|
Which Client is Most Popular? From what I uploaded over the last few days here are the clients that people used. At 12 GBytes. BearShare 65.12% LimeWire 18.54% Gnucleus 5.57% MyNapster 4.22% Gnotella 4.03% PHEX 1.91% Other* 0.61% ---------------------------------- At 18.5 GBytes. BearShare 60.54% LimeWire 18.98% Gnotella 9.90% Gnucleus 5.37% MyNapster 2.90% PHEX 1.26% Other* 1.05% ---------------------------------- At 24.6 GBytes uploaded and 10,900 Files uploaded. BearShare 64.92% LimeWire 17.37% Gnotella 8.47% Gnucleus 4.83% MyNapster 2.52% Other* 0.95% PHEX 0.94% ---------------------------------- At: 35 GBytes uploaded 14,329 Files uploaded 3,719 Unique IP addresses uploaded to BearShare 61.58% LimeWire 21.67% Gnotella 7.92% Gnucleus 4.42% MyNapster 2.35% Other* 1.17% PHEX 0.89% ---------------------------------- At: 49 GBytes uploaded 18,124 Files uploaded 4,667 Unique IP addresses uploaded to BearShare 62.12% LimeWire 17.17% Gnucleus 11.89% Gnotella 5.72% MyNapster 1.69% Other* 0.84% PHEX 0.57% *clients unable to identify |
Re: Which Client is Most Popular? -- I'm sure you're smiling about BearShare having the most uploads, the only reason is that the only other client who even has a speck worth using of your QHD crap compatability is LimeWire. Maybe that's why it's second. (And also why Gnucleus is such a far third.) Maybe QHD would work if there was compatibility for it Kirby [IMG]http://**************.com/ms/kirbykore/images/kirbywave.gif[/IMG] |
:D I :D am :D not :D smiling :D What are you talking about? There was only 0.61% that were not compatible enough to be identified. :rolleyes: The biggest error would be that the data only came from one location over the space of a few days. |
Moved this post info to the top one, so it would be easier to see. |
Let's look at this Quote:
>The biggest error would be that the data only came from one location over the space of a few days. So, from what I see, one IP downloaded 18.5 gigs of stuff from you. Most of the time he uses Bearshare, but he also uses LimeWire and some others. Wait, misunderstanding. So what you're saying is that there were different IPs. But just a small half the time, it was one IP. (Who was using BearShare, no doubt.) >What are you talking about? There was only 0.61% that were not compatible enough to be identified. :rolleyes: Yes, I did say that wrong. But the way you say it, you act like everything can be IDed 100% of the time, which is, needless to say, stupid. Kirby [IMG]http://**************.com/ms/kirbykore/images/kirbywave.gif[/IMG] |
Sorry Sorry I didn't think that it would be that hard for you to understand. >>The biggest error would be that the data only came from one location over the space of a few days. >So, from what I see, one IP downloaded 18.5 gigs of stuff from you. Most of the time he uses Bearshare, but he also uses LimeWire and some others. Wait, misunderstanding. So what you're saying is that there were different IPs. But just a small half the time, it was one IP. (Who was using BearShare, no doubt.) 1. You have got it backwards the "one location" is me the one uploader, not one downloader. 2. The "data" is not the "18.5 gigs" that I uploaded, it is the data that I collected about those people that downloaded from me, i.e. what client & version they were using, what country, IP, host, time of day, etc. >>What are you talking about? There was only 0.61% that were not compatible enough to be identified. >Yes, I did say that wrong. But the way you say it, you act like everything can be IDed 100% of the time, which is, needless to say, stupid. 1. Sorry, next time I won't abbreviate. "Other" in my list means: Other clients unable to identify. |
I tried Bearshare but it kept crashing my router/firewall. Also I have been trying to avoid java so no Limewire for me (so I'm Javaphobic sue me). I have been using Gnucleus for several days now and it is far more sophisticated and most importantly....it does not crash my router. :D Gnucleus kicks *** |
Ya, Gnucleus is a good one. I still use it a lot. |
Moved this post info to the top one, so it would be easier to see. |
Re: Sorry Quote:
>1. You have got it backwards* the "one location" is me the one uploader, not one downloader. So, basically, most of it was you downloading files using BearShare. Also, are clear on what "upload" and "download" mean? Because if you keep saying "downloading from me", you're liable to confuse a lot of people. Kirby [IMG]http://**************.com/ms/kirbykore/images/kirbywave.gif[/IMG] *Actually, you're the one who originally had it backwards, I misiinterpreted it because you don't know the difference between an upload and a download. (Well, you know what they are, you just never use them in the right places.) |
So what is it then? None of the client data is from my downloads. All the client data is from me uploading to other people only. If I am uploading then they are downloading, right? So I am uploading to them and they are downloading from me. And if I was downloading from them, then they would be uploading to me. What is wrong with that? How do you say it? What is wrong with saying "downloading from me?" They are downloading a file, and I am the one that they are download it from, so they are "downloading from me." "2. The "data" is not the "18.5 gigs" that I uploaded, it is the data that I collected about those people that downloaded from me, i.e. what client & version they were using, what country, IP, host, time of day, etc." This is the "downloading from me" that you are talking about right? Here what about this? Arrow = data flow my downloads - Me <-- Them my uploads - Me --> Them downloads from me - Me --> Them uploads to me - Me <-- Them So is that wrong? |
Not trying to argue I am not trying to argue. Lots of people were asking about which client is best and which one should I use, stuff like that. But which one is best is totally personal prefrence and any answer to that would be totally biased, so I desided to collect some data about client popularity on the network. It may not be perfect because it is such a small about of GBytes and Files, all from one person's uploads, over a short period of time, not all the clients were identified, etc., but at least it would not be biased. And I think that is what the newbies wanted, was a unbiased idea of what clients other people were using. Sorry if you don't like the numbers. They are not what I expected either. As you can see from the fluctuation in the percents over just a few GBytes, they are by no means a perfect representation of the real network. But I believe they are accurate enough to be of some worth to people new to the network. |
Re: zeroshadow -- Okay, I think I get it. The upload/download thing was that you weren't consistent with either saying "uploading" and "downloading from me". Kirby [IMG]http://**************.com/ms/kirbykore/images/kirbywave.gif[/IMG] |
Ya, you are right I am not very consistent with the terminology I need to work on that. If it is a little confusing to a Senior Member then I bet it would be really confuse to a Junior Member. |
Its unfortunate about bear share because that has really made Vinnie arrogant, and threatening other gnutella clients in how they should act, by threatening to use their software to block them out. I would urge those who use Bearshare to stop using it, and to try out <b>Phex</b> or even Limewire. Phex is by far the best client I have used, I share a lot of files and with Bearshare and Limewire I would not get much in return, when I got phex I was finaly feeling like I am getting back what I put into the network, this is greatly due to their auto re-search feature, that automaticly checks to see if a file is available from another client, meaning I can leave the Phex alone to do its thing and it will work with out me. My results went from 1-2 a night to 6-7 a night. When I told my friend about it, he had recieved similar results, he was impressed by Phex. Now Vinnie is threatening Phex, and seeing the user base BearShare has, its really sad to see that such an arrogant jerk has that kind of power. :( |
Your a ****ing moron, bearshare is better then phex thats why BEARSHARE HAS MORE USERS AND PHEX IS SCREWING UP THE GNUTELLA NETWORK, Vinnie is only concerned about gnutella, so **** off leech, your probably just using *leechware* like phex because you are not sharing enough files. |
Currently the poll says this... BearShare 23.08% LimeWire 30.77% Gnucleus 23.08% MyNapster 0% Gnotella 7.69% Phex 15.38% This is out of a measly 13 votes... in real world experience from running my own gnutella client (I run phex)... out of 101 unique IP address clients that connect to download from me... BearShare 42 (41.6%) LimeWire 40 (39.6%) Gnotella 15 (14.9%) Gnucleus 3 (3%) Phex 1 (1%) Of course these are people downloading from me, and are partly skewed by the files I provide. |
For the 101 unique IP addresses how many GBytes and files were there, so we have a reference to compare with? Next time I will add unique IP addresses to mine. |
good question.... aproximately 1.5GB and 357 Files, and they were wide ranging from images videos and audio files... I dont think I will go in to the specifics of what those files were :) |
Moved this post info to the top one, so it would be easier to see. |
Ya, I never thought about the shared files skewing the data. I have no videos, but just about everything else. So if one client is used mainly for videos then the numbers are going to be low in my data for that client. Other then that my files cover a broad range of file types that should give fairly good data. Maybe I should download a few videos, just for testing purposes. :D |
Questions 1) What (objectively) is PHEX allegedly doing to mess up the Gnutella network? Is it really behavior that needs to be corrected to bring it into compliance with Gnutella 0.4? 2) I am beginning to write my own client (which will be a plug-in to a front end which I'm designing). Is there somewhere I can go with technical questions about the "Bearshare trailer" to the QueryHit descriptor, how clients identify each other (I don't see it in the 0.4 spec anywhere!) and stuff like that? |
BTW 1.5GB and 357 files are how many I am sharing, not how many were downloaded from me... this whole thing was done by hand :) so it was kind of hard to keep a track of that kind of information. I did notice BearShare users downloaded a lot more from me, but multiple downloads didnt add to a clients count, only unique IPs did. I also didnt count unknowns. Well, I dont think its really on the content as much as the general size of the content. video tends to be larger then audio, and audio bigger then images... other kinds of files like zip files can range greatly... but anyway bigger files will likely be what broad band users look for and smaller files for others (there may be more 56k users that prefer Bearshare for all we know, actually that would be an interesting statistic to see in terms of download bandwidth of diffrent gnutella clients, I'll probably try that tomarrow night :)). bigger files also mean a system is held up much longer, on certain occasions mine was held up, which can also have certain effects on results. One thing I will say for sure, people sure like pron... |
"this whole thing was done by hand" Man, you are hard-core. I would never think about doing that if I had to do it all by hand. :D I was counting multiple downloads in the file and GB counts, so one IP is downloading an average of 3.85 files from me. Even though I do not have any videos I still have good range in file size, including a good number of larger zip files that are comparable to video sizes. I don't have any data about download bandwidth to clients. But I do get a good range of download bandwidths from other people. Since my connection is really fast I never get enough uploads at once to reach my max uploads, so they never get a busy signal from me, even though I have larger files that take people a long time to download. So my system is never held up. I don't have any porn, but I don't think that is client specific. :D |
Re: Questions Quote:
http://www.konrad-haenel.de/phex/ |
Moved this post info to the top one, so it would be easier to see. |
Re: Up's and Down's Quote:
Quote:
|
I just thought about something else, this only gives you a percentage of users that download, this information does not include people who share. This could very well effect the numbers, partly because BearShare is by far the most advertised (I heard it mentioned on TechTV a number of times along side Napster and other users, sites like zeropaid put that as one of their favorites despite the user ratings), this can skew things by getting most new users who dont have much to share, are out there looking for things to download. Then there are those who download a few things and share a lot and have tried diffrent ones, have less things to download (experienced guntella users). So its more likely the newbie will be accounted for more then the experienced users by tracking what people are downloading. I think a more well rounded statistic would both include uploads and downloads... I'll give it a try (I need to free up hard drive space though :)), see what the results are... |
How would you get data about what client people that are sharing are using? Or what client experienced people are using? Also I don't think that those two group are necessarily the same people. The only way I know of to do this would be tracking who you personaly download from. Sorry but tracking who you download from is what Kirby thought that I was doing, and Kirby was right it is meaningless data. I was not trying to track who is sharing, I was just looking at the number of people using each client in comparison to one another, i.e. the popularity of each client. And for this purpose my data is more accurate and larger then any I have even seen before. Mainly because I have only seen personal opitions or data from about 100 unique IP addesses or less. You are right LimeWire used to be the popular one, but now BearShare is so older users most likely sharing more or going to be using LimeWire more, and the new users are going to be using BeaShare more. But since I am not trying to find old vs. new user or sharing vs. freeloading these don't matter. I am only looking at popular vs. not so popular with the users on the network today. If you want try to tack something else please do, but this thread was started to track client popularity on the network, and the voting poll was for people to vote for their personal favorite client mainly so they could disagree with the client popularity data if they wanted to. If you want to do something like sharing vs. freeloading I am sure that lots of people would be interested in it. |
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
I'm sorry you didnt quite understand this, maybe I worded it to wrong, but still we are talking about the same thing. |
Accuracy aside... I think its safe to say that... 1) BearShare 2) LimeWire 3) Gnotella 4) Gnucleus 5) MyNapster 6) Phex From my own data LimeWire was close to but never surpassed BearShare and also from my own data at one point LimeWire and Gnotella were the same, but in others it showed LimeWire ahead, so its more likely limewire is more popular. Phex and MyNap appear to be to close... the accuracy issue comes into play... from my own information they are tied, from yours it appears MyNapster is more popular, seeing as that is the case, I would say MyNapster is more likely more popular then Phex. I did a download test like I said I was (downloading mostly mp3s of diffrent kinds of music and audio, and 1 avis) and the results only showed up for 3 clients (BearShare, LimeWire, Gnucleus), but this was only out of 14 connections (14 diffrent IPs, and 11 successful downloads many of which were in a short period of time)... and the results were similar to my earlier results showing LimeWire much more closesly to BearShare, but like I said this is only out of 14. (I need to free up some hard drive space now :)) |
If you could somehow record the ip and the client used when you do a search, you could get the data about what client people who share files tend to use. But, you would probably have to design a pseudo client that adds the information to a database for you to do that.... |
Ok, I'll do it =) If you could somehow record the ip and the client used when you do a search, you could get the data about what client people who share files tend to use. I can do this fairly easily... I'll have this code running within a day or 2. I've been hacking around with the Gnucleus code for the past week or so and I've already added a mySQL database interface to it. I originally added this interface to store statistics on query packets so I could detect a bot thats been scanning me which has resulted in me and my isp getting threatening letters from DCMA - Mediaforce. I plan on detecting the IP addresses they scan from and making these addresses public information so we can all block connect requests from these pricks... but more on that later. Anyways, I just stumbled in here and read this thread and thought I could help. If anyone is interested, I can make my new IP/client logger version of Gnucleus available to anyone who wants to run it and feed data into a mySQL database. Then I'll publish the results weekly or whenever. Let me know if anyone wants this |
Most popular A tool that collects info about the clients that share would be cool! I'm using BearShare, and there you can log those who download from you. Out of the 3584 Distinct IPs that've downloaded from me the last three weeks, 45% had BearShare 41% had LimeWire 6% had Gnotella 4% had Gnucleus 3% had MyNapster I'm sorry to say, but I would've voted in favour of BearShare. |
@ PotLegalizer Yes, please make your IP logger version available to everyone. I would be very interested in using it and it would be a good way to make those statistics all are talking about in this thread. |
A post from BearShare.Net Quote:
|
Re: A post from BearShare.Net Quote:
Isn't this supposed to add up 100% not 210%? Am I missing something? |
Yep... Percentage of Requests that Were for Porn... (as opposed to mp3s...) broken down by client |
Quote:
|
zeroshadow, think of it as 50% of BearShare clients wanted porn... not 50% of the total clients that wanted porn were BearShare. |
Quote:
|
ok, my logger is done I'm curious how you guys are getting total stats from bearshare?! I haven't seen that feature, can someone point me to it? Anyways, my own custom client logger is done. I haven't put together an instruction set how to use it, so I can't really post it publicly and expect anyone to know what the heck to do with it. I'll work on this in the next few days. In the mean time, if anyone is planning on running this, I'd suggest going to mysql.com and installing the latest version of mysql and the ODBC driver for it. If anyone here claims to have gotten that far, I'll post directions on what to do next. =) So, after 1 day of running... my stats logged this information about people downloading porn only. (I had to unshare my mp3's for now due to threatening letters to my ISP... I'll fix that later) I'm looking into why I'm getting so many unspecified clients... that number looks awfully high! Unique Downloading Clients 279 Bearshare 112 - 40% Unspecified Client 63 - 23% Limewire 51 - 18% Gnotella 25 - 9% Gnucleus 15 - 5% Mynapster 12 - 4% GTK-Gnutella 1 - - Next I plan on studying what type of porn is prefered by each client type... just kidding! |
stats from bearshare Quote:
|
Re: ok, my logger is done Quote:
Bye, |
gnut is performing very well! How about gnut? The programmer has some good ideas about optimizing network performance http://www.gnutelliums.com/linux_uni...oc/gnut-6.html |
You should add: Gnewtellium Gnut Hagelslag |
and soon xolox... |
And even sooner... Gnukerist :) It is in its Alpha Stages right now, but be prepared to see it on my website soon enough :) |
Version 1.0 of XoloX is now available! Check out www.xolox.nl |
Correction, 1.04 is currently available for download at www.xolox.nl |
| All times are GMT -7. The time now is 07:50 PM. |
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2025, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
SEO by vBSEO 3.6.0 ©2011, Crawlability, Inc.
Copyright © 2020 Gnutella Forums.
All Rights Reserved.