Talk:FrostWire

Comment

Frostwire is nice... I just downloaded it. Looks exactly like limewire but doesn't use up so much memory, runs fast, picked up all the downloads I had running on limewire before the install. Nice program. --AK7 20:49, 12 December 2005 (UTC)

It does seem superficially like a skinned version of limewire. Secretlondon 15:28, 13 January 2006 (UTC)

Viruses?

Does Frostwire get viruses like Limewire does? I just got a new computer and I don't want it to get all virusey.

It does-- but only if you download them. I suggest you SCAN YOUR DOWNLOADS, always. ALWAYS. Under NO circumstances should you not. Really, it doesn't matter if you use Limewire, Frostwire, or whatever, if the file you're getting is virus'd, you will get a virus. So scan instead xD 199.126.134.144 05:46, 16 August 2007 (UTC)

Download avast! Antivirus, it will automatically alert you if you try to download a virus-infected file and you can abort your connection.

frostwire

as for download speed, frostwire seems to go as fast as limewire pro. Frostwire is really nothing more then skinned version of limewire (for now at least) but if you have java and use p2p its worth checking out --Joe dude 03:46, 20 January 2006 (UTC)

What did you expect to be different? The reason for the client IS NOT to change the design of limewire. --AlkalineX 09:12, 10 February 2006 (UTC)

Personally, I've had Frostwire for a while now and its been good to me, much better than Limewire ever was. --GorillazFanAdam

It is slightly diffrent to LimeWire, it has BitTorrent support --Anonymous

No, it has BitTorrent support because LimeWire has. You might be comparing it with an old version of LimeWire which hadn't. --217.87.114.140 05:46, 26 July 2007 (UTC)

FrostWire claims to be

This article contains the phrase "FrostWire claims to be" on two occasions. I know why it's there, but it sounds a lot like "but it's not". Please consider changing it to "FrostWire is". After all, the code is open source, so you can check. Shinobu 02:10, 10 June 2006 (UTC)

Features?

The new FrostWire (4.20.x forward) has one very distinctive feature over LimeWire. It's BitTorrent Technology is completely different than that of limewire's. FrostWire is now an Azureus (Vuze) client when it comes to BitTorrent File sharing, so FrostWire has now all the strengths of LimeWire's Gnutella Core and Azureus BitTorrent Core all in one client. To the editors of this article, I'd like to suggest a mention of this important evolution for FrostWire, released this past Feb 21st. Gubatron, Lead Developer of FrostWire

I'm curious as to what extra features FrostWire offers over LimeWire. Neither the Wikipedia article nor the official website say. Can someone elaborate and hopefully include the information in the article? -- Ynhockey ^(Talk) 20:44, 12 June 2006 (UTC)

The main 'extra' feature is the lack of a fee for most of LimeWire Pro's features. It has all the option capabilities, and the only thing better in LimeWire Pro is that it supports "Turbo Mode" which equates to 4 connetcted servers versus 3 connected servers for FrostWire. Search results seem equally good, and - at least when connected on a relatively slower line - download/upload speeds seem equal. 12.65.222.2 00:02, 14 August 2006 (UTC) Jitter41

My FrostWire connects to 4 peers, same as the LimeWire which you must pay for.

Legality?

Is it illegal?

(Assuming US copyright law here) Yes, the program is legal. Downloading copyrighted material is illegal no matter what program or protocol you use. -- Masterzora 02:52, 17 July 2006 (UTC)

Utter nonsense. Downloading "copyrighted" material is not illegal. Stop the brainwashing. --82.141.48.74 10:51, 23 December 2006 (UTC)

In the United States, sharing, selling, or otherwise providing a copyrighted material without paying for a license is illegal. It's called copyright infringement. Of course, this only applies to copyrighted material--material under a license such as the GPL or, like Wikipedia's content, the GFDL, then the law is very different. — SheeEttin {T/C} 17:34, 24 December 2006 (UTC)

Which means nothing at all in the rest of the world. USA law only applies in the USA, so essentially, it's ONLY illegal in a few countries like the USA, but NOT illegal in most others. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 61.122.255.149 (talk) 14:40, 29 January 2007 (UTC).

Well, the technical answer is that, even under the GPL or GFDL, the material is still copyrighted, but the license specifically allows for unrestricted copying as long as the license is included with it and proper credit given and yadda yadda. The point I originally meant to make, but so carelessly worded was that, under US copyright law, downloading copyrighted material without having the appropriate permissions (in the form of a license) is a violation of (civil) law. My wording was careless, but the main point stands. -- Masterzora 06:52, 15 June 2007 (UTC)

Technically, yes. Although the law is there, it is not enforced that well from what I understand. (due to the sheer number of people who use p2p software) —Preceding unsigned comment added by 74.218.116.82 (talk) 19:55, 16 February 2009 (UTC)

Who cares? ;-) F15x28 02:39, 15 September 2006 (UTC)

You will, when the RIAA sues you for copyright infringement (even if you are not infringing, a minor, don't use computers, or are dead. All of the above people have been sued by the (MP|RI)AA.) — SheeEttin {T/C} 02:46, 31 October 2006 (UTC)

No, I don't care about the RIAA since they have no jurisdiction where I live, and really don't have as much legal support as they pretend or claim to. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 61.122.255.149 (talk) 14:43, 29 January 2007 (UTC).

From reading articles, I understand that it is much like drug dealing, the dealers or in this case the people who allow sharing will be sued rather than those who use the program. -- The preceding unsigned comment was added by 83.71.89.49 (talk) 20:33, 5 January 2007 (UTC).

Actually, like controlled substances (e.g. cocaine), both the person supplying it and the user of the substance can be charged. (For what reason, I don't know–in my opinion, as long as they aren't harming anyone else, people should be allowed to do all the drugs they want. Just like smoking.) — SheeEttin {T/C} 20:28, 8 January 2007 (UTC)

The RIAA has moved on from suing people for file sharing. The practice was always an abuse of the legal system to begin with. The music industry needs to move on from its old outdated business model and just give up on trying to enforce unenforceable and outdated copyright laws. Comparing file sharing to drug dealing is certainly ludicrous. File sharing is a worldwide revolution against the handful of giant media corporations that have a stranglehold on artist and listeners/viewers. Dingobully (talk) 21:55, 21 November 2009 (UTC)

this is just a cheap fork

frostwire is just a fork — Preceding unsigned comment added by 200.73.226.50 (talk • contribs)

No one gives a fuck --- Blaze7755 (talk) 12:26, 19 March 2008 (UTC)

Yes. And? — SheeEttin {T/C} 17:28, 24 December 2006 (UTC)

Discussion of article - not of FrostWire

Isn't this page for discussion of the Wikipedia article about FrostWire? I can read informed and uninformed opinions about FrostWire itself elsewhere. 89.102.4.222 18:56, 21 June 2007 (UTC)

Right then, this needs a source

To quote the article:

"...however several US software security analysis firms (including Kroll Research and Development) have identified several active trojan scripts secreted within the source-code itself."

I think an allegation such as this requires a source. After all, we should be truthful, shouldn't we? 199.126.134.144 04:31, 24 June 2007 (UTC)

I agree, unless a source is provided the allegation should be removed. Karsini 20:43, 10 July 2007 (UTC)

Shai's Blurb

hi it's shai sorry about changing this page but just to tell you lime wire is the exact same —The preceding unsigned comment was added by FreddoMan (talk • contribs) 08:32, August 22, 2007 (UTC).

No, it isnt. --- 77.31.77.26 (talk) 12:22, 19 March 2008 (UTC)

This should be merged with LimeWire?

FrostWire gave me an update. I accepted, and LimeWire turned out to be the upgrade. So, is FrostWire discontinued? Is have FrostWire and LimeWire merged? Why would FrostWire make me upgrade to LimeWire? 208.101.155.204 20:59, 31 August 2007 (UTC)

This is quite possibly a bug in FrostWire. Newer LimeWire code is simply merged into FrostWire. LimeWire has a few features which allow LimeWire LLC to update certain data remotely and offer updates. It's certainly possible that the maintainers of FrostWire did not really grasp or even check all modifications to LimeWire's code and just merged them in. Thus, LimeWire LLC might have as much control about FrostWire as they have about LimeWire. This should be verified before anything like this is added to the article though. --217.87.92.25 11:51, 6 September 2007 (UTC)

Just to mention that this is still happening as of v4.17. The programme states that an updated version is available at www.frostwore.com/downloads, and it is there, but if you click on the shortcut "update now?" link, it redirects to the Limewire site. 78.144.70.162 (talk) 21:22, 23 October 2008 (UTC)

---

so, which protocoll is frostwire using? 0.4? 0.6? gnutella2? --Echosmoke 21:14, 29 September 2007 (UTC)

seems like 0.6 ? can someone confirm and add it? --Echosmoke 21:18, 29 September 2007 (UTC)

If memory serves me right, it can, or at least has the ability to use all protocols. Would have to double-check to be definate though. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Olorinjoyce (talk • contribs) 14:15, 1 January 2008 (UTC)

No adware or spyware?

When i went through installation process it wanted to install the ASK toolbar and search. "It is distributed without any bundled adware or spyware. [1]" is entirely untrue with regards to adware. the faq which is cited states "Q: Does FrostWire have spyware? A: Absolutely not! FrostWire does not come bundled software of any kind. None. Zero." I have changed it accordingly. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.108.144.5 (talk) 16:34, 16 August 2008 (UTC)

Opinion: Limewire or FrostWire

As of now, (2oo9) which in your opinion is more superior? Cookie Shanker (talk) 06:19, 18 February 2009 (UTC)

This isn't a forum, Cookie Shanker. This page is solely for the discussion of the article FrostWire. Dmarquard (talk) 00:02, 6 May 2009 (UTC)

Is FrostWire *really* Free Software? Does it meet the Open Source Initiative Definition?

When you first install and start FrostWire, you must agree that you will "not use it for copyright infringement".

Freedom Zero of the Four Freedoms (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Free_Software#Definition):

" Freedom 0: The freedom to run the program for any purpose. "

copyright infringement is a purpose.

and the 6th part of the Open Source Definition (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Open_Source_Definition):

" 6. No Discrimination Against Fields of Endeavor

The license must not restrict anyone from making use of the program in a specific field of endeavor. For example, it may not restrict the program from being used in a business, or from being used for genetic research. "

whatever your opinion on the matter, copyright infringement clearly qualifies as 'a field of endeavor.'

yet, the first paragraph of this article states the following: "Released under the GNU General Public License, FrostWire is free software."

it takes more than claiming to be released under the GPL for a piece of software to be Free Software.

and to the wikipedia 'people of influence': does it count as original research just because i haven't published an article or editorial on some trash website yet, or should i do that and then change the article? i can do so if needed, it isn't hard. nor is it hard to establish a source as 'credible'... the article currently cites lifehacker.com as a reliable source, for example.

--69.107.79.123 (talk) 03:39, 6 February 2010 (UTC)