Re: freenet performance
"Alex R. Mosteo" <[email protected]>
| Newsgroups | gmane.network.freenet.general |
|---|---|
| Message-ID | <[email protected]> |
Caco Patane wrote: >>>However the current 0.5 works pretty well IME. >> >>that's great news. >>how is performance compared to for example aMule or eMule ? > > > The main function of Freenet is not transfer performance, is anonymity. > > Freenet is slow (my experience), is nice for text-based stuff > (Freesites) and a few images. I have no experience retriving files > with more than 5MB of size. My experience has been fairly good. Using Frost, I'd say I've retrieved > 90% of the large files I've tried. And the speed is usually quite good, again IME. Specially, for people used to wait in queues in eMule it shouldn't be a new pain. The Frost progress bar is mesmerizing to me... I guess the real pain is in inserting large files. I used to insert some text-only small sites and the time required wasn't negligible. In truth and IMO, a popular release site a-la somethingreactor is something bound to happen sooner or later, here or over I2P or something else. _______________________________________________ chat mailing list [email protected] Archived: http://news.gmane.org/gmane.network.freenet.general Unsubscribe at http://dodo.freenetproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/chat Or mailto:[email protected]?subject=unsubscribe