Sony, for the love of all that is holy...

[ontologicalshoc]

...give us resumable downloads, please! I'm dying here.

 

[Jordan]

This is one missing feature I don't understand. Preventing background downloads to curb demand makes perfect sense to me, but non-resumable downloads wastes everyone's time and resources. Can you imagine how many wasted terabytes of data Sony has paid for?

 

[the Interceptor]

I was surprised to hear that for going from v1.0 to v1.1 of the GTHD demo, you needed to download the whole demo of 600 and some MB again, instead of just downloading a small patch. It seems they don't have this department running properly - hopefully - yet.

 

[DuckRacer]

This is one missing feature I don't understand. Preventing background downloads to curb demand makes perfect sense to me, but non-resumable downloads wastes everyone's time and resources. Can you imagine how many wasted terabytes of data Sony has paid for?

I would think Sony would use something like Bittorrent, so their servers aren't strained.

 

[Jeremy Ricci]

Sony is giving an update in March (3/3) and it will feature auto resume features and multi-tasking. It is not known of downloads and gameplay are a part of the multi-tasking, but it will have an auto resume feature.

 

[Jordan]

I would think Sony would use something like Bittorrent, so their servers aren't strained.

No, they wouldn't do that for a lot of reasons.

 

[Jedi2016]

No, they wouldn't do that for a lot of reasons.

Torrents are becoming quite popular in legitimate circles. Doesn't World of Warcraft use torrents to distribute updates? I've seen several companies choose to use them in lieu of wasting bandwidth.

But yes, this is a feature the PS3 needs. I read a thread on another forum not ten minutes ago where a user's daughter had inadvertantly cancelled a download that was nearly finished, and he had to start the whole thing over again. Not to mention that the reason it had been cancelled in the first place was mere accident.. there is no confirmation, it simply cancels the download with the push of a single button. At the very least, they need to add a "Are you sure you wish to cancel?" pop-up.

 

[Jeremy Ricci]

Torrents are becoming quite popular in legitimate circles. Doesn't World of Warcraft use torrents to distribute updates? I've seen several companies choose to use them in lieu of wasting bandwidth.

But yes, this is a feature the PS3 needs. I read a thread on another forum not ten minutes ago where a user's daughter had inadvertantly cancelled a download that was nearly finished, and he had to start the whole thing over again. Not to mention that the reason it had been cancelled in the first place was mere accident.. there is no confirmation, it simply cancels the download with the push of a single button. At the very least, they need to add a "Are you sure you wish to cancel?" pop-up.

March.

 

[Minnesota01R6]

how about an update to the web browser - I think webtv did a better job than the PS3 is doing right now. I want to be able to close a browser window with the push of one button

 

[LaBounti]

L2/r2.

 

[Minnesota01R6]

that only switches, doesn't close the page - I don't want 15 pages open

 

[LaBounti]

R3 then triangle then choose close window. mite be L3.

 

[harrytuttle]

No, they wouldn't do that for a lot of reasons.

Actually, there's no reason not to do it. You need to distribute a large file to thousands of people, often at the same time. Distributed torrent servers in multiple locations (North America, Japan, etc.) would do wonders for load balancing. You also want to have resumable downloads, preventing people from having to restart their downloads, and thus greatly reducing the amount of simultaneous connections (this little feature also reduces the number of people who want to stab Sony in the eye with a spork).

Using BitTorrent itself is obviously a mistake, and if that's what you meant, then I agree. But using some type of proprietary torrent-like distribution is practically mandatory. To do otherwise is amateur night at the Apollo.

 

[Jordan]

Actually, there's no reason not to do it. You need to distribute a large file to thousands of people, often at the same time. Distributed torrent servers in multiple locations (North America, Japan, etc.) would do wonders for load balancing. You also want to have resumable downloads, preventing people from having to restart their downloads, and thus greatly reducing the amount of simultaneous connections (this little feature also reduces the number of people who want to stab Sony in the eye with a spork).

Using BitTorrent itself is obviously a mistake, and if that's what you meant, then I agree. But using some type of proprietary torrent-like distribution is practically mandatory. To do otherwise is amateur night at the Apollo.

Your terminology is flipped - the word "torrent" specifically implies a peer-to-peer method of file distribution, which as you state would never ever be practical for consumer electronics. The distributed server/client relationship you described is exactly how nearly every digital content provider already works. Both Nintendo and Sony use Akamai for these services, the largest company in the field.

 

[Jeremy Ricci]

Actually, there's no reason not to do it. You need to distribute a large file to thousands of people, often at the same time. Distributed torrent servers in multiple locations (North America, Japan, etc.) would do wonders for load balancing. You also want to have resumable downloads, preventing people from having to restart their downloads, and thus greatly reducing the amount of simultaneous connections (this little feature also reduces the number of people who want to stab Sony in the eye with a spork).

Using BitTorrent itself is obviously a mistake, and if that's what you meant, then I agree. But using some type of proprietary torrent-like distribution is practically mandatory. To do otherwise is amateur night at the Apollo.

Using torrent like services would eat up consumers bandwidth, unwillingly, I might add. Not everyone likes to give up their own bandwidth just so someone can save a few bucks. I for one don't want my upload bandwidth being eaten by someone downloading a game, and effecting the way I am playing (insert title here) online.

 

[harrytuttle]

Using torrent like services would eat up consumers bandwidth, unwillingly, I might add. Not everyone likes to give up their own bandwidth just so someone can save a few bucks. I for one don't want my upload bandwidth being eaten by someone downloading a game, and effecting the way I am playing (insert title here) online.

I'm not talking about a traditional torrent service (true peer-to-peer). It would be sort of how Google does searches: one request, multiple servers. Whichever one has the lowest load picks up new transfers. It would be "server/peer - to - client/peer.

Considering Sony's DRM history, I don't think they'd consider sharing anything from anyone's PS3. The moment you allow a device to share data, someone will find a way to choose what data gets shared. And thanks to the RIAA, we all know what that leads to....