Beta
×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

Opera Embedding BitTorrent Client

CmdrTaco posted more than 9 years ago | from the p2p-uber-alles dept.

The Internet 542

Opera Watch writes "The next version of Opera, 8.02, will have an embedded BitTorrent client. Opera has released today a Technical Preview of this new version on its FTP directory, though they have made no official announcement as of yet."

Sorry! There are no comments related to the filter you selected.

torrent (5, Funny)

supe (163410) | more than 9 years ago | (#12994946)

So where's the torrent for Opera 8.02?

Re:torrent (4, Insightful)

Kissing Crimson (197314) | more than 9 years ago | (#12994994)

Actually, that's not a bad idea. One of the few Firefox 'features' that really annoys me is that each update requires a full download of the installer package. Opera could quietly download its updates through bittorrents (at severely choked rates!) and the present the update to the end user when complete.

Re:torrent (4, Insightful)

ZephyrXero (750822) | more than 9 years ago | (#12995235)

I dont' see why anyone would use a download service that's not bittorrent anymore. Users benefit from faster downloads and content providers have to pay for less bandwidth. It's a win win situation (unless you break it like Blizzard).

Re:torrent (4, Informative)

masklinn (823351) | more than 9 years ago | (#12995308)

One of the few Firefox 'features' that really annoys me is that each update requires a full download of the installer package.
Which, as it's been said times and times again, is fixed with a binary updater in the soon to come Firefox 1.1

On a side note, it should be noted that Opera is no better in that field...

Re:torrent (1)

mindaktiviti (630001) | more than 9 years ago | (#12995006)

Yeah I want to know too, let me just download Opera 8.02 so I can use it's new bittor...er.

Actually, you download 8.02 from Opera itself... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#12995125)

...and use the Bit Torrent feature to download the keygen.

Download from Bogaa Torrents (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#12995226)

you can download it from http://www.bogaa.org/ [bogaa.org]

Torrent this first post, fuckers! (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#12994951)

deeznutz!

Opera improving (1)

heauxmeaux (869966) | more than 9 years ago | (#12994961)

It's nice to see them supporting the piracy industry so openly. There will be a lot more Hollywood stuntmen with hungry families now.

Prediction... (5, Insightful)

niteskunk (886685) | more than 9 years ago | (#12994965)

I predict a swarm of FireFox BT plug-ins within the next two weeks.

Re:Prediction... (3, Insightful)

Celt (125318) | more than 9 years ago | (#12994981)

I've heard its been suggested before and frankly I've been disoppointed that it hasn't been implemented.
I guess now it will :)

Another prediction (1, Interesting)

CdBee (742846) | more than 9 years ago | (#12995015)

I predict that networking sites will be swamped by Opera users asking why their routers are crashing and what port-forwarding is, and how to set up their "new oprah download thingy lolbbq"

Re:Another prediction (4, Funny)

swillden (191260) | more than 9 years ago | (#12995137)

I predict that networking sites will be swamped by Opera users

sites... swamped... by... Opera users ???

Does not compute.

Re:Another prediction (4, Funny)

byolinux (535260) | more than 9 years ago | (#12995212)

I think he means they both gang up and hit a site at the same time ;)

Re:Another prediction (5, Funny)

ArsonSmith (13997) | more than 9 years ago | (#12995251)

Netadmin: We've been Operadotted!!!

Pointy haired: What's that mean?

Netadmin: Two Opera users hit our web server within the same hour.

Pointy haired: What's Opera? Is that a new virus?

Re:Prediction... (5, Informative)

masterren (733946) | more than 9 years ago | (#12995052)

MozTorrent seems to be in the works already.

http://moztorrent.mozdev.org/ [mozdev.org]

Fine, but... (2, Interesting)

Heliologue (883808) | more than 9 years ago | (#12994966)

That's all good and fine, but do I really _want_ a bittorrent client embedded in my browser?

Re:Fine, but... (1)

isometrick (817436) | more than 9 years ago | (#12995002)

Hmmm ... I don't know! _Do_ you?

Re:Fine, but... (1)

dawnread (851254) | more than 9 years ago | (#12995026)

Zawinskis Law [catb.org]

Re:Fine, but... (3, Funny)

Jerf (17166) | more than 9 years ago | (#12995087)

Yes.

Next question, please.

Re:Fine, but... (-1, Troll)

Threni (635302) | more than 9 years ago | (#12995131)

If you've paid for your browser then I guess you'll have to take what you're given! That's the choice of non-free software! Still, having paid for Opera at least you can make changes to the source and...no, sorry, it's software you don't pay for that you can do that with, isn't it!

What's the point of paying for a browser again?

Re:Fine, but... (2, Insightful)

TheRaven64 (641858) | more than 9 years ago | (#12995135)

Yes. If I click on a link to an HTTP-served file, my browser downloads it. If I click on a link to an FTP-served file, my browser downloads it. If I click on a link to a BitTorrent served file, my browser drops the .torrent somewhere and I need to ferret around for a third-party app to download it.

Does this sound like a consistent UI to you?

Re:Fine, but... (4, Funny)

justforaday (560408) | more than 9 years ago | (#12995215)

And if I click on an .exe, my browser should execute it. No wait, that's not a good thing...

Re:Fine, but... (1)

ArsonSmith (13997) | more than 9 years ago | (#12995338)

No but it should download it in order to keep consistant with the parent posts argument.

Re:Fine, but... (1)

idobi (820896) | more than 9 years ago | (#12995241)

Does this sound like a consistent UI to you?

Actually, it is. The link is to a file. The HTTP-served file, or an FTP-served file. The .torrent is an HTTP-served file.

Also, you don't expect your browser to spend 2-12 hours downloading a file, regardless of how it's served. If something takes that long, generally, you get another application to download it for you.

Re:Fine, but... (1)

idobi (820896) | more than 9 years ago | (#12995149)

Seriously... my BT client is up 24/7... my browser crashes at least once a day on some crappy web site...

Re:Fine, but... (0, Flamebait)

garcia (6573) | more than 9 years ago | (#12995181)

That's all good and fine, but do I really _want_ a bittorrent client embedded in my browser?

I certainly don't see a need for it. I don't download torrents via a webbrowser as I use the curses-based btdownloadcurses on the command line.

For a community that's so against IE's "bloat" it's amazing how many people welcome with open arms more *unnecessary* bloat.

Yes, BitTorrent is great and it has a great many uses. I use it frequently for music and porn but being that I don't use it in my browser *ever* it's just not something we need. Let's keep it as an external module. In fact, let's move most of the extraneous crap out of browsers that I never use (i.e. bookmarks, tabs, etc).

Either you're with bloat in the browser world or you aren't. Which is it?

Where is the "bloat"? (5, Informative)

hkmwbz (531650) | more than 9 years ago | (#12995311)

"For a community that's so against IE's "bloat" it's amazing how many people welcome with open arms more *unnecessary* bloat."
Bloat? Opera with BitTorrent is a smaller download than Firefox, and BT downloads in Opera work exactly like HTTP or FTP downloads (there is no UI clutter).

Where is the bloat?

"Either you're with bloat in the browser world or you aren't. Which is it?"
I'm for making it easier and more convenient to do stuff online. I hope Firefox gets a built in BT client too.

speaking of absolutes (2, Funny)

uberjoe (726765) | more than 9 years ago | (#12995321)

"Either you're with bloat in the browser world or you aren't. Which is it?"

That's sith talk there buddy, watch it.

Re:Fine, but... (1)

athakur999 (44340) | more than 9 years ago | (#12995265)

It doesn't seem like a great idea to me. I leave my BitTorrent client running for hours to days each time I use it. My web browser, on the other hand, I close and reopen several times an hour. Hardly ideal behaviour for a BitTorrent swarm.

I suppose Opera can get around this problem by keeping Opera loaded even when you close all the browser windows but this seems like it'd cause alot of headaches for their support team from users who don't understand what's going on. "I downloaded a file and closed my browser but the Internet is still slow!", etc.

Re:Fine, but... (1)

ArsonSmith (13997) | more than 9 years ago | (#12995299)

Only if your web browser is embedded into your file browser that is embedded into your OS.

Opera torrent (-1, Troll)

Amouth (879122) | more than 9 years ago | (#12994967)

wee someone else to be sued.. good thing they are using an ftp server and not a torrent.. they don't want to be seen as helping push real stuff over it.. wait.. this is kinda neet.. now only if they made a borwser that worked nicely then we would have a cool tool

Apache (4, Interesting)

Rei (128717) | more than 9 years ago | (#12994968)

Now we just need apache with an embedded torrent generation/serving (or at least just serving; it'd be simpler to configure, that's for sure) for bulk static content. :)

Re:Apache (1)

Amouth (879122) | more than 9 years ago | (#12995028)

now that is one hell of an idea right there.. set apache up to handel being the tracker or at least some nice interface for it.. people go to get a file and it gives them the torrent.. with that box as the tracker and a seed.. and well that would be neet.. sounds like a simple thing to do realy, if you have the time

Re:Apache (5, Interesting)

sfcat (872532) | more than 9 years ago | (#12995038)

Now we just need apache with an embedded torrent generation/serving (or at least just serving; it'd be simpler to configure, that's for sure) for bulk static content. :)

Actually I had this same good idea a couple of years ago. It could effectly wipe out the slashdot effect. What if, each time server load went over a preset amount, it served a torrrent containing the HTML and image files instead of the HTML file itself. When the browser sees the torrent with special HTTP headers, it automagically unpacks the torrent after completing the download and displays the HTML locally. An apache plugin for this was started and never completed. The problem was getting the browser/torrent client to do the right thing once it got the HTML so the fact that you downloaded a torrent instead of the HTML directly was transparent to the user. Once torrent clients are embedded into the browser, competition will force the other browsers to include this feature. Then no more slashdot effect, yea!!!

Re:Apache (5, Informative)

csnydermvpsoft (596111) | more than 9 years ago | (#12995124)

A lot of the time the Slashdot effect isn't due to bandwidth being exceeded, but rather due to the database server being overloaded on database-driven sites. These sites couldn't be served this way anyways, as they have dynamic content that could be different for different users.

Re:Apache (1)

MindStalker (22827) | more than 9 years ago | (#12995173)

Yes, but good admins will setup a page for when their database goes down. This page now now be more more complex than. "Sorry we are down".

Re:Apache (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#12995194)

The point is that good admins won't get slashdotted in the first place.

Well, HTML is pretty small (1)

Khashishi (775369) | more than 9 years ago | (#12995160)

HTML is usually smaller than the bittorrent itself, so there would be no saving there, but for downloads and some images, it's a no-brainer.

Re:Apache (1)

Rei (128717) | more than 9 years ago | (#12995190)

Yeah, I thought of this a while back, too. It might as well always serve the torrent if the browser is compatible; there's comparatively little penalty for doing so. You could go about this in two ways: either require the browser to use an Accept-Encoding header field, or have the server determine what is supported by the browser identification. The former is preferable. The browser would request a single file, and if the server sees that "torrent" is an acceptable encoding, it sends it a torrent for all of the associated static content.

It doesn't help on dynamic content, but is dynamic content that much of a problem as far as bandwidth goes? In the general case, what you want a torrent for is the large html (and similar) pages, jpg/gif files, flash, etc that is to be displayed, as well as transparently serving torrents for available large downloads.

Re:Apache (1)

TheRealMindChild (743925) | more than 9 years ago | (#12995255)

Have you ever USED a torrent? I mean, christ.... it takes about 5 minutes just to "find peers". Then... regardless the fact that there are 10k+ seeders, you still somehow only get 2k a second.

Re:Apache (3, Interesting)

notNeilCasey (521896) | more than 9 years ago | (#12995283)

One thing I hacked together for a friend's site [channel102.net] serving out a lot of video was an automatic redirector to the Coral Cache (not as neat as a torrent plugin would be, but cool enough, I thought) which he could activate when his bandwidth was approaching his monthly limit.

I just used mod_rewrite to parse the URL and append .nyud.net:8090 to the hostname and send a redirect to the client. If this were made into a plugin which would combine detecting some bandwidth threshold with the option to fall back on the Coral Cache before throwing out error codes, I think it would benefit a lot of admins staring down the business end of the /. effect.

OT: The site is a video project called Channel 102 based in New York City where people make 5 minute video "pilots" which are screened at the Upright Citizens Brigade Theater [ucbtheater.com] for an audience who then votes on which ones they want to see return next month. Many of them have some serious [nyud.net] geek [nyud.net] appeal [nyud.net] .

Re:Apache (1)

XMyth (266414) | more than 9 years ago | (#12995145)

Nah, decentralized tracking works and it works well. We just need Azureus and the mainline client to work together on their implementations.

Re:Apache (4, Informative)

kv9 (697238) | more than 9 years ago | (#12995151)

what we need is people implementing [sourceforge.net] the idea not people coming up with ideas. hint: Development on mod_torrent is currently suspended indefinitely due to lack of time.

they [mailto] need help.

Good feature (4, Interesting)

Dark Paladin (116525) | more than 9 years ago | (#12994969)

This is something I'd also like to see built into the next version of iTunes or iPodderX for getting Podcasts and the like (so as to reduce the bandwidth on shows I'm interested in listening to).

Of course, to make sure that Opera doesn't get sued for having a P2P network built into their client that could be used for copyright infringements, they need to add a note into their EULA that says something akin to "Don't steal music, or movies, or - just don't steal, OK? If you do, don't blame us. Thanks." to that their intent in supplying the technology is clear.

Re:Good feature (1)

MindStalker (22827) | more than 9 years ago | (#12995206)

Just so you know the ipodder does support bittorrent downloads. Don't know why ipodderX doesn't.

piratebay? (-1, Troll)

ichigo-666 (896741) | more than 9 years ago | (#12994971)

Will it include a hardcoded link to thepiratebay?

I'm not impressed (3, Insightful)

ReformedExCon (897248) | more than 9 years ago | (#12994974)

The real problem with this move is that even though they have a sort of "first mover" advantage, Opera is at the mercy of the Firefox/Mozilla developers with regards to this feature. Some enterprising Open Source developer will be able to incorporate BitTorrent into the Firefox browser without much trouble, and then Opera, the only significant for-pay browser left, will turn back into an also-ran.

The key for Opera is to get into niches where they stand a chance, handheld computers and cellphones are one area they are very active in. Per-unit licensing for their browser on cellphones makes them a lot of money. I hope they do well into the future.

Re:I'm not impressed (4, Interesting)

hkmwbz (531650) | more than 9 years ago | (#12995273)

BitTorrent is far from the only thing which sets Opera apart from Firefox. Speed, size, functionality, integration out of the box are some keywords. Of course, which one is better is a matter of taste, but some people prefer the way Opera works. No extension problems when upgrading, for one.

Firefox with BT support would be a good thing. For Opera too. It would move BT further into the mainstream, and that would benefit anyone who wants to use it. Opera probably has something in mind, such as distributing Opera through BitTorrent. Why else implement it?

Money (1)

ZakuSage (874456) | more than 9 years ago | (#12994988)

It really is too bad Opera is choosing to charge for it's browser or force people to look at ads, or I'd look into downloading it. It's shaping up pretty good, but I've tweaked FireFox to block all ads... not just popups, all ads, so it would be shitty to have them back and built into the browser.
Any extensions for FireFox that connect to a BitTorrent client?

Re:Money (1)

anonicon (215837) | more than 9 years ago | (#12995144)

"It really is too bad Opera is choosing to charge for it's browser or force people to look at ads, or I'd look into downloading it. It's shaping up pretty good, but I've tweaked FireFox to block all ads... not just popups, all ads, so it would be shitty to have them back and built into the browser.
Any extensions for FireFox that connect to a BitTorrent client?"


Or, in my own words:

"It really is too bad ZakuSage is choosing to charge for his work and creativity, or force people to look at his ads, or I'd look into using him. It's shaping up pretty good, but I've tweaked FireFox to block all ads... not just popups, all ads, so it would be shitty to have them back and built into the browser since I'm too cheap to actually pay for a browser I really like."

Of course, YMMV. :-)

Re:Money (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#12995183)

Actually - they have great software and they charge a reasonable price. Have you considered trying the economic model that the rest of the world uses - paying for goods?

I know I have ;)

Re:Money (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#12995191)

Everyone to their own, I prefer the free Opera to switching apps (to FF obviously), especially since I know I would spend a lot of hours tweaking extensions to perfection.

I foresee another 7 or so comments saying ad-Opera really is ok, although everyone have already heard a million times that this peculiar group of users hardly notice the ads after a while. /tobbe

I've used free Opera for years.. (1)

the_rajah (749499) | more than 9 years ago | (#12995199)

The ads are miniscule and not a bother to me at all. They aren't popups, just very small google adsense adverts embedded in the toolbar. Give it a try. It's not going to cost you anything but a few minutes of your time.

Re:Money (3, Informative)

Khashishi (775369) | more than 9 years ago | (#12995249)

What's wrong with wanting money? Not everyone can subsist on rocks and mud, you know.

This is THE way to keep Bittorrent alive (1)

pestilence669 (823950) | more than 9 years ago | (#12994991)

It'll be rather difficult to shut down Bittorrent if it's in Mozilla & Opera... where's the Mozilla integration already?

Best news I read all morning.

Re:This is THE way to keep Bittorrent alive (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#12995218)

I don't understand this line of thinking... BitTorrent isn't a network, it's a protocol. What is there to shut down?

What is it written in? (1)

barureddy (314276) | more than 9 years ago | (#12994995)

If it is anything like opera, it will be written in C/assembly. It would be nice to have an optmized version of bittorrent, however, too bad it is not open source.

Re:What is it written in? (1)

Curate (783077) | more than 9 years ago | (#12995187)

What part of Opera is written in assembly?

Re:What is it written in? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#12995271)

Been at the crack pipe again?

opera uses qt so c++ is a safe bet for the majority of the code, perhaps they have inline assembly in places the compiler failed to optimise properly.

Bt has several oss clients, dummy.

Re:What is it written in? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#12995307)

If you are looking for libraries (which usually include example clients) try:
libbt (C): http://libbt.sourceforge.net/ [sourceforge.net]
libtorrent (C++): http://libtorrent.sourceforge.net/ [sourceforge.net]

A milestone for BT... and a green light. (3, Interesting)

deft (253558) | more than 9 years ago | (#12994997)

Well, "milestone" is lofty, but this certainly does lend legtimacy to the software as a real tool just like, say, winzip or anything else that just does a job, and people use it for good and "bad".

Should make Opera look good too.

The underlying thing here that looks great for BT is that Opera must have done some due diligence and decided they were on good legal ground to embed the software... which may be seen as a green light for others to do the same.

Re:A milestone for BT... and a green light. (1)

Laurance (872708) | more than 9 years ago | (#12995055)

If they do this right, it will help out the average end-user who might not understand Bit Torrent.

And Mozilla is on it's way... (5, Informative)

MTO_B. (814477) | more than 9 years ago | (#12995003)

Thanks to google's summer code we can hope to have a functional BitTorrent client built with XUL/XPCOM.

Included in Firefox? :-)

Check the Mozilla development projects that have been accepted for Google's Summer of Code program:
http://summer.mozdev.org/projects.html [mozdev.org]


And the MozillaZine news about it here:
http://www.mozillazine.org/talkback.html?article=6 874 [mozillazine.org]

Way to go, Opera! (1)

Wolfger (96957) | more than 9 years ago | (#12995009)

I may just have to switch browsers now. Unless Firefox comes out with a Torrent extension before the new Opera goes stable for my distro. FireTorrent, anyone?

Re:Way to go, Opera! (1)

Peridriga (308995) | more than 9 years ago | (#12995158)

Maybe not FireTorrent but, MozTorrent [mozdev.org] fits the bill.

Opera Banned! (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#12995021)

Great, now MPAA/RIAA can go & ban Opera from US & ultimately ban Internet(s) in US.

Nice going, turds! Great idea to bundle P2P with Browser. Where's my kitchen sink-embedded browser?

These 'embedded' things always suck; like the IRC chat util in Mozilla, Download managers etc.

Re:Opera Banned! (2, Insightful)

afd8856 (700296) | more than 9 years ago | (#12995270)

Are you crazy?

Irc chat in mozilla doesn't suck. It has replaced every other irc chat that I had on my computer. I use windows as my everyday desktop (games & graphic apps), but chatzilla, when coupled with dialogmate (a small utility that offers, among others, the possibility to put programs in the systray), is mostly everything I need.

The embeded download manager doesn't suck as bad as you think. Sure, the resume doesn't work, but the downloads can be retried and it has its limited uses. Just as I assume the torrent client will have when is embeded in Firefox.

In my oppinion, this is a good thing. It will expose more people to BitTorrent and will atract more people from the non-firefox users world, as it will be an extra feature they will get.

Legal problems? (1)

D-Cypell (446534) | more than 9 years ago | (#12995023)

IANAL but wasnt their a precedent set in the US courts recently where a company could be held responsible for creating a tool that enables copyright infringement.

Crazy as this is, arent Opera just asking for trouble here? Surely the smart thing to do would be to have someone develop plugin that provided BitTorrent functionality. Opera doesnt have pockets as deep as most corps but they are deep enough to make them a target.

Re:Legal problems? (1)

infinityxi (266865) | more than 9 years ago | (#12995126)

...And markets it as such, which Grokster was doing. I don't think Opera will be in trouble as it is just offering it and as long as it doesn't advertise the BT client to "download music, programs, games, and movies" it will be in the clear.

Re:Legal problems? (1)

yincrash (854885) | more than 9 years ago | (#12995132)

The precedent is that a company could be held responsible if they encourage and enable copyright infringement, such as torrent sites with illegal software. Otherwise things like ftp, floppy disc, cd-rs, networks, etc. would all be at risk.

Re:Legal problems? (5, Informative)

ari_j (90255) | more than 9 years ago | (#12995143)

The precedent recently set is that you cannot distribute a tool with the intent that it be used to infringe copyrights. Grokster distributed software and said "Go illegally download songs to which you have no license!" Opera is saying "Go and download really big files!" Including Bittorrent is no different than including HTTP in their web browser, since either can be used for both lawful and unlawful purposes. What would make Opera a target is if their new release were advertised (at all! ... hahaha, I kill me) with the tagline "Opera 8.5 with Bittorrent: the world of pre-release movies is at your fingertips."

Re:Legal problems? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#12995333)

Yeah, until an Opera employee posts on a blog in Togo (in Togolese) about how he thought about using BitTorrent to download a copy of the classic "Steamboat Willie".

Opera will be sued out of existence in a matter of minutes.

The three people who use Opera will be quite pissed!

Re:Legal problems? (1)

Dj Offset (260006) | more than 9 years ago | (#12995236)

This is how big corporations and lobbyist groups are trying to blame BitTorrent for everything.

BitTorrent is not like anything of the others since it doesn't doesn't have embedded search such as Napster did or that... spywa^H^H^H^H kazaa?

In that regard, hosting BT tracker for copyrighted material would be no different than hosting it on HTTP or FTP like people did in the early days of the internet.

Re:Legal problems? (1)

MindStalker (22827) | more than 9 years ago | (#12995243)

BZZZ sorry. The precendent set but the US Supreme Court states that if you create it FOR copyright infingment or openly market it as a tool for such. You are liable no matter how many legal uses it might also have. Bittorrent has openly from the beginning been aimed at legal downloads. It not more helps infringe copyright then FTP does, it just does it a bit faster.

Just more proof... (5, Insightful)

Kjella (173770) | more than 9 years ago | (#12995027)

...that bittorrent the technology is not going away. In fact, it is a vastly superior method that should replace HTTP/FTP for most file downloads. There should be no more need to find mirrors, simply run it and let the program decide which sources are the faster. An integrated client will introduce a lot more people to it. Now, if they get consistantly better download performance perhaps you'll even see popular demand :)

Kjella

BFD (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#12995034)

Opera still sucks, and so does linsux and all other OSS. And you? You're just a faggot OSS zealot with NO FUCKING CLUE.

Well I guess (3, Interesting)

CSMastermind (847625) | more than 9 years ago | (#12995035)

I see the advantages here and in other ways I see the disadvantages. In one way I'm excited at the thought of not having to run a seperate program to download a file using torrents. I even see that it might force other browsers to do the same (I'm betting we see a firefox addon in about a week). I could even picture a time when all webpages are sped up via torrents.

At the same time I'm worried about a browser doing too many things. I'm not going to start using opera just because it can handle torrents but if IE or Firefox starting doing it I would be rather happy. It's kinda like the various PlayStations playing Dvds when competing with a dreamcast or 64.

This also begs the question, will this help make torrents more mainstream? I know plenty of average people who have no idea what a "torrent" is. If more of the general public starts picking it up who knows what will happen with things like piracery.
Meh, just my thoughts.

ah, no (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#12995107)

"a time when all webpages are sped up via torrents"

Explain to me how connecting to a tracker, then connecting to peers is going to be faster than a single connection to an http server.

"I know plenty of average people who have no idea what a "torrent" is."

Do you guys have regular meetings?

"piracery"

Rad.

Re:ah, no (1)

MindStalker (22827) | more than 9 years ago | (#12995337)

Explain to me how connecting to a tracker, then connecting to peers is going to be faster than a single connection to an http server.

Well not ALL webtraffic would be helped, it greatly depends upon the traffic. But it would be nice if it became a standard, even something that apache used automatically when nessesary.

Just for note, times when torrents make a good idea.

A: if you have a very slow connection as a trackerless torrent could replace a persons static blog they are serving up through their cable modem.
B: You have very large content (game downloads/ movies etc. this example is already becomming common)

Obviously A: is not possible right now (possible not not easy as the person would have to download to their computer and open as a local document).
Sadly I don't think this opera integration is going to make A any easier as it seems to still require downloading to a location.

Is this necessary? (2, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#12995068)

I'm perfectly happy with Azureus. I doubt that the BitTorrent client integrated into Opera will be better.

This seems to be an unnecessary feature. I don't see myself using it over Azureus.

BitTorrent clients also tend to use up a lot of memory because of the nature of BitTorrent. Would this impact Opera's preformance as well?

So now... (1)

blankmeyer (600714) | more than 9 years ago | (#12995069)

So now when BT is found to be illegal because of the Grokster ruling, Opera will be liable too. Great!

Good for Opera (0)

grandmofftarkin (49366) | more than 9 years ago | (#12995076)

Finally someone did this. I was waiting for one of the browsers to include it. Seems like a natural addition.

Well done to Opera for being first!

Interesting Legal Implications (1)

everphilski (877346) | more than 9 years ago | (#12995098)

Regardless of your opinions on the situation...
With the recent "discovery" of a statement where Bram "encourages" piracy. Coupled with the Grokster ruling. Coupled with how we all know the court systems can work... just imagine what happens if the courts go kung fu on BitTorrent's ass in the near future, and Opera has all these "BitTorrent clients" floating around the internet. Could get messy.
-everphilski-

End of Opera (1)

martalli (818692) | more than 9 years ago | (#12995118)

I predict: 1) Terrific swarms of malware after the malware guys figure out an exploit. 2) Opera is sued out of existence by various and sundry copyright owners. Somehow it sounds like the sort of malware hole that IE would devise - a great backdoor for downloading gigabytes of malware slowly over time!

So much for the corporate desktop (2, Insightful)

killbill (10058) | more than 9 years ago | (#12995136)

What a great way to see that they get banned from corporate desktops across the planet.

This will change Opera browser installs on enterprise systems to go from "officially not allowed but generally ignored" to "hunted down and killed at every opportunity".

The new "vi vs emacs"? (3, Insightful)

slapout (93640) | more than 9 years ago | (#12995142)

Is "Opera vs FireFox" the new "vi vs emacs" ?

Re:The new "vi vs emacs"? (2, Interesting)

yincrash (854885) | more than 9 years ago | (#12995175)

Only if they started sticking ads in vi and decided to also sell it ad-free.

Re:The new "vi vs emacs"? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#12995193)

No.

Re:The new "vi vs emacs"? (1)

trezor (555230) | more than 9 years ago | (#12995203)

It may be another "emacs vs vi", but I hardly doubt that as long as both emacs and vi exists that that war will ever go away :)

Re:The new "vi vs emacs"? (1)

Curate (783077) | more than 9 years ago | (#12995246)

Vi!!!!!!

This is pretty cool (1)

trezor (555230) | more than 9 years ago | (#12995159)

For most people this will make fetching torrents a lot easier. Problem is ofcourse that most people are still using IE.

It wont make me switch back from Firefox (I used to use Opera), as I'm simply addicted too extensions. Plus I still haven't encountered a better bittorrent client than Azureus [sourceforge.net] .

And as the rest of the people here say: I bet we will see a bittorrent extention for Firefox pretty soon. The wonders of competition. Security issues apart, this shows why a browser monopoly is just as bad as other monopolies.

Yea so now what (1)

Snatch422 (896695) | more than 9 years ago | (#12995164)

Is the CEO going to swim around the world if there are 5,000,000 pirated downloads?

embedded? (1)

grumpyman (849537) | more than 9 years ago | (#12995232)

Ok, is there an option I can uninstall the 'bundled' software?

Put open-source aside, isn't that kind of like bundling IE on Windoze, where you put in additional software on top of the original to add value?

Opera is like Emacs (1)

Esine (809139) | more than 9 years ago | (#12995248)

Yay!
Opera is like Emacs, though it's not too bloated... Opera has everything I need. Most of the features it has are hidden so they stay out of your way.
I'm currently testing this out (bittorrent downloading) and seems pretty nice. Torrent downloads appear as normal http downloads.

Way to go Opera!

-- Esine / dbg

.. btw, vim rules (Emacs just isnt for me) \o/

Doesn't seem like a good fit to me.... (4, Informative)

wowbagger (69688) | more than 9 years ago | (#12995263)

Adding a Bittorrent client to a browser doesn't seem like a good fit to me - a BT client needs to run continuously in the background, downloading and uploading the files.

A browser's model is more one of "load the thing and show it" or "Stream the thing and show it". How does that map to BT, where you cannot even "stream" a thing (since you are getting the pieces out of order)?

Will we see people who's torrent clients only serve the file while it is being downloaded, and then stops?

Personally, I run Torrentflux [torrentflux.com] - which is a PHP CGI app that allows me to download & serve torrents on my server - then I just point my browser at it to set things up.

Now, *if* the browser plug-in then communicated with a [daemon|service|external program] that did the torrent work, and all the plug-in did was send the command to the external entity to command the queuing of the download (and then open a window in the browser when the download is done)- then that might make sense.

Oprah? (4, Funny)

ewg (158266) | more than 9 years ago | (#12995274)

I'd be more impressed if Oprah [oprah.com] offered support for BitTorrent.

And open source is innovative? (2, Insightful)

GCHQAgent (561731) | more than 9 years ago | (#12995286)

Opera is a commercial company and with their relatively modest research and development budget they've come up with a fairly neat idea to incorporate BitTorrent into a web-browser. Now granted, it doesn't take a genuius to be able to put 2+2 together, afterall, one might see it as a simple extension of what web-browsers already provide. What slightly annoys me is comments like 'some enterprising firefox/mozilla will have this feature in a couple of weeks' - couple that with statements such as 'open source drives innovativation'. While I don't doubt either statement, this example is one where open source hasn't driven the innovation. It has helped (BitTorrent is open-source, without it Opera would have nothing). But then, if an Open Source browser developer just 'copies' this feature - where is the innovation? If open source really drove innovation, why didn't some bright OSS developer have the idea for such a feature sooner?

btclient plug-in for squid (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#12995296)

yes, please, cool .. now please give me the squid
bittorrent plug-in that will take over the
download if my browser goes thru it to a .torrent
file and maybe dump it into my local apache /htdocs/torrent directory ???
what for? i can port-forward to one machine only
so it should be a server computer that everybody (on
LAN) can access ...

Hrm... why? (2, Insightful)

Duncan3 (10537) | more than 9 years ago | (#12995300)

When I click on a torrent it already automaticly launches and starts. The BT installer is mean and lean, no worries there.

Won't this just mean one more thing for Opera to have to write/maintain/patch themselves?

Still a cool move, just... why?
Load More Comments
Slashdot Login

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?