Discussion Forums > Technology
uTorrent Becomes Ad-Supported to Rake in Millions
Bob2004:
--- Quote from: BaronVonBull on August 16, 2012, 10:12:25 AM ---^
For some things I'd agree with that, but not all.
Take game consoles for example. I have an Atari 2600 made during the early run of vidja games...It still works like a champ as if it were out of the box, peoples xbox's die in a matter of months to a few years. 30 year old Atari > Modern day console. Tsk, damn.
--- End quote ---
Firstly, Xbox != computer software. Secondly, they're two completely different products, made by completely different companies. You don't get an Xbox by applying patches to your Atari 2600, do you? You can't really use the fact that Microsoft make shoddy products as an example to show that software updates consisting largely of bugfixes don't make that software more stable.
BaronVonBull:
Most of the problems plaguing consoles, is really not software, it's hardware. RROD isn't a software problem, it's a hardware problem. In anycase, i wasn't comparing software problems or hardware, it was toward the statement regarding new = better. which obviously isn't always the case. Whether it be software or hardware, technology or new methods of building things. new doesn't always equal better. Or did you forget about analogies? It still applies. There's appliance out there, that still work better and longer than their newer counter parts. May not be energy efficient but they preform better. Some software are still applicable now because they a more solid base in the code than the newer counter parts.
Also when people usually have a problem with consoles these days, it's a hardware problem. Fans don't work things over heat, disk drives break down, and so do optical drives. Some sooner than others, some factory defects right out of the line. However this goes back to "New" ways of assembly and cutting cost, which in turns creates shitty consumer products that are literary meant to break and throw away to increase sales and while cutting cost of production. This isnt always a good thing. Again, this goes to the point of new isn't always better. Analogies are so much fun.
limefc:
It's planned obsolescence.
Also remaining functional for longer does not make something technically superiour, it just makes it more reliable.
Modern devices have to deal with significant long term reliability problems even without being designed to break down. Electromigration which used to be a very minor problem in the past is one of them.
Atari 2600 was way simpler in design, too. I mean fuck, the Xenos chip from 360 alone is several times more complicated than the entire system of an Atari 2600... and in comparison to more modern ICs, even that is stone-age equipment. No moving parts in Atari 2600 either.
Oh while we are on the topic of Xbox360. "S" models introduced in august 2010 are considerably more reliable than early models AND cheaper to produce. Cost cutting measures also helped a lot with reliability.
BaronVonBull:
"It's planned obsolescence" but does this make it "better". No, it's an excuse to make inferior products for huge profit gain...It actually encourages shoddy products.
However if we're using it as an analogy say for utorrent we can plug it in like this
Utorrent 1.8 (or popular older version) would be the Atari, newer utorrent would be say xbox 360 or modern console equivalent.
Utorrent 1.8 has less or no "moving parts" per se, you also have to consider manufacturing at that time was better quality as well in regard to craftsmanship. New utorrent has more moving parts, and craftmanship regarding manufacturing has changed to require less labor, and took a hit in quality to lower prices and production cost. This leads to a product that breaks down faster and has undesirable effects.
--- Quote ---Also remaining functional for longer does not make something technically superiour, it just makes it more reliable.
Modern devices have to deal with significant long term reliability problems even without being designed to break down. Electromigration which used to be a very minor problem in the past is one of them.
--- End quote ---
this is true, but the fact remains, it out lasted modern gaming consoles. Technologically speak, yes they are different and built different.
Technologically superior, no, infact it was inferior to it's arcade counter part. I never said it was superior. However, when it comes to craftmanship? Yes, it's superior simply because it is reliable, and has stood the test of time. The same aspect can be applied to software. I want a superior software as far as craftsman ship goes, that does withstand the test of time and can still be applicable without fucking up all the time. This can be applied to any product.
--- Quote ---Atari 2600 was way simpler in design, too. I mean fuck, the Xenos chip from 360 alone is several times more complicated than the entire system of an Atari 2600... and in comparison to more modern ICs, even that is stone-age equipment. No moving parts in Atari 2600 either.
--- End quote ---
The part in bold is what I love most about this statement. Simpler design! This is a statement people tend to forget or don't acknowledge. People seem to think, the more complicated something is, the more superior it is. Not really. Take for example the chair. It's simple, comfortable, and functional. Now take the same chair, add a few gadgets and gizmos, say a heating pad and a drink dispenser, pretty cool right? and now you have this complex, functioning and seemingly comfortable new chair. However, something happens to the chair, the heating pad breaks, causing it to over heat, burning your ass, and the drink dispenser goes hay wire and makes a sticky mess all over your house. Is that same complicated chair superior to the old simplistic chair? hardly. Your old chair didn't have a melt down in your living room. Older chair = superior even though simplistic.
Look all I'm saying is newer doesn't always equal better. The consoles were used as an analogy, not to argue specifics on the consoles themselves. Older can be more reliable in terms of use than the newer. Ergo Newer doesn't always equal better. However I didn't say everything new can't be better than the old either.
limefc:
--- Quote ---Utorrent 1.8 (or popular older version) would be the Atari, newer utorrent would be say xbox 360 or modern console equivalent.
--- End quote ---
Now this is an extremely bad analogy. uTorrent 1.8 is capable of performing the exact same tasks as uTorrent 3.2 with a couple of exceptions.
An Atari 2600 has no means of performing the same tasks as an Xbox360. Not even close.
Also I wouldn't exactly call the Atari 2600 a masterpiece of craftsmanship. It doesn't really use high quality parts at all. Several power supplies I own today are potentially less reliable than the Atari 2600 brick, but are made using parts of such high quality that no consumer product designer even dreamed of putting them into their power delivery systems back in 1977. The difference? Complication to handle heavier loads. These are capable of outputting over 500W DC.
You can only use reliability and simplicity as a metric for determining which product is better if you're comparing things with close to the same or identical capabilities. Of course a simpler thing is better if it can do exactly the same shit.
The Xbox 360 "S" is simpler than the good old Xbox 360 crate and it's more reliable. It has identical capabilities - it's clearly superiour.
The Atari 2600 does not have identical capabilities, it's incomparable directly. You can compare them in reliability but it is useless information. What are the odds that the Atari sitting in a corner unused because it can't handle modern software? Pretty high I am afraid.
--- Quote ---but the fact remains, it out lasted modern gaming consoles.
--- End quote ---
Well, sure. It lasted 15 years. Although I'd very much NOT like to see the 360 last that long. Thank you very much. That shit is holding computer gaming back like a huge ball and chain with its limited capabilities.
Now back to topic of utorrent, whether old version is better than new is debatable. They have some differences in capabilities and that difference is what will determine which is better to use on case by case basis. For instance, some trackers ban uTorrent versions prior to some 2.xx version. Then it seems logical that using a newer version is better if you use the tracker(s). Though there is no denying that the older versions were less complicated, at least without knowing the inside workings.
One of the 1.xx versions had a nasty security bug as well which has since been fixed.
Navigation
[0] Message Index
[#] Next page
[*] Previous page
Go to full version