yakitatefreak

Established Members
  • Content Count

    20
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

0 Neutral

About yakitatefreak

  • Rank
    Member
  1. Sorry, but the most recent alpha version (27280) crashes upon attempt to install.
  2. Just a quick thing... Every time I download at a pace faster than 1 MB/s, uT always uses quite a bit more CPU on my computer (from almost zero to ~10-20%, and sometimes the antivirus uses 40-55% after the dl was finished). Is it just me or do others have the exact same issue on using a lot of the PC? (uT 3.1.2 build 26773 on a Windows 7 Machine)
  3. Since the inception of the uTorrent+ ver. 3.1 project, I have only had one problem. Otherwise, it works great!
  4. Nice alpha. It works far better than the latest so called stable version of Aegisub on my laptop LOL Anyway, keep up the good work, and try to patch as many security holes as possible =]
  5. Not sure what other version you are referring to' date=' but it appears both the 64-bit and new alpha build (32-bit) work fine residing side-by-side. And they both open (not concurrently) fine and appear to function as they should. Currently have [b']utorrent 3.0 (build 25570) [64-bit] and utorrentPlus 3.1 Alpha (build 25760) [32-bit] both installed and working fine. They do seem to each take a few seconds longer to open than normal, almost as if it's trying to get everything in order before fully launching... @Admin Will there be a uTorrent+ on 64bit? and will that also apply w/ other OSes? By the way, uTorrent+ 25728 [32-Bit] has been working fine since the restart. Excellent program.
  6. Thanks for the invite! By the way, it seems annoying to have to look for the licence key to activate this program. Is there a way to never have to activate this every time you start up? Another thing that I've been having trouble using is the Virus Guard program. I can't get the program to run... either that or uT 3.1a will not show that the file was scanned. Is this a bug? Because I had the Virus Guard program installed ages ago (when uT was adding features to earlier betas/alphas), I was wondering if it might be me or if it may be the bug of the program. It always ends up failing to scan every single time I start up.
  7. When I select files in the 64-bit experimental (25422) to download and set priorities, sometimes, the files automatically deselect without my prompt to deselect the file before I am able to set the priorities. I hope this problem can be fixed, because I am using both the 64-bit experimental and the 32-bit stable versions.
  8. To further explain on what happened with uPaceM's post, it seems like this version of uTorrent doesn't like apps at all. After I experience a crash at the startup the latest build of uTorrent 3.0 32 Bit Version, I decided to switch over to the 64 bit version to see if there was that problem prevalent. It seems like these builds have made the apps quite fragile - as when I press on ANY APP or scan with the antivirus scanner (not just VLC), see that this build crashes as well. Improving compatibility with the handling of apps would be much appreciated. Note: This happened on a Windows 7 Machine.
  9. μt 3α uses a lot of ram on build 24023 when checking large files... at this point when I was checking, i downloaded ~15 MB out of 12 GB, and the ram shot up to using >3GB on Windows 7 on a 4GB ram card. Anyone else have this issue?
  10. Looks like I'm also a victim here. I've had 8-10 crashes as the download approaches 100%. What's happening is that it crashes when the file piece's section is being downloaded by two or more peers. Unfortunately, this happened on Windows 7. I'm using the 3.0 alpha build 21887. When I reverted to 2.2 beta, this problem seems to go away.
  11. Thanks for fixing the bug, uTorrent Builders!
  12. Thanks for the information... Now to see if there was any problem with the previous builds....
  13. I noticed that I got banned on a tracker. Unfortunately, the DHT settings were not allowed on that tracker and I got really poor results. So when I loaded the trackers, It said that the connection was refused by that active peer. And on top of that, the tracker was loading every 35 seconds. Now you're (as a collective community) saying it was the cause of duplicated keys. If you revert back to 1.8 Stable or any previous build, would the bugs caused by duplicated keys be fixed?
  14. All of these logos look good. I'm thinking of making one with a sketch. It will be in pencil, so it might be hard too tell the difference from color and gray. I dunno how to photoshop (and I don't have photoshop... hehe), so anyone could edit it. Never mind... I saw Firon's post... (but I'll still have one in case there is any need for it.)
  15. I thank whoever made this client. This client saved me quite a bit of time doing a whole bunch of crap that I may have not wanted to do. I have done tests when I was younger and found that µTorrent was the best. First off... Azureus Vuze was a good client, but it contained Java. If I used Java, the computer would have an unstable registry causing it to crash. It was a user friendly client, but unfortunately it contained a lot of bloatware. I was able to capture some speed and it was around 125/35 for my internet (@ ~ 80% speed). BitComet 0.60 was not very good (or 0.59). It had a massive download rate but it showed some unfair upload rates that happened. It also contained bloatware (a couple of user friendly options that used a lot of space). Second, It contains adware (or so I have heard from Wikipedia). Third, there were not many options that I could use in addition to the bloatware. Furthermore, It tricks the computers into thinking that it will seed/upload and therefore cause the swarm to slow down overall. Another bad thing that I heard from Wikipedia is that it has that "Padding" that will keep the BitComet users up to speed... but it has caused other clients to slow down. By the way... BitComet 6.0's last speed ~ 135/15 @ 80% speed for a good tracker... but for a poor tracker, it was ~ 95/35 @ 80% speed. BitTorrent Mainline could use some more user friendly things, but I think that Python did not allow it to go that well. No other complaints on the original client. Speed ~ 130/30. BitTornado was not bad, but it was not very user friendly (too many windows!). And it has no updates for over a year now. I quit that client about a year ago. It was good in the fact that it tried to reject the BitComet users and that was what I liked about it. And it was not a very big client. But that was pretty much it. Too bad that it was based on python... it does not seem that Python would have too many user friendly features. Limewire/Shareaza do not count as a BitTorrent Client as itself. Both of them are not bad, you just have to be careful. It is full of bloatware and other features that I don't like. µTorrent is the best by far. It is user-friendly enough to the point where it is nice, not a pain in the butt (Word 2007 for example, is a pain in the butt for me). It has many of the features like trackers (I'm using µTorrent 1.8 alpha/1.7.7 and switch off to the latest version), and it regulates many of the things that I want in a client, like all of the download and upload information, speed data, pieces and how much of it is done (that is a big help to many of my problems), logger, options, and is not full of that baloney that is caused by bloatware. Thanks for making our lives easier by making the this client. Continue and I will try to get the latest stuff and see if there are any problems. I'm also spreading the word to many of the people that participate in the clubs that I have in my school. I also have passed on some of the information to my family, and one of them is addicted to this client (particularly because of the easter eggs that are in here).