uthappyuser

Established Members
  • Content Count

    26
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by uthappyuser

  1. I'm using 2.2.1, though I'd be happy with 2.0.4 which was also great for me. Another member summed it up nicely: Stable; has never crashed No disk I/O and caching issues No ads No social features No streaming features No multimedia features No anti-virus integration Clean and fast UI Seriously, µtorrent became the king because it was tiny, fast, any computer could run it, and it had no stupid bulk. Everything since 2.2.1 has forked in an entirely different and highly annoying direction. It used to be that clients would get banned from different trackers when they got old. Fortunately, everyone seems to realize how dreadful the 3.x versions are so client-banning has virtually disappeared with the realization that a lot of people have no intentions of upgrading. As long as that remains the case, I'll be using 2.2.1 for years to come. Who wants ads, streaming, multimedia, and social features in a content downloading program??
  2. I'll take my chances and use a version of the program that works, thanks.
  3. I've stepped back to 2.0.3.21177 and it's solved all the problems of 2.0.4.21586. The afore-mentioned tracker problems, internet shutdowns... it's kind of a mess. One thing I noticed was if the torrent has the following tracker list (for example): http://tracker.openbittorrent.com:80/announce udp://tracker.openbittorrent.com:80/announce udp://tracker.publicbt.com:80/announce http://tracker.publicbt.com:80/announce http://genesis.1337x.org:1337/announce Then the only trackers that'll show up in uTorrent's tracker tab are: http://tracker.openbittorrent.com:80/announce udp://tracker.publicbt.com:80/announce http://genesis.1337x.org:1337/announce That is, the spaceless (same machine) trackers only show up as the first line in the group. They all show up (properly) in 2.0.3.
  4. Ya, there's still a problem. When I've got more than 2 torrents off a private tracker, the third one won't come to life for an hour or two. The third torrent shows that the tracker is offline or refusing the connection. I switch back a few builds and it works fine.
  5. What was the promotion for? Pointless upgrades?
  6. i downloaded 20683 off of the main site on July 24th, but they have since rolled back to 20664 so i assume that 20683 created more problems than it solved.
  7. 2.0.1 is very pretty! Yaaaaaaay Good work, developers!
  8. Does the 2.0.0.18907 build that's now posted constitute the release of the 2.0.1 testing?
  9. He got it from this site... try clicking "download" before assuming that it's some hacked up hoax from the other side of the internet.
  10. Ridiculous? How is having what's available to you ridiculous? Should I tell my ISP to take away my download bandwidth so that you approve of their ratio? Your comment is ridiculous.
  11. Yay 2.0 final Thanks. Adding UDP tracker support is long overdue and wonderful to finally have.
  12. Using the latest 1.8.4 build, but tested with 16442 as well: => 9 torrents running with a 60kb/s global upload limit. All's fine. => add a torrent with a 4kb/s individual upload. All is not fine anymore. The new torrent's individual cap becomes the global limit in practice (even though it's still set at 60). Anyone else having this happen?
  13. While they're looking at the availability regression, I'd suggest looking at the overall functioning. I loaded a torrent with 54 seeds and 16667 wouldn't download a drop of it. I backtracked to 16442 and immediately the torrent took off with 300kb/s. Tested with 2 other torrents - same result. No firewall.
  14. Any time spent on development for a completely dead OS (and based on Microsoft's abandonment of it, it really is dead) is just wasted. Look to the future and let 1.8.2 serve the needs of those rooted in the past.
  15. You know, people really don't benefit from a jackass like you swearing at them like a moron. 150 really isn't high. 65535 is high, but still fully allowed by Windows (and was in fact the default value not that long back). 10 is chokingly low - that is well established. The patches for TCPIP.SYS all originally appeared when XPSP2 came out and imposed that limit. Under normal computing circumstances with multiple applications doing multiple things and only 10 half-open spots, Windows started generating huge amounts of 4226 events (not 4662). The patches came along to halt those errors by giving back the half-open breathing room to the applications. A perfectly valid and useful way to increase the productivity of one's system and eliminate a huge number of logged errors. Higher half-open limits do not get better transfer speeds; however, they do allow µtorrent to acquire sources faster. If someone's running a lot of torrents and wants to connect to their sources 150 at a time instead of 8, there's nothing wrong with that reasoning. In the end it may not make much of a difference, but some people like every little bit that they can get and faster connection and commencement is just like people who tweak their computer boot-up times: It doesn't make a difference in the end with how fast they can get their work done, but it's nice to be able to start up quicker. And so what if Microsoft updates TCPIP.SYS from time to time? There are a host of tools that can reset the limit in 10 seconds. By my count, TCPIP.SYS has only received 3 updates in more than the last 2 years. No reason to not change the limit for me I'm afraid.
  16. Keeping in mind that Tomato only works on very old Linksys routers (version 4 or below). Linksys is currently on version 8.2 which far exceeds Tomato in every performance way.