Announcing FURIAA - P2P-Zone

AYB · 24-06-02, 03:52 PM

Well here you go, some hardcore information on my file sharing app.

First up, it's called furiaa (fury-ah), website http://www.furiaa.com but there's nothing of any relevance there yet.

After your input we've decided to go for both a hybrid client and our own network. The very first release will probably only connect to OpenNap and Gnutella but bear in mind we will have the whole proprietory-to-generic system in place for this which will mean adding a network is easy - expect at least one new network with every major release.

When we've become established we'll begin work on our own network which include features like:

-Encryption
-Anonymity
-Boolean searches
-Partial download sharing

and everything else you'd expect from a decent p2p app nowadays.

The idea is when you're having trouble finding what you want and want to search the maximum possible number of sources you'll connect to as many of the networks as your connection can handle simultaneously. When you want to take advantage of the more advanced features our network offers, you can connect to just that.

twinspan will be happy to hear we have ditched the whole .NET idea after realising the framework is a whopping 20mb. Instead we're going the Java route.

Any input on this is greatly appreciated

dead_frog · 24-06-02, 04:11 PM

keeping twinspan happy is always a good idea, especially after 11pm

AYB · 24-06-02, 04:14 PM

TankGirl · 24-06-02, 04:16 PM

First of all: congratulations and good luck!

IMHO every new p2p application is welcome - and especially so when the application comes from people close to p2p communities like is the case with you guys.

Your basic approach sounds healthy. Regarding the architecture my advice would be to pay attention to the issue of permanent, verifiable peer identities. It's a bit trickier to implement in the decentralized environment than on a centralized system but it is worth it. Building on it you can have safe communications, safe hotlists, even safe communities if you will support group formation on your own platform at some stage.

And one more thing: the name rocks!

- tg

AYB · 24-06-02, 04:22 PM

Works on some many levels doesn't it?

goldie · 24-06-02, 05:22 PM

The name alone is near and dear to my heart.

The appie itself sounds like a dream come true AND full of HUGE potential

AYB, Can all of us here on NU become your baby's "godparents"?

How about aunts and uncles?

Spaceboy · 24-06-02, 05:38 PM

I think using a variety of networks is definetely the way to go initially. This will ensure that there is a lot of content available right from the off. Once you build up a large enough userbase you could then drop these and just concentrate on your own network. Nice to hear that your new network will also include some sort of encryption.

Scyth · 24-06-02, 06:18 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by AYB
twinspan will be happy to hear we have ditched the whole .NET idea after realising the framework is a whopping 20mb. Instead we're going the Java route.

If you're targetting Windows, I'd suggest you don't go with Java. It is slower than natively compiled code, and enough so to keep users away. It also provides a poorer GUI than either Windows or MacOS.

JackSpratts · 24-06-02, 09:05 PM

sounds like you guys are truly making progress and are on your way to releasing a viable application. i have no doubt it will prove to be a great addition to the filesharing community and one that stays relevant for a long time to come.

i would like to see one feature included à la freenet, and that would be the option to scramble an uploaders ip address. without a valid address the riaa can't determine who gave them that latest file with the contested copyright history, and the gov't can't arrest the citizen for spreading the latest embarrassing truth.

here’s to furiaa!

- js.

SA_Dave · 24-06-02, 09:26 PM

to Java.

Scyth, java's good for everyone because :[list=1][*]It runs on virtually ANY platform i.e. Mac, Windows, Linux (or any *nix sytem eg. BSD, Unix), Sun, Sparc etc. More platforms = more users =

[*]It may be a little resource hungry in some cases, but it's far more preferable to .NET & skins etc. can be easily disabled![*]It'll be easy for native configurations to be developed later, as java is very similar to c++. If you read some of AYB's other posts, you'd realise that this is only the initial plan & other platform-specific versions will be released later.[/list=1]

As far as the name goes...

HAHAHAHAHA!

RIAA many times over!

Maybe Hilary likes it though!

spstn · 24-06-02, 11:32 PM

One A short and we have FURIA, spanish for FURY.

I can't wait to see the new spot in Hilary's fur.

Merijn · 25-06-02, 01:32 AM

Way to go AYB!

Just one thing pops up here.... since the Java in Windows XP was kinda scr00d somehow (I can't exactly remember how or why), won't XP fail to run Furiaa?

Not that I'm complaining.... I loathe Windows XP myself. [searching for the smiley that flips The Finger.. damn, where is that thing]

BuzzB2K · 25-06-02, 03:42 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by Merijn
Way to go AYB!

Just one thing pops up here.... since the Java in Windows XP was kinda scr00d somehow (I can't exactly remember how or why), won't XP fail to run Furiaa?

Not that I'm complaining.... I loathe Windows XP myself. [searching for the smiley that flips The Finger.. damn, where is that thing]

Wasn't scr00d, just left out - You can get it from Windows Update if you need it. And I think I read somewhere that it will be included in SP1

AYB · 25-06-02, 05:01 AM

Wow guys, thanx for the comments

Scyth: Java GUIs are a big concern of ours, they were pretty much the biggest reason against us using Java in the first place. However you can program/hack anything if you put enough time and effort into it and we WILL make the interface look good, and be fully skinnable

As far as speed issues are concerned, and perhaps you can enlighten me here, we might sort out some kind of Win32 compilation from the Java source code. I haven't really looked into the subject aside from checking out JET which looks pretty tasty except we'd have to fork out some major amount of cash for the professional version. I'm hoping there are some free alternatives? Maybe we'll even code one ourselves

JackSpratts: that kind of security feature is just the sort we want to get into our network. We don't want our ultimate p2p app to become the RIAA's ultimate tool for hunting down filesharers

Stoepsel · 25-06-02, 05:08 AM

I personally couldn't be happier about AYB deciding to code FURIAA in Java instead of using the .NET framework.

Here are some of my reasons:

Java is a proven cross-platform language, the Java Development Kit (JDK) has undergone refinements and is now in version 1.4. Is it being used by well-known companies to build enterprise-ready applications. On the other hand, is .NET even a finished product?
The Java Runtime Environment is easily installed and removed. Can you say the same for .NET?
Java can be used to create OK-looking GUIs. Admittedly, the effort involved is greater than using .NET - at least that's what I would suspect. And the Java GUIs often tend to react sluggishly.
Applications written using .NET will surely have better performance when it comes to the GUI because of a tighter coupling with the underlying OS. But I doubt that there is much difference between Java and .NET when it comes to networking. And that is something I'd be more concerned about at this stage of development.

For the reasons listed above, I personally would be extremely hesitent to install FURIAA, if it were written using .NET. But I have no problem with Java. To me, Java is a proven technology I know and (for the most part) trust. .NET has not yet shown me that it can back up all the hype surrounding it.

@AYB:
Will you be using the most recent version of the JDK (1.4)? Be sure to check out the new networking capabilities (e.g. non-blocking socket I/O) to get the best performance out of the Java app.

@Merijn and BuzzB2K:
Wouldn't you want/have to install the 'official' Sun JDK or JRE in any case? Microsoft is known to try to screw up and undermine the Java standards set by Sun and go their own ways. And I doubt that WinXP comes with a recent version of the JRE that would be able to run FURIAA.

Hope I didn't offend any Microsoft supporters. Everything is IMHO of course, so go ahead, flame me

, see if I care

.

Stoepsel

BuzzB2K · 25-06-02, 01:03 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by Stoepsel
@Merijn and BuzzB2K:
Wouldn't you want/have to install the 'official' Sun JDK or JRE in any case? Microsoft is known to try to screw up and undermine the Java standards set by Sun and go their own ways. And I doubt that WinXP comes with a recent version of the JRE that would be able to run FURIAA.

Hope I didn't offend any Microsoft supporters. Everything is IMHO of course, so go ahead, flame me , see if I care .

Stoepsel

The version MS providing (install on demand) is their old MSJavx86 from 1997

I have j2re-1_4_0-win installed instead...

Microsoft To Pack Java in Windows XP Update

napho · 25-06-02, 02:49 PM

Good luck AYB.

This is like a hometown boy making good.
btw If the program is a little slow you can blame it on Twinspan.

Mowzer · 25-06-02, 03:31 PM

no, no AYB,

The dot Net frame work is a mighty download for some at 20mb, but dont make that your reason for skipping out on employing it.

.net is easy to get, and as time goes on, the dot net frame work is something that allot of windows users will already have. Once someone has it they only need it once.

I first installed the dot.net framework when running an alpha of Microsoft Saturn, which has now been released as Microsoft ASP web matrix.

Here is a sinppet from the Saturn documentation that shows how microsoft is employing dot net...

"While application developers have long enjoyed development tools like Microsoft’s Visual Studio suite, development tools targeted to Web developers have been few and far between.

Sure, there have been development tools targeted to HTML designers such as Microsoft’s FrontPage and Macromedia’s Dreamweaver, but Web developers creating the backend code for data-driven Web applications have had to use tools not quite fit for the job. We’ve either been forced into using glorified text editors like Visual InterDev or Homesite, or are using tools like Visual Studio .NET to create our ASP.NET Web pages, which, in many cases, is akin to killing a flea with a cannonball. Not to mention Visual Studio .NET’s imposing price tag. If it is your job to do application or Web development, the one thousand to twenty-five hundred dollar price tag of Visual Studio .NET is reasonable, but if you do ASP.NET development for pay or for fun on your spare time, purchasing Visual Studio .NET might not be an option.

Microsoft took it upon themselves to create a tool that would be specifically designed for ASP.NET developers and ASP.NET developers alone, and carry with it a very sensible price tag – free! Furthermore, the ASP.NET team did not want to restrict this tool or the ability to test ASP.NET Web pages to only those developers using Windows 2000 or Windows XP Pro. That is, their goal was to make this free, ASP.NET-specific editor able to run and to “execute” ASP.NET Web pages on any version of Windows 95 or higher. Such a product, reasoned the ASP.NET team, would not only help the existing ASP.NET developer community, but also provide the motivation for those interested in jumping into ASP.NET.

One of the first things you’ll notice when downloading Project Saturn from http://www.asp.net is its small file size. At the time of this writing, the Saturn download clocked in at a slim 785 KB. You didn’t read that wrong, that’s 792 kilobytes. The amazingly small file downloads quickly and can fit on a single floppy, an amazing feat especially considering that Saturn’s big brother, Visual Studio .NET, requires several full CDs. (Note that you will need the .NET Framework installed on the computer you wish to run Saturn. The .NET Framework can be downloaded from http://www.asp.net as well, and will run on Windows 95 and up.)"

The tool is as powerful as other programs such as Visual Studio .NET, yet comes in a much smaller package. Thats one of the beauties of .net

Since I have had the, net frame work already installed I have also used a number of other applications that also work with dot net, including a nifty little weather app for the desktop. More and more .net is being implemented. There has been no need to load extra .net framework aswell.

Sadly, microsoft keeps trying to phase out java by default, although lately they did decided to keep making it available for the next short term.

Although along side .net java is a very excellent method to also use. Like its been noted almost any OS can use java.

I hope to eventually leave java behind though, and will be able to once xiamian finishes up its work on .net for linux.

The name of your app really rocks too. Good choice. As always best of luck on development.

Can't wait to see the final product

JohnDoe345 · 25-06-02, 05:52 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by Stoepsel
The Java Runtime Environment is easily installed and removed. Can you say the same for .NET?

.NET does have an uninstall option in window's add/remove feature. I haven't uninstalled it so I don't know if it is as easy to uninstall as other programs.

Quote:

Originally posted by Stoepsel
To me, Java is a proven technology I know and (for the most part) trust. .NET has not yet shown me that it can back up all the hype surrounding it.

I agree with this. Until .NET can prove itself through extensive testing to be better then programs like Java then it might not be such a good idea to jump on the .NET bandwagon. So far I don't have any problems from .NET that I can tell but most people are always hesitant to use something new when they already have something that works. What makes the situation worst is that it's from Microsoft.....I don't think I need to explain further.

If .NET does prove itself to be a great program then you might want to think about making a version for it in the future. Right now I think the best way to get a lot of people to use your program is with Java. A lot more users are more willing to install Java then .NET.

Quote:

Originally posted by Stoepsel
@AYB:
Will you be using the most recent version of the JDK (1.4)?

I was wondering about this too. I already have version 1.3.1 installed on my XP machine. Will I have to install the lastest one? It's not really a problem if I have to....just wanted to know.

AYB · 25-06-02, 11:37 PM

I genuinely feel .NET is the way of the future... BUT it's not ready yet. It's still early days for the system and I don't think its mainstream enough for us to consider it, especially given the size of the framework. 20mb mite be a matter of minutes for a broadband user but it's approaching an hour for 56k. Before the user has a chance to even fire up our app they have to take (considerable) time and effort to download and install the framework. Which IMHO is too much to ask of them. We want them to have easy, instant access.

Another very important point about .NET is my partner in crime tried installing the framework as part of the Visual Studio installation when we were first considering it and the install failed midway thru with the result that his machine is fairly messed up now. When reinstalling he gets the same error. We didnt think this boded particularly well - if even we can't install the framework first time error free then what hope do we have for our users?

And yes we will be using version 1.4 of the JDK

24-06-02, 03:52 PM	#1
AYB Registered User Join Date: Jan 2002 Posts: 82	Announcing FURIAA Well here you go, some hardcore information on my file sharing app. First up, it's called furiaa (fury-ah), website http://www.furiaa.com but there's nothing of any relevance there yet. After your input we've decided to go for both a hybrid client and our own network. The very first release will probably only connect to OpenNap and Gnutella but bear in mind we will have the whole proprietory-to-generic system in place for this which will mean adding a network is easy - expect at least one new network with every major release. When we've become established we'll begin work on our own network which include features like: -Encryption -Anonymity -Boolean searches -Partial download sharing and everything else you'd expect from a decent p2p app nowadays. The idea is when you're having trouble finding what you want and want to search the maximum possible number of sources you'll connect to as many of the networks as your connection can handle simultaneously. When you want to take advantage of the more advanced features our network offers, you can connect to just that. twinspan will be happy to hear we have ditched the whole .NET idea after realising the framework is a whopping 20mb. Instead we're going the Java route. Any input on this is greatly appreciated

24-06-02, 11:32 PM	#11
spstn No Nonsense Nonsense Join Date: May 2002 Location: Miami Posts: 382	Hail to FURY ! One A short and we have FURIA, spanish for FURY. I can't wait to see the new spot in Hilary's fur.

25-06-02, 05:08 AM	#15
Stoepsel Waiting For The Night To Fall... Join Date: Jan 2002 Posts: 225	The Java vs. .NET debate - My 2 cents I personally couldn't be happier about AYB deciding to code FURIAA in Java instead of using the .NET framework. Here are some of my reasons: Java is a proven cross-platform language, the Java Development Kit (JDK) has undergone refinements and is now in version 1.4. Is it being used by well-known companies to build enterprise-ready applications. On the other hand, is .NET even a finished product? The Java Runtime Environment is easily installed and removed. Can you say the same for .NET? Java can be used to create OK-looking GUIs. Admittedly, the effort involved is greater than using .NET - at least that's what I would suspect. And the Java GUIs often tend to react sluggishly. Applications written using .NET will surely have better performance when it comes to the GUI because of a tighter coupling with the underlying OS. But I doubt that there is much difference between Java and .NET when it comes to networking. And that is something I'd be more concerned about at this stage of development. For the reasons listed above, I personally would be extremely hesitent to install FURIAA, if it were written using .NET. But I have no problem with Java. To me, Java is a proven technology I know and (for the most part) trust. .NET has not yet shown me that it can back up all the hype surrounding it. @AYB: Will you be using the most recent version of the JDK (1.4)? Be sure to check out the new networking capabilities (e.g. non-blocking socket I/O) to get the best performance out of the Java app. @Merijn and BuzzB2K: Wouldn't you want/have to install the 'official' Sun JDK or JRE in any case? Microsoft is known to try to screw up and undermine the Java standards set by Sun and go their own ways. And I doubt that WinXP comes with a recent version of the JRE that would be able to run FURIAA. Hope I didn't offend any Microsoft supporters. Everything is IMHO of course, so go ahead, flame me , see if I care . Stoepsel __________________ Who is General Failure and why is he reading my hard disk?

Thread Tools	Search this Thread
Show Printable Version Email this Page	Search this Thread: Advanced Search
Display Modes
Linear Mode Switch to Hybrid Mode Switch to Threaded Mode

24-06-02, 04:11 PM	#2
dead_frog Oddball Join Date: Feb 2002 Location: Pond Posts: 140	keeping twinspan happy is always a good idea, especially after 11pm

24-06-02, 04:14 PM	#3
AYB Registered User Join Date: Jan 2002 Posts: 82

24-06-02, 04:16 PM	#4
TankGirl Madame Comrade Join Date: May 2000 Location: Area 25 Posts: 5,587	First of all: congratulations and good luck! IMHO every new p2p application is welcome - and especially so when the application comes from people close to p2p communities like is the case with you guys. Your basic approach sounds healthy. Regarding the architecture my advice would be to pay attention to the issue of permanent, verifiable peer identities. It's a bit trickier to implement in the decentralized environment than on a centralized system but it is worth it. Building on it you can have safe communications, safe hotlists, even safe communities if you will support group formation on your own platform at some stage. And one more thing: the name rocks! - tg

24-06-02, 04:22 PM	#5
AYB Registered User Join Date: Jan 2002 Posts: 82	Works on some many levels doesn't it?

24-06-02, 05:22 PM	#6
goldie yea, it's me. Join Date: Jan 2002 Location: usa Posts: 2,093	The name alone is near and dear to my heart. The appie itself sounds like a dream come true AND full of HUGE potential AYB, Can all of us here on NU become your baby's "godparents"? How about aunts and uncles?

24-06-02, 05:38 PM	#7
Spaceboy Registered User Join Date: Jun 2002 Posts: 5	I think using a variety of networks is definetely the way to go initially. This will ensure that there is a lot of content available right from the off. Once you build up a large enough userbase you could then drop these and just concentrate on your own network. Nice to hear that your new network will also include some sort of encryption.

24-06-02, 09:05 PM	#9
JackSpratts Join Date: May 2001 Location: New England Posts: 10,017	sounds like you guys are truly making progress and are on your way to releasing a viable application. i have no doubt it will prove to be a great addition to the filesharing community and one that stays relevant for a long time to come. i would like to see one feature included à la freenet, and that would be the option to scramble an uploaders ip address. without a valid address the riaa can't determine who gave them that latest file with the contested copyright history, and the gov't can't arrest the citizen for spreading the latest embarrassing truth. here’s to furiaa! - js.

24-06-02, 09:26 PM	#10
SA_Dave Guardian of the Maturation Chamber Join Date: May 2002 Location: Unimatrix Zero, Area 25 Posts: 462	to Java. Scyth, java's good for everyone because :[list=1][]It runs on virtually ANY platform i.e. Mac, Windows, Linux (or any nix sytem eg. BSD, Unix), Sun, Sparc etc. More platforms = more users = []It may be a little resource hungry in some cases, but it's far more preferable to .NET & skins etc. can be easily disabled![]It'll be easy for native configurations to be developed later, as java is very similar to c++. If you read some of AYB's other posts, you'd realise that this is only the initial plan & other platform-specific versions will be released later.[/list=1] As far as the name goes... HAHAHAHAHA! RIAA many times over! Maybe Hilary likes it though!

25-06-02, 01:32 AM	#12
Merijn Registered User Join Date: May 2002 Location: NL Posts: 107	Way to go AYB! Just one thing pops up here.... since the Java in Windows XP was kinda scr00d somehow (I can't exactly remember how or why), won't XP fail to run Furiaa? Not that I'm complaining.... I loathe Windows XP myself. [searching for the smiley that flips The Finger.. damn, where is that thing]

25-06-02, 05:01 AM	#14
AYB Registered User Join Date: Jan 2002 Posts: 82	Wow guys, thanx for the comments Scyth: Java GUIs are a big concern of ours, they were pretty much the biggest reason against us using Java in the first place. However you can program/hack anything if you put enough time and effort into it and we WILL make the interface look good, and be fully skinnable As far as speed issues are concerned, and perhaps you can enlighten me here, we might sort out some kind of Win32 compilation from the Java source code. I haven't really looked into the subject aside from checking out JET which looks pretty tasty except we'd have to fork out some major amount of cash for the professional version. I'm hoping there are some free alternatives? Maybe we'll even code one ourselves JackSpratts: that kind of security feature is just the sort we want to get into our network. We don't want our ultimate p2p app to become the RIAA's ultimate tool for hunting down filesharers

25-06-02, 02:49 PM	#17
napho Dawn's private genie Join Date: May 2001 Location: the Canadian wasteland Posts: 4,461	Good luck AYB. This is like a hometown boy making good. btw If the program is a little slow you can blame it on Twinspan.

25-06-02, 03:31 PM	#18
Mowzer ' Join Date: Jan 2002 Posts: 209	no, no AYB, The dot Net frame work is a mighty download for some at 20mb, but dont make that your reason for skipping out on employing it. .net is easy to get, and as time goes on, the dot net frame work is something that allot of windows users will already have. Once someone has it they only need it once. I first installed the dot.net framework when running an alpha of Microsoft Saturn, which has now been released as Microsoft ASP web matrix. Here is a sinppet from the Saturn documentation that shows how microsoft is employing dot net... "While application developers have long enjoyed development tools like Microsoft’s Visual Studio suite, development tools targeted to Web developers have been few and far between. Sure, there have been development tools targeted to HTML designers such as Microsoft’s FrontPage and Macromedia’s Dreamweaver, but Web developers creating the backend code for data-driven Web applications have had to use tools not quite fit for the job. We’ve either been forced into using glorified text editors like Visual InterDev or Homesite, or are using tools like Visual Studio .NET to create our ASP.NET Web pages, which, in many cases, is akin to killing a flea with a cannonball. Not to mention Visual Studio .NET’s imposing price tag. If it is your job to do application or Web development, the one thousand to twenty-five hundred dollar price tag of Visual Studio .NET is reasonable, but if you do ASP.NET development for pay or for fun on your spare time, purchasing Visual Studio .NET might not be an option. Microsoft took it upon themselves to create a tool that would be specifically designed for ASP.NET developers and ASP.NET developers alone, and carry with it a very sensible price tag – free! Furthermore, the ASP.NET team did not want to restrict this tool or the ability to test ASP.NET Web pages to only those developers using Windows 2000 or Windows XP Pro. That is, their goal was to make this free, ASP.NET-specific editor able to run and to “execute” ASP.NET Web pages on any version of Windows 95 or higher. Such a product, reasoned the ASP.NET team, would not only help the existing ASP.NET developer community, but also provide the motivation for those interested in jumping into ASP.NET. One of the first things you’ll notice when downloading Project Saturn from http://www.asp.net is its small file size. At the time of this writing, the Saturn download clocked in at a slim 785 KB. You didn’t read that wrong, that’s 792 kilobytes. The amazingly small file downloads quickly and can fit on a single floppy, an amazing feat especially considering that Saturn’s big brother, Visual Studio .NET, requires several full CDs. (Note that you will need the .NET Framework installed on the computer you wish to run Saturn. The .NET Framework can be downloaded from http://www.asp.net as well, and will run on Windows 95 and up.)" The tool is as powerful as other programs such as Visual Studio .NET, yet comes in a much smaller package. Thats one of the beauties of .net Since I have had the, net frame work already installed I have also used a number of other applications that also work with dot net, including a nifty little weather app for the desktop. More and more .net is being implemented. There has been no need to load extra .net framework aswell. Sadly, microsoft keeps trying to phase out java by default, although lately they did decided to keep making it available for the next short term. Although along side .net java is a very excellent method to also use. Like its been noted almost any OS can use java. I hope to eventually leave java behind though, and will be able to once xiamian finishes up its work on .net for linux. The name of your app really rocks too. Good choice. As always best of luck on development. Can't wait to see the final product

25-06-02, 11:37 PM	#20
AYB Registered User Join Date: Jan 2002 Posts: 82	I genuinely feel .NET is the way of the future... BUT it's not ready yet. It's still early days for the system and I don't think its mainstream enough for us to consider it, especially given the size of the framework. 20mb mite be a matter of minutes for a broadband user but it's approaching an hour for 56k. Before the user has a chance to even fire up our app they have to take (considerable) time and effort to download and install the framework. Which IMHO is too much to ask of them. We want them to have easy, instant access. Another very important point about .NET is my partner in crime tried installing the framework as part of the Visual Studio installation when we were first considering it and the install failed midway thru with the result that his machine is fairly messed up now. When reinstalling he gets the same error. We didnt think this boded particularly well - if even we can't install the framework first time error free then what hope do we have for our users? And yes we will be using version 1.4 of the JDK