Talk:EXeem

message: I thought exeem is just like everyother p2p, but only sharing torrent files :D is that incorect? --Sloncek 22:29, 29 Dec 2004 (UTC)
replies: text: No- exeem supposedly is using a secure, quasi torrent system of its own that lacks trackers. --maru 15:32, 29 May 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Relation to torrents 

message: So, is Exeem still active now that SuprNova has died? --Harry 21:28, 19 Dec 2004 (UTC)
replies: text: Somewhat. --maru 15:32, 29 May 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Vitality 

message: article seems unnecessarily bitter! --Anonymous
:Not what I can see now anyway. But maybe you commenected ages ago; please sign your comments. -- Northgrove 09:49, 20 September 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  POV 

message: MIT License says they can do what they want with it... does it mean close the sources too? Time to get some answers. --Ghost Freeman 15:59, 31 Jan 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Licensing 

message: Sorry but article is poor and Cydoor can be removed easy with spybot. Exeem simply is the revolution of P2P is comming. --Anonymous
:Riight... And why is hardly anyone using Exeem anymore, while Usenet, Edonkey, and the Bittorrent scenes are only growing up? --maru 15:32, 29 May 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  More off center criticism 

message: Neither BitTorrent's Cohen nor Swam system's representative, Sloncek, claims that eXeem incorporates BitTorrent.  Influenced by?  Based on?  Something like that.....
As to whether eXeem is cool, is worthy of more praise here, or is indeed the future of P2P--that's all unsubstantiated speculation at this point.  Indepth reviews are scarce--not surprising given that the package is still in beta.  Until eXeem is released, with interface, performance benchmarks and a much wider audience, this article will by neccessity be sketchy.  --Barte 05:25, 20 Feb 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Relation to Bittorrent 

message: Policy or convention on dead off-site links?  Is exeem trustworthy?  Those that fly by night frequently are, but I'm somewhat trepidatious.  Anyhoo, how long is a link that is to something that might be only occasionally available (but is noted to be down at time of a number of posting(s)) does the general thinking incline to warrant removal of such a link?  And why is there not easy way to start a poll in MediaWiki?  Any few Wikipedians could prolly be trusted to sort out any matter they were asked to peek at briefly and answer a really quick poll about, as long as you can up the N enough.  -:)Ozzyslovechild 03:44, 23 November 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Policy or convention on dead off-site links?  Is exeem trustworthy? 

message: Does anyone know where exeem is now and what has happened to it? It is not working and the sites have been down for months, a surprise as I thought it was doing well.
:I would like someone to enter some information regarding this, into this article, as well. I'm curious to know. --Gary King 21:44, 19 December 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Where is exeem now? 

message: This article says that exeem was closed back in 2005, but http://www.exeem.com/ looks functional.  Anyone know anything?
As functional as www.emule.net, www.shareaza.net, www.shareza.com, mmmhmm, sign your comments, thanks. --nlitement [talk] 20:42, 8 August 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  eXeem back?