New Client- QeerPeer

Beatle · #1 (**permalink**) July 2nd, 2002

I'm won't bore you all by waxing lyrical about its features. Take a look for yourself:

http://qeerpeer.com/qeerpeer.htm

tshdos · #2 (**permalink**) July 2nd, 2002

Some problems that should be looked at

1. Very boring, plain interface. Some may like this, I don't.

2. No advanced features. I guess this may be a good thing for some people.

3. Text in the list (connections) should be replaced by something more descriptive for the average user (ie SOCK_CONNECTED should be replaced with Connected or something )

4. Connections window should tell you what type of client you are connected to... since it supports 0.6 handshake this would be VERY easy to add.

5. Blank message boxes. I have gotten a couple of errors where the message box had no title or message ???

6. When you initiate a search it just adds the term to a listbox. It makes no mention of whether it has even acknowledged the request.

7. No way to stop a search. Granted that you don't really have any control over the hits coming back, there should be a command to stop adding things to the list.

8. If you sort the search list while items are coming in, any new items added are not sorted.

9. Results tab show too little information about a hit. Standard information should be at least filename, size, firewalled host, busy host, host speed. I recommend having those plus host address, client name, file extension and SHA1 hash

10. Apparently no ultrapeer support (unconfirmed, but I couldn't get anything from the handshake other than a User-Agent field). This should be a requirement.

11. Lots of simple text formatting things that should be changed.

12. Bandwidth hog. See 10.

13. The absolute worst problem: Sets itself to automatically startup when you load windows WITHOUT ASKING OR TELLING YOU. There is also no way (that I can tell) to turn it off without manually deleting it. ( Delete it from the Startup folder in the Start Menu ).

Still running some more tests, but I have had it for over a week and already dislike it. But that's just my opinion, try it for yourself

About the only good thing I see with this client is the charts which are a little better than most, although it is just a commercial control.

Anyone know how to pronounce the name?

Paradog · #3 (**permalink**) July 3rd, 2002

Kevin,
Maybe *Keer Peer*?

Joakim Agren · #4 (**permalink**) July 3rd, 2002

Hello!

I cannot see any of the screenshots because the links to the pictures have been broken but my impression/stomach feeling of it is that it is just a new junk client.

caterman · #5 (**permalink**) July 3rd, 2002

I cant see the screen shot also !

Beatle · #6 (**permalink**) July 3rd, 2002

Quote:

Originally posted by tshdos
Some problems that should be looked at

1. Very boring, plain interface. Some may like this, I don't.

>> Subjective- I've tried to avoid some of the horrible garish GUI's I've seen. In actual fact the GUI uses the latest XP common controls.

2. No advanced features. I guess this may be a good thing for some people.

>> Like what? When I conducted an informal survey the #1 feature request (by far) was better downloads. Compare QP's d/l with any other client. It has the best and most robust implementation of swarm downloading.

3. Text in the list (connections) should be replaced by something more descriptive for the average user (ie SOCK_CONNECTED should be replaced with Connected or something )

>> Good point.

4. Connections window should tell you what type of client you are connected to... since it supports 0.6 handshake this would be VERY easy to add.

>> On the to do list.

5. Blank message boxes. I have gotten a couple of errors where the message box had no title or message ???

>> Beta bugs, I'll look at this right away.

6. When you initiate a search it just adds the term to a listbox. It makes no mention of whether it has even acknowledged the request.

>> The latest build has a list edit box which contains pending searches, you can also cancel a search from here.

7. No way to stop a search. Granted that you don't really have any control over the hits coming back, there should be a command to stop adding things to the list.

>>See 6)

8. If you sort the search list while items are coming in, any new items added are not sorted.

>> By design since sorting as hits arrive can dramatically slow down searches that return hundreds or thousands of hits in small groups. Perhaps a compromise to do an option to turn automatic resorting on.

9. Results tab show too little information about a hit. Standard information should be at least filename, size, firewalled host, busy host, host speed. I recommend having those plus host address, client name, file extension and SHA1 hash

>> Meta information is displayed in the tooltip. I will add this to the list view also. As for client speed, I could add this for informational purposes, but in my experience it is pretty much meaningless because so many other factors affect d/l speed.

10. Apparently no ultrapeer support (unconfirmed, but I couldn't get anything from the handshake other than a User-Agent field). This should be a requirement.

>> Under development.

11. Lots of simple text formatting things that should be changed.

12. Bandwidth hog. See 10.

13. The absolute worst problem: Sets itself to automatically startup when you load windows WITHOUT ASKING OR TELLING YOU. There is also no way (that I can tell) to turn it off without manually deleting it. ( Delete it from the Startup folder in the Start Menu ).

>> If this is the worst problem you can think of, it certainly puts the rest of your complaints in perspective .

Still running some more tests, but I have had it for over a week and already dislike it. But that's just my opinion, try it for yourself

>> Thanks for the feedback. I'm getting lots of emails from people that love QP.

About the only good thing I see with this client is the charts which are a little better than most, although it is just a commercial control.

>> Woah, a positive comment. Funny thing is I had another guy (as vehement as you) wax lyrical about how much he hated the charts. As for the chart control's origin, I guess you would code everything yourself in assembler

Anyone know how to pronounce the name?

>> I hope you're kidding.

Beatle · #7 (**permalink**) July 3rd, 2002

Quote:

Originally posted by Joakim Agren
Hello!

I cannot see any of the screenshots because the links to the pictures have been broken but my impression/stomach feeling of it is that it is just a new junk client.

Hi Joakim,

The screenshots are pretty detailed and weigh in at 60-80k each. Sometimes the browser will take a second or so to display the image. Try refreshing.

tshdos · #8 (**permalink**) July 3rd, 2002

Quote:

>> Subjective- I've tried to avoid some of the horrible garish GUI's I've seen. In actual fact the GUI uses the latest XP common controls.

I just personally don't care for a completely "tabbed" application.
Also, just because it uses the latest XP common controls doesn't mean it is better

The interface is better than some that I have seen but I have also seen alot that I like more. Shareaza actually allows you to select which type of view to use.

Quote:

>> The latest build has a list edit box which contains pending searches, you can also cancel a search from here.

But does it close the tab that shows the results? That is very annoying. IMO cancel search should just stop the search ( stop displaying hits etc ) but leave the tab open. The tab should have a close button/menu option/something.

Quote:

>> By design since sorting as hits arrive can dramatically slow down searches that return hundreds or thousands of hits in small groups. Perhaps a compromise to do an option to turn automatic resorting on.

I don't really see how this can dramatically slow down the searches. You have a sorted list and when you add the new item to the list you have to give it an index anyway. It may slow down the speed at which items are added to the list ( which is what I think you mean ) but a user wouldn't notice anyway because there is no guarantee that N results will be displayed in T time. I agree that an option may be the best idea because I know not everyone sees things as I do.

Quote:

>> Meta information is displayed in the tooltip. I will add this to the list view also. As for client speed, I could add this for informational purposes, but in my experience it is pretty much meaningless because so many other factors affect d/l speed.

Agreed, but personally I like to try the (apparent) fastest hosts first and the (apparent) slowest last. Besides, if you already have the information available and it is basic information, why not add it?

Quote:

>> If this is the worst problem you can think of, it certainly puts the rest of your complaints in perspective

Just annoying. Some other clients have the option to do this but it is an OPTION. I leave my computer running full time but I had to restart a few days ago and after logging in QeerPeer started up. I went through all of the options to try to find where this was set and even uninstalled and reinstalled to see if I missed anything. I just dislike programs that assume I would like it to startup when the computer does without asking or at least telling me. ( This includes programs that just add an icon to the system tray

). Anyway just hoping you could add an option to remove/add the "Start on load" feature.

Quote:

>> Woah, a positive comment. Funny thing is I had another guy (as vehement as you) wax lyrical about how much he hated the charts. As for the chart control's origin, I guess you would code everything yourself in assembler

Sure why not...

No, I just have fun coding stuff like that for the hell of it, even though it is "reinventing the wheel", so I have a personal dislike for commercial controls.

Personally I think the charts are better than any other client I have tested. It is nice to be able to glance at them every once in a while just to see what is going on rather than having to read through all of the numbers and make a chart in your head ( which is sometimes useful ).

Quote:

>> I hope you're kidding.

Actually I wan't. I just wanted to know the "official" pronunciation for it.

I wish you much luck with your client. It has potential. I think it is a very good thing for there to be many clients. If there were to be only 1 or 2 clients then they would control how the network was run and that would/could be very bad.

cultiv8r · #9 (**permalink**) July 4th, 2002

Quote:

my impression/stomach feeling of it is that it is just a new junk client.

Well, well. Let's not go so far calling it a "junk client" because you haven't seen it. It's always nice to see new Gnutella clients, and the earliest versions will always have some issues. So, let's wait until you see some screenshots or have tried it, then give some comments on how to imrpove it...

Unbathed · #10 (**permalink**) July 4th, 2002

The screenshots don't load and refreshing does not help.

W3C's validator complains, too.

http://validator.w3.org/check?uri=ht...y%29:confused:

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
Client to Client Encryption	lyonadmiral	New Feature Requests	1	February 1st, 2006 04:55 AM
Which client is best for me?	revingtosh	General Gnutella / Gnutella Network Discussion	0	August 3rd, 2004 08:01 AM
Client	Squee	General Gnutella / Gnutella Network Discussion	1	August 22nd, 2001 04:52 AM
what client should i use?	Unregistered	General Gnutella / Gnutella Network Discussion	1	July 13th, 2001 05:57 PM
php web client	miker	General Gnutella / Gnutella Network Discussion	0	June 26th, 2001 10:20 AM