Why does LimeWire require babysitting?

[ChrisM]

I would like clarification on the way LimeWiire functions when one is not in constant attendance to it on the computer.

Let me explain what I mean by today's example. Before I went to work, I started up LimeWire on my home computer so that others could have access to the files I am sharing and so that my computer would (hopefully) download some of the several dozen incomplete files I have in my Incomplete Library.

However, when I came home that night, LimeWire failed to download any of my requested files, while over 200 files were uploaded to others.

The status column revealed that most of my requested files were "Awaiting Sources," while others "Need More Sources." I highlighted a block of 8 files that needed more sources, and within five minutes, 7 of those files were "Complete" on my hard drive.

My questions about LimeWire's design are these:

* In the ten hours I was away from my home computer, why didn't LimeWire automatically download those requested files (and others) all by itself?

* Why did LimeWire require my personal attendance to give it a kick in the *** before it would retrieve files that obviously were available on the network?

If the developers tell me that the "automatic" feature is something that only the LimeWire Pro version has but the plain vanilla version does not, then I will consider supporting the product's development (once again) by paying for LimeWire Pro.

But if the developers tell me that a user must be physically present in order to give LimeWire constant kicks in the butt in order to trigger it to go out and retrieve files on the network that have taken on the status of "Awaiting Sources" and "Need More Sources," then I would criticize this as a design flaw that ought to be addressed.

After all, what benefit is there to me for leaving my computer on all day if the program is not going to go out and fetch the files I requested? While I am happy to share what I have with others, I was counting on LimeWire to bring me some goodies, so I am disappointed to discover that I apparently have to baby sit in order to get it to behave as I'd like.

Thanks for any insight and feedback.

[trap_jaw4]

Originally posted by ChrisM
* In the ten hours I was away from my home computer, why didn't LimeWire automatically download those requested files (and others) all by itself?

because it ran out of sources and it doesn't look for more sources on its own.

* Why did LimeWire require my personal attendance to give it a kick in the *** before it would retrieve files that obviously were available on the network?

see above

If the developers tell me that the "automatic" feature is something that only the LimeWire Pro version has but the plain vanilla version does not, then I will consider supporting the product's development (once again) by paying for LimeWire Pro.

The pro version does not have this but one of the next versions might re-introduce that feature in one or the other form.

[stryka1]

is there any thing that can be downloaded (an auto-saerching tool), because i dont like babysitting either, if limewire must be treated like a 2 year old then i am going to kaza+kazoom

[ChrisM]

Thanks, Trap_Jaw4, for clarifying LimeWire's current feature capability. I vaguely remember that LimeWire did have that capability, so I was surprised when I found it lacking in this latest iteration of the software, which is why I posted my message seeking confirmation one way or the other.

Of course, it's unfortunate that LimeWire is not currently designed to seek out sources by itself on a periodic basis when a use is not able to be physically present at the computer.

I would like to see a feature/preference added in which I can tell LimeWire to automatically go search for more sources once a file I seek has been sitting in the status column in a "Need More Sources" or "Awaiting Sources" mode, say, for a user-definable period of minutes, say every 30 or 60 minutes.

That would eliminate my need to babysit LimeWire and be constantly present at the computer.

And, if LimeWire's developers promoted this feature right, it could be hyped as a key distinguishing feature separating the plain vanilla version from the PRO version. I would definitely pay for the PRO version, if this feature were (again?) integrated back into the product. I'd bet that millions of other users would, too.

So, what's stopping you, LimeWire developers?

[trap_jaw4]

Originally posted by ChrisM

I would like to see a feature/preference added in which I can tell LimeWire to automatically go search for more sources once a file I seek has been sitting in the status column in a "Need More Sources" or "Awaiting Sources" mode, say, for a user-definable period of minutes, say every 30 or 60 minutes.

The problem is the following: If every user sent one requery per hour, the search traffic could effectively double. So you will not have the option to choose the requery interval.

[ChrisM]

You make an excellent point, Trap_Jaw4, and I must certainly acquiesce to your superior technical knowledge of the LimeWire product.

I would expect that, with the ultimate objective of customer satisfaction in mind --and why else would any company expend time and capital resources to develop any product but to fulfill customers' needs in any given market-- the combined expertise of the technical and marketing people who oversee LimeWire's development will have considered the pros and cons of integrating features that would enhance LimeWire's technical capabilities vis-a-vis the impact such features might have on bandwidth constraints and traffic monitoring.

You maintain that adding (back into the product?) a feature that would allow LimeWire to automatically (i.e, without human intervention or supervision) periodically search for sources that were not found upon the application's launch, would increase the traffic flow, with the implication that this would be a bad thing for the Gnutella network, and, therefore, for its customers. Again, if LimeWire's technical experience in this area causes it to make a reasonable conclusion that implementing such a feature would truly result in a net loss of customer satisfaction, then, of course, it would be wise not to implement such a feature.

However, your argument also implies that it would be a bad thing for customers who are constantly attentive to their LimeWire application and all its pending searches to hit the Resume button in regards to incomplete downloads, or to click on the Find Sources button when a file's status falls into the never-never land of "Awaiting Sources" or "Need More Sources." Do you really expect customers not to ask LimeWire to resume going out on the Internet to find the files they want to download, even if doing so every few minutes would increase the traffic exponentially more than if an unattended LimeWire did so automatically on their behalf at greater intervals?

What is the overall goal here? Is it to minimize traffic, or is it to maximize customer satisfaction by encouraging as many people to be sharing files on the network as possible?

If you consider that customer satisfaction is the only real criterion for implementing enhanced features in a product, would it not be more satisfying to your customer base overall if we were given an incentive for leaving our computers on when we were away from it for extended periods of time, so that others could have more files available for them to upload, and so that those of us who are sharing would have the satisfaction of knowing that the product was working on our behalf even though we were not baby sitting it constantly?

LimeWire developers have the last technical word obviously, but I think the developers ought to blend in marketing considerations as well when they decide what features to integrate and what features are better left on the cutting room floor.

Thanks for the dialogue.

[trap_jaw4]

Originally posted by ChrisM
You maintain that adding (back into the product?) a feature that would allow LimeWire to automatically (i.e, without human intervention or supervision) periodically search for sources that were not found upon the application's launch, would increase the traffic flow, with the implication that this would be a bad thing for the Gnutella network, and, therefore, for its customers. Again, if LimeWire's technical experience in this area causes it to make a reasonable conclusion that implementing such a feature would truly result in a net loss of customer satisfaction, then, of course, it would be wise not to implement such a feature.

I think we have come a long way during the past months. A year ago most queries were dropped before they could reach the larger part of the network because all ultrapeers were simply overloaded. Today and especially when LimeWire 4.2 is released, we will even have a little bandwidth to spare that we could use to handle requeries.
Before automatic requerying is re-introduced it will need a lot of fine-tuning so it doesn't damage the network. I don't know when such a feature is going to be implemented. Probably not in the upcoming 4.2 but possibly in 4.4. - I am using already a requerying-enabled version at home.

What is the overall goal here? Is it to minimize traffic, or is it to maximize customer satisfaction by encouraging as many people to be sharing files on the network as possible?

The overall goal is that manual queries are never dropped because an ultrapeer is overloaded with requeries. - Trust me, if it were up to me, you would have automatic requeries in the next version - but since I don't work there, it remains up to the LimeWire developers (especially LW's CTO) to decide that.