Update download size

I think it would save time and bandwidth, for both the user and the server, if we'd download updates, instead of downloading the whole installation program everytime. Unless the developpers really change every single files everytime. Would be best to download only the files that changed. Making an small update utility that detects file versions and/or file dates wouldn't be that hard.

We're all on broadband connections. It took you longer to make that post than do download the update. Stop complaining.

Actually I agree with Aoshi and I've brought this very point up a month or so ago. The filesize keeps getting bigger and bigger, and since I joined a couple months ago the file size increased by about 5 megs. So that means within a year (theoretically if this trend continues), the filesize will be 30 megs larger than it is today.)

Yes, we're all on high speed connections, but from a logistics standpoint it makes zero sense for us to download the full install each time instead of just downloading the updated files needed. LL would save a tremendous amount of bandwidth if they just updated the files necessary, and left the full install for the people who actually need it.

E

Given that LL hasn't been able to get the cache working reliably enough to know it needs to redownload ground textures, I would rather they put this request on the back burner. I've had too many problems with smart installers in other apps being stupid (Red Hat Linux 4.1... yeesh: they put some drivers in kernel modules... on a CD I needed to load those drivers to read).

Let's not ask them to invite the foulup fairy in.

I agree that for now, it would be more productive to investigate the caching system and see if it can be revamped.

When it takes me longer to download the patch than to post a message I'll start complaining. That is, when the file size breaks about 60 MB or so
In the mean time, stop wasting bandwith and enjoy the 25 MB patch as compaired to WoW's 80+ MB.

I agree with Aoshi, while downloading really is fast, I do have a download limit on my connection. I believe he was making a suggestion, not complaining. I am complaining though, and if you don't like it, feel free to pay me a no-limit connection instead of pushing down others. If posting is a waste of time to you, like it seems from your quote, don't bother replying.


It's funny how you dislike wasting bandwidth, yet you are against his suggestion which is actually about that, not wasting bandwidth

I'm all for LL reducing their use of bandwith, but it'd be better done by how the client gets data from the servers. I'd bet that making THAT have the least usage possable would save more bandwith than figuring out a better patch system.