Fujitsu develops new data transfer protocol 30 times faster than TCP

<i>if the company divulged its secret, it wouldn’t be able to commercialize the new protocol</i><p>why? does it contain nothing new? have software patents suddenly become worthless?

As usual, anything from extremetech is worth ignoring.

What is the actual time associated with the TCP protocol? I'm imagining that 30x faster is pretty much an unnoticeable difference in real-world usage.

Superficially, this sounds similar to what CurveCP[1] does (modulo the cryptography being done on the latter).<p>[1] <a href="http://curvecp.org/index.html" rel="nofollow">http://curvecp.org/index.html</a>

The press release is slightly better <a href="http://www.fujitsu.com/global/news/pr/archives/month/2013/20130129-02.html" rel="nofollow">http://www.fujitsu.com/global/news/pr/archives/month/2013/20...</a><p>Basically it's a software solution that transmits over UDP with their own mix of algorithms to make it reliable, but faster than TCP. TCP is broken on mobile, anyway [1]. So, this should be good news.<p>[1] <a href="http://blog.davidsingleton.org/mobiletcp/" rel="nofollow">http://blog.davidsingleton.org/mobiletcp/</a>

Sounds generally similar to Aspera, RaptorQ, etc. It's not clear what's new here, if anything.

tl;dr: Fujitsu makes an unverifiable claim because the details of the algorithm have not been made public.

The "bouncer" metaphor seems to be describing <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Transmission_Control_Protocol#Selective_acknowledgments" rel="nofollow">http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Transmission_Control_Protocol#S...</a>, which we already have. Is it really possible to do that much better?

TCP is plenty fast when tuned for the latency of the link. You just need appropriately large window sizes.

Oh look, it has better "latancy". Flag and bag.