While Usenet usage is unfortunately declining for text, heavily supplanted by web-based forums and, in more recent times, social networks, it’s being more and more used to carry binary contents. There are many groups (whose name normally include “binary” or “binaries”) dedicated to the exchange of video files, audio files and, essentially, all sorts of material. In this arena, since very few ISPs still run a newsserver at all, and those few that do will just not carry binary groups, several commercial Usenet providers fill the gap. I am currently a customer of UsenetServer, but I may just switch to NewsHosting.

I want to make it clear that it is not my intention to advocate or promote piracy in any way. This post is solely dedicated to highlighting the differences between Usenet binaries and the more widely known BitTorrent system, and showing how NewsHosting got it just perfectly right. Let’s start from the beginning, but if you want, you can jump to the review by clicking here.

NH 468×60 B

Usenet vs. BitTorrent

Unlike BitTorrent, which essentially works as an independent peer-to-peer network (the “swarm”) for each torrent, Usenet is a well define client-server architecture. The client connects to the server and uploads or downloads data. It is the server’s business to make sure that all data is synchronized with its fellow server peers. Neither system is necessarily better than the other. While it is true that BitTorrent allows for transfers even in complex situations, whereas a Usenet servers provide a single point of failure, it is also true that the download speed within a swarm depends on the upload speed of the peers themselves. Given that most binary Usenet servers are commercial, however, bandwidth is never an issue and downloading from them is always a very fast business. Indeed, I saturate my downstream bandwidth every single time: I literally download as fast as my DSL allows.

Moreover, many BitTorrent’s trackers have strict ratio enforcement requirements, which can make downloading almost impossible if a user’s line is highly unbalanced. For instance: my effective connection speed is 1.3 MB/s, but I can only upload as fast as around 60 KB/s. This means that if I download a 650 MB file (a typical CD ISO image), it will take me little over 8 minutes. To reach a round 1.0 ratio, ie. to upload as much as I have downloaded, it will take me 3 hours. In the long run, it becomes unsustainable. Usenet servers pose no such problem: users download the contents they want, and only upload (new) contents if they want to. No requirements, and oftentimes no limits whatsoever.

But how does it compare, in practice?

Let’s assume I wanted to download a Linux distribution. I would have to head to a tracker’s site (or anywhere else to get hold of a small .torrent file), feed it to my BitTorrent client, and have it download and upload back, possibly tweaking the settings so that everything is efficient: uploading at the maximum speed possible will make the download slower because there is not enough room to push the ACK packets over the line.

With Usenet, I would head to a Usenet search engine (there are several) and download a small .nzb file, feed it to my Usenet newsreader, provided it handles binary files, and download it. The support for binary files is important: given that Usenet is still essentially a decentralized text-only gigantic bullettin board system, several techniques were devised to allow it to carry binary content. Files are usually split into smaller part using RAR or another compression software, and each part is usually further split into smaller chunks, each of which is uploaded as a single post or article. In addition, parity files are added so that it is possible, within certain limits, to recover any chunk that may be missing due to the decentralized structure of the network itself. Sounds complex? In practice, it’s not. There are specialized Usenet binary downloader programs that are solely dedicated to that; in fact, some of them don’t even handle text groups at all. It’s still a bit of a burden for the uninitiated, and that’s where NewsHosting comes into the picture.

The easy way: NewsHosting‘s client

This is a (currently beta) news reader that incorporates a very nice search system to find contents directly. No more browsing Usenet search engines, comparing dates, looking for retention promises. The database is built by NewsHosting itself, so if it shows, it can be downloaded. It is also possible to use external search engines, but in my tests I found no reason to. The client is also extraordinarily simple to use, and this what really sets it apart. Let’s have a look.

Downloading the application is very easy: after logging in to NewsHosting, a link will led to this page, where it is possible to choose the appropriate operating system. I used the Mac version, but I’m sure that the experience is the same on Windows and Linux too.

Upon launching the app, the only thing that’s needed is typing in one’s username and password. Nothing else. There is no configuration to go through, though of course there are many settings that one may want to tweak: download folder location, connection speed, number of concurrent downloads and more. It is all completely optional, and this is what makes this application really great.

After logging in, the user is presented with what I assume is a collection of the latest posts from the default group bookmarks, seen on the left pane. The application takes care of collecting the chunks and the parts (see above) and condensing them into individual files. Note in the screenshot that there are 26,730 pages to scroll through.

Searching is built-in. Aside from the quick search field in the top right corner, there is a dedicated search pane that allows to set up additional clauses, such as the content language, the file size and more. The application is smart enough to pull up an image for the file in question, whether it’s a cover, a screenshot or a logo.

Before downloading, it is possible to obtain detailed information about the selected file. If an NFO file is present, it is shown directly. In the case of video files, a very interesting feature is the ability to watch a short preview. This is something I haven’t found in any other Usenet downloader I have used, and it’s very interesting. I have no proof of this and I haven’t looked into it in detail, but I suppose that it achieves this by downloading the first part of the set, forcing its extraction without the rest, and then relying on VLC being able to play an incomplete file. For this reason, it may not work in case the video format needs an initial complete seek, but it’s a very handy function nevertheless.

Downloads are just a click away. Once the transfer is started, it is possible to keep browsing around (whether via the search or directly in a newsgroup), or switch to the Transfers pane which shows detailed information about the transfers, down to the part and chunk level.

NewsHosting carries many newsgroups (including national hierarchies) and inexperienced users will probably find the notion of “group bookmarks” less confusing than the traditional idea of a “subscription” used by most, if not all, other newsreaders.

Of course, while the application is specifically built for downloads, I found that it works quite well as a traditional newsreader too. Posting access is disabled by default, but it can be requested via the Control Panel (also directly within the program itself!)

So, how much does it all cost? Less than you think. There are three plains available:

• NewsHosting Lite, $10.00/month, with a 50 GB monthly allowance with rollover, 30 connections
• NewsHosting Unlimited, starting at $12.95/month, unlimited transfer, 30 connections
• NewsHosting XL Powerpack, starting at $15.83/month, unlimited transfer, 60 connections, free account at EasyNews to search and download directly with a browser

Of course, it is possible to use any Usenet newsreader and/or downloader to access NewsHosting‘s servers, though the application I described above frankly makes it hard to justify going through all the loops and hoops of configuration, separate searching and so on.

NewsHosting‘s Usenet client may very well be the “killer app” for anyone interested in the world of Usenet binaries. It’s well worth a shot, and with a two-weeks free trial, why not?

If you sign up for the service, feel free to leave a comment and share your experience!

(Are you interested in protecting your anonymity on the ‘net? Check out my review of IPVanish!)

NH 468×60 A

I happen to live in the Province of the Empire, in a country I oftentimes call “the third world of technology.” No way to rent movies online – or through the mail, for that matter –, no Pandora.com or Last.fm to easily find new music (the latter is available on a paid-membership basis; the former is simply forbidden), no iBooks when the iPad comes out, and so on. I live in Italy.

I am also a happy Mac and iPhone user. Not an evangelist, not anymore at least: I will praise how durable and enjoyable Apple products are, but I won’t urge anybody to buy them. I will, however, talk about them to people who ask me. After close to ten years as a Mac user (I do remember MacOS 9.2 and MacOS X 10.0) and years of previous experience with Linux systems, Apple has become an invaluable provider of my daily computing. OS X allows me tinker with the underlying UNIX system with ease while being extremely user-friendly with the rest of the user interface. As a web developer, it’s the closest thing to perfection I can think of.

When the iPad was announced, I was following Steve Jobs’s keynote through Engadget. I gradually turned from skeptic to disappointed: what, a big iPhone? A few hours later, a friend of mine summarized such feelings as: “I was hoping for a laptop replacement, and he just announced a tray. An iTray.”

A few days later, however, an article on a blog shone light on the matter: most of us computer people probably wouldn’t have much for a device like that. I’d personally much rather use my 13-inch MacBook Pro rather than an iPad, as it’s a full-fledged computer onto which I can install any program I want, with which I can multitask and that has a physical keyboard. I do sometimes use my MBP on the sofa, and while I agree that it’s not the most perfect experience, I’m willing to trade comfort for power.

People who do not have complex computing needs, though, will love the iPad. Take my father: he inherited the last PC I used, a glorious machine based on an AMD Duron 850 MHz CPU and 512 MB of memory. It runs Windows XP, and it’s far exceeded its time. Components keep breaking, and they are becoming hard to find. Every replacement has to be second-hand, and considering the higher price compared to current parts, it’s probably best to just ditch the machine entirely and build a new one. That was the plan, until the iPad was announced.

See, my father isn’t very computer-savvy. In fact, all he does is using Firefox to browse the web and little more. He doesn’t even care about productivity suites, he just reads a few online newspaper, peeks at The Daily Kitten, browses YouTube and visits the occasional website that he might hear about. He doesn’t even use email, in fact his email address is forwarded to mine so any messages he might receive from his bank will be taken care of. Also, since his computer started acting very flaky, he barely turns it on at all; and he doesn’t like sitting at the desk for long, and has no intention of learning how a computer works, therefore he is often confused by the interface.

Here are the three alternatives:

1. he can spend about €350 for a new PC that will be possibly left to dust
2. he can spend about €550 for a Mac Mini that will also be possibly left to dust and which will require him to get used to OS X
3. he can spend no less than €450 for a cheap laptop whose battery will last a couple of hours and which will have a learnng curve to be climbed
4. he can spend some €450 for the smallest iPad available (I think that that’s the pricing it will get in Europe), which he can use on his sofa, outside and anywhere else there is a wirless network, and that will take little time to get used to

He has also been saying that he wants a digital frame – and that kind of scares me, considering that I have 40 GB worth of pictures and that I will be the one who has to go through them with him – and that’s something else that an iPad might double as.

The iPad is, effectively, a closed environment. Users cannot install anything they want on it, and Apple can censor and refuse any content it doesn’t see fit. In return, the experience is smooth and without hurdles. What works, works; what doesn’t work, just doesn’t work. Those of us who see that as a threat to freedom should talk with computer illiterates. They would be amazed at how many people are perfectly fine with the concept of “you just can’t, period.” For them, even the simple lack of multitasking can be extremely beneficial; and that applies to some of “us” too.

Even tinkerers like me can be perfectly fine with closed systems, once the “threat to freedom” argument is put aside. I have been using an iPhone 3G since September 2008, and aside from minor annoyances, it’s served me very well. Sure, it would be great to have a wifi stumbler with GPS tracking support, but I can live without it. Also, tethering has been finally enabled with my cellular operator, so that’s not an issue anymore for me. And while the lack of multitasking can be annoying at times, the increase in battery life allows me to get over it. Of course, everyone has different needs, and I certainly do not question that; but that’s why there are alternatives.

For instance, I have read complaints by people who bought iPods and were extremely disappointed to see that they needed to install iTunes on Windows, or were just out of luck when using Linux. I think that such complaints are petty, pointless and naïve: the fact that you haven’t made any research prior to purchasing a product does not mean that the product is mediocre. The real problem is that your workflow isn’t flexible enough to fit said product, whether by choice  (“I don’t want to install iTunes”) or by need (“there is no iTunes for Linux”.) But that’s a problem with your workflow, not a problem with the product. The good news, however, is that there are plenty of other MP3 players that can be mounted as if they were USB drives and will read any files that are copied onto them. And they’re also cheaper than iPods!

The same applies to music: songs can be purchased from many online stores other than the iTunes Store, and they will play just the same. If you are old-style like me, you can also still buy physical CDs, with a printed booklet and whatnot.

Some commenters are astonished that the same people who bash Microsoft have a different attitude towards Apple. That may be true – Microsoft has a history of forcing their products onto the computer industry at large, whilst Apple’s influence is recent and limited to specific media industries –, but the truth is that even the most bitter anti-Microsoft people eventually grow up and take up a healthier “live and let live” attitude: I do not need Windows, I don’t use it; OpenOffice perfectly replaces anything I might need to do with Office; and so on.

Now, if Apple manages to modernize the press industry, then it’s certainly good for them. Rest assured that DRM won’t last long: media is bound to be globalized, and I am confident that in a few years producers will realize that they will make much more money by allowing everyone on the planet to buy their movies/songs/books without resorting to artificial boundaries; pecunia non olet, said the Romans. By the time a movie is released in another part of the planet, those who were waiting for it might as well have gotten it illegally: why not cash that money?

And incidentally, Apple is often an innovator. It was the first company to believe in mass-distribution of music over the ‘net, and many others followed suit; it was the first to believe in having computers with only USB ports (the glorious iMac); it was the first to provide the masses with a usable graphical user interface (Windows 1, released two years later, was little more than MS-DOS with a colored border around the screen); and so on. Who knows what will happen with Light Peak…