Talk:Shareaza

2009

URL's

Lets open this for discussion

Should the URL's point to shareaza.sourceforge.net, or should they point directly to pantheraproject.net as SF automatically redirects users there.

I vote for pantheraproject.net as it is the final place for the redirects, as well as the Wiki, Forums and Help which are also hosted on that domain. 84.68.29.237 (talk) 23:55, 10 March 2009 (UTC)

The SourceForge page is still the one advertised as the project's home page, primarily because nobody outside of the code developer community knows what "Panthera" is. I'd rather we pointed there for now, at least until the Panthera Project actually releases something. Chris Cunningham (not at work) - talk 09:52, 11 March 2009 (UTC)

Yeah, shareaza.sourceforge.net is and will always be the page advertised in order to be able to redirect all users at any time to a new domain, should this become necessary, since what happened with the shareaza.com domain should never happen again. Also, both versions of the links should be kept since the SSL encrypted links currently generate an error on InternetExplorer ("This page contains both secure and unsecure items[...]" or something similar) becasue the page does load (unencrypted) SF logo files from SourceForge. Since such a message could scare away users who don't know about SSL and related stuff and the error message is really annoying, the normal version should be kept as link, too.

BTW, it was a domain takeover and not only a transfer. And the defense found should be mentionned, too (my personal opinion, not so important, since I don't know if the policies allow naming such a stuff, even if not written like an advertisement). Also, I don't think 'trademark registration' is a good way to name this illegal action. (To be further discussed).

One last thing: 84.68.29.237, plz register, I hate discussing with IPs ^^ Old Death (talk) 15:33, 11 March 2009 (UTC)

Done

Also, take a look at other BT sites which support HTTPS connections, they all have the same error message when you view their site over HTTPS, yet their articles only show the secure link, PirateBay and Isohunt spring to mind. I don't see the need for several URL's to a single site, however I understand now for pointing to shareaza.sourceforge.net should the domain name change again.

Domain transfer has been talked about already above... I'm going to add some more to it. AskMeHowIAm (talk) 12:28, 18 March 2009 (UTC)

Generally, I agree: using only one link looks more clean. What about waiting ~1 month to give the server admin the time to fix the error message issue? (I don't know whether it is possible or not.) Also, we could use the securized link for the forums and the shareaza.sf.net link for the project main page (since SSL doesn't really add significant security for visiting the project page, whereas this is the case on the forums (login data etc.))

As for the Pirate Bay: they are not even advertising their https link on their (english) wikipedia article. (-;

Greetings, Old Death (talk) 21:19, 2 April 2009 (UTC)

Check the page history, it did, then did not, then did, and now it does not ;) AskMeHowIAm (talk) 00:09, 10 April 2009 (UTC)

I've now removed the duplicate-domain links. If anyone here knows the administrators of shareazasource.com, it might be a good idea to suggest that they run the home page through a spellchecker. Chris Cunningham (not at work) - talk 14:56, 8 April 2009 (UTC)

Without being rude as it does appear time and effort has gone into that site (and my question is not related to Shareaza so I suppose it should not really be discussed here), could someone please define to me the term 'P2P Terrorist'? As an avid user of many file sharing programs since the days of Napster, I have never heard this term used before. AskMeHowIAm (talk) 00:09, 10 April 2009 (UTC)

Reference: iMesh clone and purpose of Shareaza

"(or resp. ShareazaV5, V6 etc.), an iMesh clone promoting commercial music netshoping from Discordia LTD, an israelian company closely related to the RIAA."

This has been deleted by AskMeHowIAm recently. I think there should be a mantion of a) the fact that it is not anymore only v4 and b) what this application is all about (iMesh clone + Discordias purpose) in the article, as it is somehow very important, isn't it? It is in my eyes what the entire takeover is all about. Greetings, Old (talk) 09:43, 14 June 2009 (UTC)

Hello OD, my main objection is simply how after every release we are going to see something like V5, V6, V7, V8, V9, V10. There is no reason to do this so it may as well be stopped now instead of later.

The article also talks about the version being made available on the day Discordia received the domain, the sources also describe version 4. There is enough information in this article for people to see what the current release of the 'real' Shareaza is, and where to get it from, no matter how many times Discordia update their version.

The latter half of the sentence 'promoting commercial music netshoping' firstly does not make any sense, secondly the ability to purchase music is only available to those in the US and Canada (see iMesh). Thirdly, Discordia are based in Cyprus, not Israel and lastly 'closely related to the RIAA'. The only thing that iMesh and the RIAA have in common is that iMesh were sued by them, they are still operating thanks to getting Robert Summer on their side, who had his contacts in the RIAA and could make them see that iMesh were serious about going legal - http://news.cnet.com/Legal-P2P-opens-for-business/2100-1027_3-5911718.html. Oh, and of course paying royalties to them and the other folk in the industry.

The last thing I'm going to say on the above matter, having a section about Discordia, we both know that it would never be a neutral subject ;)

Now for something totally irrelevant to the above, this isn't really the place but I am sorry to read about what happened to you guys and your project. I actually thought Rhythm was doing a great job as admin and was helping to steer Shareaza forward, what with the recent site changes and stuff. Good luck getting the project back on course! AskMeHowIAm (talk) 23:33, 15 June 2009 (UTC)

I'll try to reformulate it to make it sound neutral and correct the mistake (Israel/Cyprus) about the country. It is important in my opinion to describe the company posing the threat to our project and the service they try to install.

Greetings, OldDeath (talk) 10:08, 14 September 2009 (UTC)

Shareaza Pro / Premium

What's up with these versions (google for them; you'll see several software download sites ofering them)? I expect them to be fraudulent (not associated with Shareaza), but they're not mentioned on the page. 213.112.129.85 (talk) 20:59, 7 September 2009 (UTC)

They are fakes and not related to the Shareaza Open Source Project at all. Any versions of Shareaza with a higher version number than 2.x.x.x are fakes, too. mfg, OldDeath (talk) 09:49, 14 September 2009 (UTC)

2010

Nav boxes

Don't the amount of navigation boxes at the bottom seem a bit extreme? I would be for removing Shareaza from the Gnutella navigation box and not use it here. I think that it only acts as a leaf node and not an ultra-peer. However, there are many other clients like this. Just a suggestion to remove this one as I think the clutter of nav boxes at the bottom of the page is a bit un-managable. I believe there is some template parameter to have them close by default. I would suggest this for all but 'Gnutella2/G2' as Shareaza is the primary citizen of this network. Bpringlemeir (talk) 18:52, 29 January 2010 (UTC)

This is probably a mis-understanding. Users without Javascript see all the user nav boxes, they do not collapse. I typically use NoScript and all othe nav-boxes are expanded. See also Wikipedia:A_navbox_on_every_page#Multiple_navboxes_on_a_page for some more on this topic. The amount still seems excessive. See Wikipedia:Navigation_templates. I think links to the protocol pages would suffice and the nav-box doesn't need to be here (except G2). The 'see also' section is a good place for the protocol links. Bpringlemeir (talk) 19:10, 29 January 2010 (UTC)

Maybe the IRC and eD2k templates could be removed from the page, but the link on the nav boxes should stay. These two are the least important (there are still many Gnutella users on Shareaza clients, even if it is unable to run as an ultrapeer). The other templates should stay at my opinion and as they should be collapsed for 99% of the internet users, there should be no problem, besides...

mfg, OldDeath (talk) 22:07, 31 January 2010 (UTC)

Piolet

The link redirects to Ice axe! --213.130.254.217 (talk) 09:04, 7 June 2010 (UTC)

The Piolet P2P article seems to have been deleted... I'll fix the issue.

mfg, OldDeath (talk) 22:33, 8 June 2010 (UTC)

Why separate version history from the rest of the history

Version history is history too. That section should either be a subsection of History or (better yet) simply mixed in with the current text. Although the current way makes it easier to find info on specific versions (and for that alone I'd rather not make such a big change BOLDly), that's a moot point because they are simply not each important enough to deserve their own section. --an odd name 02:21, 8 August 2010 (UTC)

You are right I think. I moved it into the history section and I'll add some more content once I get the time to. Could be two weeks, though...

mfg, OldDeath - 15:26, 14 August 2010 (UTC)

Sharelin

Please do something with information about Sharelin. It does NOT port Shareaza features, it is NOT limited Shareaza for linux and it is NOT based on Shareaza. Sharelin is a stand-alone project on implementing G2 on unix/linux. G2 code along with http file transfer routines were written from scratch. See http://sharelin.sf.net for details. Sav. 95.84.148.28 (talk) 09:23, 23 August 2010 (UTC)

2011

Etymology

Would anyone know the origin of the program name? Clearly "Share" but the 'aza' part in particular. At first I thought it might be derived from Kazaa until researching the dates and realizing that Shareaza precedes it in creation so I'm not sure what it's from now. I thought it might be interesting to list on the article. Dictabeard (talk) 12:53, 26 January 2011 (UTC)

I think the French Wikipedia article on Shareaza has the answer to your question. IIRC, it was playing on some person out of a tale for children...

mfg, OldDeath - 16:27, 29 January 2011 (UTC)

Nice contradiction, really!!

Now read this WP snippet: Discordia Ltd (iMesh Inc.), filed for trademark registration of the Shareaza name in an attempt to stop the original developers from using the name, claiming that the first-ever use was on December 17, 2007.. Ah yes. So Discordia say first ever use was shortly before Xmas '07. And how, Discordia, do you guys explain the fact that you allegedly had a public Shareaza ready back in 1999? Work on Shareaza began in 1998, with the introduction of the first Shareaza in 1999 - slightly after the original Napster. linky Another proof that this "company" does nothing but fraud and involving themselves in a spiderweb of contradictions. -andy 77.7.12.148 (talk) 12:25, 6 April 2011 (UTC)

Lol, nice catch. :) I've saved a screen-shot of their page in case it is needed at a later time xD.

mfg, OldDeath - 12:43, 16 April 2011 (UTC)

Question to community of shareaza

No forum activity because almost no registered user over there? I noticed a ticket talk about no one can register: Ticket 229 — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2001:B011:B005:9A6:B4DA:159:8A8F:5A58 (talk) 09:32, 25 March 2019 (UTC)