µTorrent Community
You are not logged in.
Earlier, I was downloading a 700MB torrent from Taiwan.
The torrent was old and not so well seeded.
There were like 1 seed and 7-10 peers in total.
All of them in the swarm were using BitComet, except for me who was using uTorrent.
I was using my optimal uTorrent settings which work very well for other torrents.
However, I feel that the BitComet peers were not giving me back my fair share,
I was uploading plenty, yet my download was much slower than usual
(even when compared to other torrents with a small swarm like this).
From 0% to 95%, it was ok, although it was slower than usual.
From 95% to 99.9%, I was still making progress, but it took me 2 entire days.
Finally, at 99.9%, there was no progress at all for 30+ hours.
At 99.9%, there were only 2 pieces left (256 kB each),
each piece was available from 1-2 connected clients at various times.
In fact, my uTorrent uploaded MBs of data to the peers with the pieces I want,
yet they wouldn't send me the 256 kB piece that my client specifically requested.
At times, the torrent flags showed "D" (interested and not choked) for the peer,
yet nothing is downloaded from the corresponding BitComet peer.
Being so frustrated, I copied the almost-completed files to my testing machine
and continue downloading from there using BitComet.
I went to sleep immediately after that.
The torrent was complete when I got up after several hours of sleep.
I am very suspicious of BitComet discriminating other clients.
I never liked BitComet in the first place, because it doesn't have as many functions
as Azureus or uTorrent.
And an all-BitComet swarm probably wouldn't perform as efficiently as an Azureus+uTorrent swarm.
The problem is that I often want to download things from Chinese/Japanese sources,
and most of the Chinese/Japanese people are using BitComet.
This is because BitComet was the first lightweight BT client that
had Chinese + Japanese interface (long before uTorrent existed).
Many of them are using BitComet because this is the only client that they know.
BitComet's discriminating behaviour (if it exists) would also make it
very hard for any one in that community to switch to another client.
I don't want to give in to BitComet, but I really want to download certain things.
Even using BitComet once in a while makes me feel very bad about myself,
like I violated some principles. But what am I suppose to do?
Is there anything that uTorrent can do to prevent itself
from being taken advantage of by BitComet peers?
(while being able to download from them)
More importantly, how can we educate the Chinese / Japanese people
about the wrong-doings of BitComet and help them move away from it?
p.s. I am a Chinese myself, but I can't do much on my own >.<
Offline
Is there a way to block bitcomet clients from connecting to me? I hate that client...
Last edited by Sangamon Taylor (2007-02-27 15:39:51)
Offline
I guess its true it only takes one rotten apple...
BitComet is known for this behavior and therefore shunned by many (including the Mainline client iirc). Nothing much you can do about it really except for spreading the knowledge about BitComet.
Offline
Sangamon Taylor
since µt is a nice client, there is no automated way to block them.
but you can use ipfilter.dat to block them by manually adding the IPs where a peer show as BitComet.
Offline
Select the in the peers list, right click: Kick and Ban.
Offline
^ Confused, just a little? Seems so... uTorrent doesn't have a "kick and ban" function.
Offline
I guess stevenofnine has outed himself now as a non µT user!
An "enemy combatant" in the forums!! ;-P
Offline
How is banning them gonna work if 99% of the clients in that torrent swarm are using BitComet?! @@
Changing uTorrent to play dirty with them isn't the answer either, since that would bring us down to their level and ultimately start wars between different clients.
So I guess we should make an anti-BitComet website in multiple languages and spread out the words (especially to the Asian communities where people don't know there exists better BT clients like uTorrent).
By the way, I don't know who operates the public trackers around the world. If we can get BitComet banned from a majority of the public trackers, that ought to get their attention. BitComet users would be forced to find the alternatives.
Last edited by Terence (2007-02-28 19:37:22)
Offline
It's ok to use BitComet if there's no other working choice to finish a torrent. No need to feel bad about it at all! Just do the best you can to set fair settings in your BitComet. ...and maybe complain on their message forums when it ignores them and cheats. 
Arguing here about it won't do any good, as the makers of BitComet has been ignoring us for a LONG time! They knew they were violating the private torrent flag, and were doing so even against their own users' wishes, (as posted at their own message forums) for over 6 months before enough bans hit their client to change it!
Offline
I'm all for an anti-BitComet website... I can build and host it, I just need the info and the graphics! 
no-bitcomet.com, anyone?
edit: Or how about badcomet.com? Both these sites don't exist yet...
Last edited by Falcon4 (2007-02-28 19:18:11)
Offline
nobitcomet.com (without the hyphen) is also available
Perhaps it's best to start with just a mainpage and a forum to gather more people to work on the content and spread the words.
Offline
if your download gets stuck at 99.9%, i think that means its a fake
Offline
josephgoss
> if your download gets stuck at 99.9%, i think that means its a fake
That wasn't the case since I could complete the torrent after moving the files to BitComet to finish downloading the last 0.1%.
Offline
Then it was BitComet playing dirty when you were trying to complete using µTorrent and showing how it favours other BitComet users when you were able to complete.
Offline
If you get stuck at 99.9% and you're getting hashfails, it means your router is corrupting a packet because you turned DMZ on (common with D-Link routers). The only reason it worked on BitComet is pure luck.
Offline
Firon:
Only that I wasn't getting any hashfail, nor was I using DMZ.
Combined with the facts that at 99.9%:
1) I only had two 256kB pieces left to complete
2) For each of the two remaining pieces, it was available from 1-2 peers at various times
3) my µTorrent sent each of these peers* MBs of data
4) The peer* status changed to 'D' (interested and not choked) in some occasions.
5) I didn't get a single byte from these peers*
* the specific peers holding the remaining pieces that I wanted
I never had these problems when I downloaded from swarms that had a good percentage of non-BitComet clients. And the problem was suddenly solved when I moved my files to BitComet.
So how could I not suspect BitComet's behaviors?!
(for favoring other BitComet peers over µTorrent and/or purposely holding the most rare pieces from non-BitComet clients so that we seed several times as much and still not get to complete.)
Last edited by Terence (2007-03-03 18:26:42)
Offline
Since I saw a link to this thread and the last post is from this month I couldn't help but post here.
You have to look at the versions of BitComet. 0.60 and older had very loose programming/setting abilities that people can manipulate to cheat easily. Plus 0.59 & 0.60 have the old PHE that only works with those specific BitComet versions. BitComet 1.01 is actually BitLord, one of BitComet's bastard sons with adware & cheating abilities. BitSpirit is another bastard son with cheating abilities.
It's not the client but the users who are specifically cheating. If you look at the BitComet forums they'll tell you not to use those versions because of the problems and do not favor any of the older versions. In fact they recommend 0.70 which is very stable and plays fair. Or they tell you to try the newest version of the rewritten clients 0.71 - 0.84 thus far. The new ones are hit or miss with working for you, but when they do work they can be useful. The users just have to set them up properly, which the BitComet forum does instruct them on doing.
Something else people need to know about Rnysmile, he doesn't speak English. To be overly blunt BitComet is Chinese.
Last edited by Dark Shroud (2007-03-15 15:01:02)
Offline
The chinese (and japs as well) use bitcomet because
1) excellent localized language support
2) NAT transversal, needed in china to bypass the Great Firewall of China.
Offline
Game90 wrote:
2) NAT transversal, needed in china to bypass the Great Firewall of China.
lol, I'm using that one.
But yes BitComet's main features are it's various abilities to bypass firewalls. They've added more UDP support, UDP Tracker spec version2, and added the PE/MSE function to their NAT Traversial and kept it backwards compatible with the old versions.
Offline
No, the client itself cheats too.
All BitComet versions allow WAY too many upload slots for their upload speed -- and since it's an automatic control, you can't really stop it...only minimize its effects by limiting your max connections per torrent really low.
Offline
There is a difference between cheating and being stupid.
Offline
no, it cheats too. It abuses super-seeders and hammers clients literally several times a second.
Offline
Dark Shroud,
Actually allowing too many upload slots *IS* cheating too. I won't argue that it's stupid, but it's rather unfair to others to try to connect with lots and lots of peers and seeds...and then often offer back only token upload speeds to any given peer no matter how fast they're uploading to them.
Offline
IMHO, that a client lets a user set the upload slots to a stupid amount doesn't necessarily mean it's cheating. Even still, though, there are too many incidents where peers playing fair get treated like crap that can only be explained by the fact that the swarm is infested with BitComet users (presumably with crappy settings on top of the abusive behavior it already exhibits "naturally"). Users who knew nothing about BitComet's abusive tendencies also complained about seeing BitComet peers doing this and that -- it's too much of a coincidence, so I'm still convinced that BitComet is playing hardball.
It really isn't that difficult to code some kind of sensible limit for a lot of the things BitComet does wrongly, and I'm sure RnySmile knows about all of the complaints. Additionally, it's not that hard to see how not having limits would adversely affect the swarms, so even if he never heard the complaints, I don't understand how he could create an entire BitTorrent client without *once* giving a thought to it. To me, it all seems intentional on his part, or at least he doesn't seem to care about the swarm, but only about his own client (selfish, and totally different from the BitTorrent/P2P ideals).
Offline
one thing i noticed with BC's in the swarm
I fyou yourself are connectable, just make yourself shortly unconnectable (click on green change port one number) then drop all conns by shortly ticking initial seeding, untick....
...and watch in the logger tab all those masses of IPs you try to connect that give you connection timeout/ refused.
Most of them are stupid BC users. Its fascinating to see when your 55 connections that were before filled more then half with BCs now only fill up with maximum a handfull of those 55 ;-)
Offline
