Author Topic: 3rd party winmx replacement? (Read 36402 times)

whohas · « **on:** June 01, 2008, 11:07:57 pm »

I have done some research though perhaps not enough, I am not sure, however my question is posted as such :

Since the last talk of winmx 4 years ago by FrontCode before abandoning the winmx project (http://www.slyck.com/story355_WinMX_Interview) nothing has been done to updating winmx since they did not release the source code, and very little updates to some popular 3rd party download/upload managers such as mxmoni or mxlinks.

I am curious however why if winmx still has millions of users (mostly in japan) why nobody has thought about making a "new" winmx replacement program that can connect to the same winmx cache servers and be compatible with winmx client users so as not to alienate its users.

There is potentially a huge list of very useful changes that could be applied to winmx that probably would of been done if the project wasn't abandoned. (like the 2gb limit, one example)

I am not a programmer and have poor knowledge of it so I am not sure how difficult this may be to produce, if even possible.

Anybody know why nobody has attempted this?

GhostShip · « **Reply #1 on:** June 02, 2008, 12:18:16 am »

The main problem is that winmx had a proprietory encryption scheme unlike most of the other protocols around at the time and programmers have always been in short supply.

Currently both of these problems are resolving themselves with two projects in production now, both projects are being undertaken by volunteers who work as and when time allows to complete clients for our future, there is no emergency at this time so its all relaxed and much discusion goes into the technical implementation and from this we all profit in terms of building more information for those following the same path.

I would like to make clear that the last winmx versions came out in late december 2004 and winmx closed in sep 2005 which is not a very long time ago and since then the only thing that hasnt changed is the client, many of the third party projects have altered dramatically and incorporate enhancements not though of back then.

The old saying "if it aint broke, dont fix it" is a great description of winmx 3.54b4, the new clients are being built purely to ensure we will never have to face another closure brought upon by the abuse of the legal system by the recording industry, they have done their worst and not only have we prevailed, but by utilising the talent pool within the community we are now regaining ground.

SamSeeSam · « **Reply #2 on:** June 02, 2008, 07:54:57 am »

"proprietory encryption"

Does that mean that the protocol is owned by frontcode and consequently its not legal to develop code based on it..

Cheers

GhostShip · « **Reply #3 on:** June 02, 2008, 09:49:36 am »

That could be the case if they had published it somewhere Sam, whilst the protocol and more importantly the wimx.exe source code remains unpublished however they can have no claim to anyone creating something similar to something they have never released, same story with the peer caches.

I like to think that Winmx Tech is under a legal gagging order to sit on their codebase and info, and that by reinventing that info to sustain the network a few smiling faces are to be seen in Canada.

Mick832 · « **Reply #4 on:** June 02, 2008, 11:52:06 am »

"a "new" winmx replacement program that can connect to the same winmx cache servers and be compatible with winmx client users so as not to alienate its users."

I would always consider a winmx replacement as risky, as there would always be people who would look for other programs. When winmx first crashed, the room I was in looked at alternatives, such as Ares and Filetopia to list a couple, however not each program suited each member of our room. I would think a winmx replacement could further split winmx users, some going to the replacement, some going to other programs, and some refusing to leave winmx. I would only consider a replacement program if winmx was no longer viable. The program itself is fine, as long as we can connect. Maybe alternative peer cache technology would be more benificial in the long run in case of future problems.

Lagerlout666 · « **Reply #5 on:** June 02, 2008, 12:18:50 pm »

The new client will completly interoperate with the current network mick. It will solely be your choice which you want to use, Just i know once a new client is made stuff like third party MxMONI and bendmx can all be integrated into the client itself. Which as you know will then start to make the 3.54 series start to appear outdated. Also once this client is built tactics to beat throttling can be implemented, for many winmx is becoming useless due to this process and if a new client is finished and this throtling defeated you will probbaly find alot of people make the move.

$i£ve®$haÐów · « **Reply #6 on:** June 02, 2008, 02:18:09 pm »

Quote

Also once this client is built tactics to beat throttling can be implemented, for many winmx is becoming useless due to this process

i for 1 will be very excited about this.

Lagerlout666 · « **Reply #7 on:** June 02, 2008, 03:29:02 pm »

Well addons etc are a way off yet, but thier are two very active developments you should be able to follow,

One is MoonMX being developed by SirMoon. A link is here https://forum.winmxworld.com/index.php?topic=6221.0.html

The other is WinPY by String
https://forum.winmxworld.com/index.php?topic=6593.0.html

Both developers are extremly active and are flying along, we tend not to hype early starts as this just puts added pressure on a already difficult challenge an im sure you will agree why we do this.

As far as i know both developers are going along the opensource route. But thier are others more in the loop than myself that may want to come forward and let you know a few more details. Nothing like a scoop lol.

Mick832 · « **Reply #8 on:** June 03, 2008, 01:17:37 am »

"The new client will completly interoperate with the current network mick."

Then it will just be like a new version in a way, those who wish to update will. Much the same as there are still people who don't use 3.54beta, prefering to stick with older versions.

GhostShip · « **Reply #9 on:** June 03, 2008, 05:02:08 am »

All developers are aware their offerings have to reach a certain "interest" level to entice folks to utilise them, new features will be the key selling point.

I,m sure we all agree the network has been durable and yet able to continue evolving, despite tremendous hurdles, no one need have any fear that they will be "left out in the cold" if they dont choose to update as and when a new compatible version arrives, much of the discussion that has gone on is focused on ensuring no problems will be created for existing users, that responsibility is taken very seriously and always in the forefront of the programmers minds, they are a community that seeks solutions, not to create further problems.

whohas · « **Reply #10 on:** July 21, 2009, 02:56:48 pm »

Hi guys, I checked winmx the other day and was surprized to find so many people still online actively using it to share files!

I am a very patient person, but another year passes and there has been zero development from anybody with making an alternate stable client to run on the current WPN cache servers.

There are still LOTS of people using winmx sharing lots of files, and until winmx stops working forever, most people still using winmx are unlikely to "switch" to different new network to share these files, regardless of how many benefits they will get by doing so from the new technology and features.

So the way I see it, the only option is to develop new client on this network or continue to use this very flawed client forever more. (please noo!)

I have done some research and found several projects that have started and been abandoned. I still find it amazing that of the millions of people (mostly from japan) who still use winmx, that there is not ONE single person who can write a client to run on the WPN network, is it really that difficult to write such a program?

The amount of other p2p software I have seen come and go run on other networks like fasttrack, gnutella etc.. since winmx was abandoned is quite allot. If all these other clients are created to run on other networks so easily, why is it so hard to make one for the WPN network?

So far this is what info I have gathered for WPN client projects to date, correct me if I am wrong or missing any out. (abandoned = over year no progress) :

MoonMX -- abandoned (https://forum.winmxworld.com/index.php?topic=6221.0.html)

WinPY -- abandoned (https://forum.winmxworld.com/index.php?topic=6593.0.html)

CrossMX -- abandoned (https://forum.winmxworld.com/index.php?topic=4482.0.html)

Winzo -- abandoned (https://forum.winmxworld.com/index.php?topic=2063.0.html)

If somebody did start to develop a new client I would personally be very happy to help them in the development process as much as possible (eg bug reports, testing in different enviroments, new ideas, doing the homepage etc...). I have lots of spare time but unfortunately don't know anything about programming.

Or, should we all just give up and move on? Your thoughts please.

Forested665 · « **Reply #11 on:** July 21, 2009, 03:40:08 pm »

WinPy works but the primary protocal is kept underwraps, the same goes for the others.
Crossmx was believed to be a hoax, as no screenshots were posted and all the code "got lost"

~~birdman~~ · « **Reply #12 on:** July 21, 2009, 03:42:35 pm »

The closest thing i have seen to a new winmx client is the W.P.C.C chat client by Emulator it looks and feels just like winmx but with the ability to share files and use primary connection, the way it was being developed i thought it may have become a new winmx but sadly not. I know ghostship has a new client in the works but has asked for help to deliver it sooner but so far i have seen no offers of help being made on the forum in regards helping programe it.

Forested665 · « **Reply #13 on:** July 21, 2009, 04:17:21 pm »

thats because the requests arent made on the forums. Wmw and GS both exist outside of this area you know?

~~birdman~~ · « **Reply #14 on:** July 21, 2009, 05:22:13 pm »

Ghostship did make a request for help in the "twitter" thread, maybe its just a case of yeh there is many programers in the winmx comunity but non with the ability to make a new client to replace winmx or maybe not the time either way i personaly see no possible new client in the near futureother than the one ghostship is making which he said doing on his own is going to take a year

GhostShip · « **Reply #15 on:** July 21, 2009, 06:05:48 pm »

I have always thought that the hurdles to client production all stem from the same route cause, mainly lack of WPN network knowledge.

I,m pretty confident we have a fair understanding of how things operate and I myself have made some material available to the community coders to try to span the gap between what they know and whats necessary, however it seems we are still at a stage where no one is willing to work as a team or build something for others to examine the core concepts of a client, this is where I hope to fill the bill with something that's not going to be a work of art but rather a teaching tool for those who just need to get to grips with the "WinMX style" of doing things, sure we could rip off a few whole clients from another network but to convert that whole would be about the same time as carefully crafting what we need out of individual parts, much of WinMX's operation is shrouded in secrecy with a few folks having all the pieces of what does what and this hasn't helped get more folks to offer help either.

I know folks want to have the most important bits of information but when asking why they need it its often a case that they are trying to walk before they can run thus they are told not a chance as its always been my contention that if someone cant show they can create a working secondary client then why should anyone trust them to work on a primary client where any mistakes could impact on the whole network.

All this aside its often the case that small things are forgotten when working alone, this has been driven home to me a few times and the project is started again from scratch, to avoid silly mistakes its best if the work is done in a controlled way with effort focused on where its needed and the build done in the most efficient order. I can say from experience this is a job for a team not a single person I think that's all there is to say and will be here if anyone would like to PM their info to chat about what they can do to help as its not just coding that can help move a project along.

Pri · « **Reply #16 on:** July 22, 2009, 02:26:14 am »

We definitely need a new client.

Limited colours in Chat
2GB File Limit on Transfers
5000 File limit on Shares
Ghost Shares when on Secondary sometimes
Various strange unrepeatable bugs
Not compatible with Vista/Windows 7 Thumbnail generation
No UPnP Port auto negotiation
Only Blank/+/@ user symbols accepted in Chat view

Some of these issues are big, some of these issues are small. But when you add them all up together it creates an unattractive and limited client. Something with no real future. If we can't get a decent client out that fixes all these problems then WinMX will never recover.

What we need to do is get someone to reverse engineer all the WPN stuff. How files transfers are started, how you connect to Secondary/Primary users, how you download a Room List, how you Browse users, how the PM system works, how Queues are maintained. Everything and then we need that someone (Could be an individual or a group) to comment it and open source it so Interfaces can be made for it. It is a big thing to open source something like that but it would enable a lot of Clients to be made.

I am also suggesting that the Core itself be written with a clear extensible protocol so at the basic level it is a WinMX 3.53-4 compatible client then on top of that base it is able to send and receive keys to whichever client it is talking, to identify itself and the other client so extra features written in this specific client can assert themselves such as beyond 2GB file transfers, Random-Access downloading and so forth.

We needed this to be honest 2 years ago we are running out of time in my opinion we all know the network is not gaining users the amount of chat rooms is in decline and their is an epidemic of 'Parkers' plaguing the network. You know who I mean people who park in 20 rooms with WPCC buffing the numbers of the room. Practically every room I go in now has this problem and the only way to solve it is to get a better client out there that gets the network some publicity and gets people interested in WinMX again.

I think the Managed approach that GhostShip suggested could work great especially if it was used to create the open source core I am suggesting if all the current Chat client creators work on a central extensible core we can be assured of compatibility between all the various clients as-well as a fast development time as it is clear getting the complete WPN built and working is the most difficult part.

Ghost what is it do you think we need to get a project of this magnitude off the ground, and I am referring specifically to getting all the current standalone developers working together on a single goal.

Forested665 · « **Reply #17 on:** July 22, 2009, 02:59:12 am »

Limited colours in Chat - colors are due to a bug winmx originally didnt have them.
2GB File Limit on Transfers
5000 File limit on Shares - you can share more then 5k they just dont show up in browse just search.
Ghost Shares when on Secondary sometimes - this can happen on primary if the files are moved without the shares being updated
Various strange unrepeatable bugs
Not compatible with Vista/Windows 7 Thumbnail generation - explain please?
No UPnP Port auto negotiation - no UPnP at all. thats all done via the patch
Only Blank/+/@ user symbols accepted in Chat view - more then most chat systems have and what would you propose?

Quote

Ghost what is it do you think we need to get a project of this magnitude off the ground, and I am referring specifically to getting all the current standalone developers working together on a single goal.

good luck teaching them the same speaking language and the same programming language.

Pri · « **Reply #18 on:** July 22, 2009, 03:48:46 am »

Quote from: Forested665 on July 22, 2009, 02:59:12 am

Limited colours in Chat - colors are due to a bug winmx originally didnt have them.
2GB File Limit on Transfers
5000 File limit on Shares - you can share more then 5k they just dont show up in browse just search.
Ghost Shares when on Secondary sometimes - this can happen on primary if the files are moved without the shares being updated
Various strange unrepeatable bugs
Not compatible with Vista/Windows 7 Thumbnail generation - explain please?
No UPnP Port auto negotiation - no UPnP at all. thats all done via the patch
Only Blank/+/@ user symbols accepted in Chat view - more then most chat systems have and what would you propose?

Quote
Ghost what is it do you think we need to get a project of this magnitude off the ground, and I am referring specifically to getting all the current standalone developers working together on a single goal.

good luck teaching them the same speaking language and the same programming language.

I think you misunderstand my post. I wasn't looking for a dumbed-down explanation of the issues, I already know the issues and pointed them all out. What we need is a Client that solves these issues.

And about the Thumbnail thing:

The Thumbnail issue is not a big issue but again when you point all the issues out together it shows a woefully outdated client that is stuck in a 9x era we need a modern client.

I get what you mean when you refer to getting everyone speaking the same language and the same programming language that is a pitfall but if we get some translators in to the mix for the discussion and comment translation and we get everyone to explain the parts of the protocols they have reverse engineered we can get multiple code bases on that code. We should not just give up at the first hurdle.

~~birdman~~ · « **Reply #19 on:** July 22, 2009, 06:14:25 am »

Emulator has a very popular client w.p.c.c which as pri has mentioned is used my many people to boost their room number, sadly the client is nothing more than a chat client it cannot share etc but could it not be improved to use primary etc ?