, the XboxLive marketplace, etc.)...

To be fair though, the bittorrent programmer(s) could try to make the program prioritize peers which are closer (in the network) thereby reducing cost to the ISPs. ISPs might be a little more friendly if we treated them better.

Does your bandwidth limit ever increase? Bandwidth is not a limited resource like power-- computers are always getting faster and in 2 years there will be hardware that can handle 10x the traffic. Other utilities do not have upgrade options like that...

 

[Piuc2020]

There's also the issue of many computers and ISP having issues with ports and red lights on torrent clients.

Anyways, bittorrent is just a way of saving bandwidth costs, in most cases direct downloads of ftps will be better except with some users with blistering connections.

 

[Newbian]

A lot of mmorpg's distribute a patch these days with torrents to save untold amounts of bandwidth.

 

[Golgatha]

Originally posted by: Newbian
A lot of mmorpg's distribute a patch these days with torrents to save untold amounts of bandwidth.

Doesn't World of Warcraft use Bittorrent? I know that most Linux distributions have a Bittorrent option too.

 

[ViviTheMage]

Originally posted by: Golgatha

Originally posted by: Newbian
A lot of mmorpg's distribute a patch these days with torrents to save untold amounts of bandwidth.

Doesn't World of Warcraft use Bittorrent? I know that most Linux distributions have a Bittorrent option too.

yup

 

[Golgatha]

Originally posted by: Fenixgoon

Originally posted by: soccerballtux

Originally posted by: tigersty1e
It's not necessarily the interfereing of data.

I'm sort of disturbed that I have to "waste" data stream to upload data.

And someone can have some malware invested files that transmit to my computer.

No, they can't, because the files are MD5'd.
You drank the coolade, bittorrent is secure and much faster/more reliable than trying to find some mirror. It's as secure as you make it. IE don't download and run "Wolverine movie (full unrleased).exe" and you'll be fine.

If Filefront had gone down we'd see a lot more of this. It's about time anyways, I don't see why Filefront should have to host some 500MB patch when bittorrent will do just fine. You're not "wasting" bandwidth anyways, most people have unlimited and the caps are something new that is probably going to get legislated away.

What they should do to minimize costs is release a patch on bittorrent, wait a week, and then release it on their mirrors. That would force people to learn about this bittorrent thing instead of just being lazy and heading to Filefront. There's a million people that would happily seed the patches, I know I would; because nobody has any problem seeding legitimate files (take a look at Linux CD torrents, there's 100 seeders and about 8 leachers at any given moment; and I can download the disk at anywhere from 700kBytes to ~3MBytes/second depending on the torrent. With an HTTP I'm usually limited to 1.3MBytes/s if I'm lucky; if it's from a sub par mirror (IE not filefront) then it usually runs at like 300-450kBytes/s (molasses when you're talking about 800mByte patches).

the good part is that fileplanet, filefront, etc. could still act in their current capacity as hubs for these types of files, but having the torrents instead of the files themselves would dramatically reduce their costs.

the only downside is that there are so many files (especially old games and whatnot) that more obscure things might never have a seeder, so HTTP would be the only way of obtaining them.

Yes, Bittorrent works great for current patches, but HTTP/FTP is the only way to go for older patches or patches for older games. I keep a directory of patches for all my games. It's grown to quite a nice size since I keep mods in there too. I am the go-to guy for patches at LAN parties.

 

[soccerballtux]

If Firefox would implement a modularized bittorrent (which could be loaded whenever you click a torrent file but not before) that would be great.

 

[ibex333]

Originally posted by: tigersty1e
So the new Company of Heroes patch downloader forced me to download some bittoreent.

I never hear good things about these things.

How's the virus or anything you've heard about this?

I loled... No seriously, I did.

Hell I might even use this as my sig on piratebay or mininova if I could have one.