Ryrynz

Too busy making the android version of the client to worry about changelogs son!

Thanks Squaresoft. Nice to see somebody's on to it here.

They really need to be testing this stuff before porting to the stable build. That and get someone onto change logs. It's not funny.

1. Torrents are files saved for reloading back into the client. I was only referring to torrents only as what was listed in your client. The actual torrent files should still be there for you to reload back into your list. 2.For merging data you want to download BEncode via (Item > Merge With...). Would pay to read up a bit on it before using it, as always back up what you already have before playing. 3.You'll need to move or copy all your torrents together under the one directory. (Preferences > Directories > Automatically load .torrents from) and select that directory. 4.You should be able to merge those in using BEncode.

Torrents are mostly files' date=' and do not go POOF from the HD. You can always try and auto-load them.[/quote'] Ugh, catching me out on my wording... You know what I mean. The list of torrents have gone. Hopefully the torrent files are saved as to reload them back in.

That's what they were referring to, but 28 is a far cry from 1000, so that's not the issue. You might want to look inside you %appdata%\uTorrent directory to see if you have a backup of your resume.dat file (resume.dat.old) or if you have a system backup you could restore the old version from that. Otherwise.. torrents have gone *POOF!*

If I have a completed torrent that I select more files to download from (thus making it no longer completed) and I click 'start torrent' it's still highlighted in the top window but the contents of the bottom window are replaced with the torrent that was above it. I'd like to see the selected torrent contents not switch when the torrents status changes.

For a minor release this is taking some time. I'm all for prolonged beta testing for more major changes but can't help feeling this should probably have been out the door already. Two months now :/

I too would actually pay for an updated ad free & light client like the old versions and almost everyone here I think would too. It's a pity you guys didn't consider this before the announcement, you probably lost a hundred or more users with that statement alone, now you have to try and win them back. For me uTorrent is the only torrent client I like that actually looks any good, the rest are plenty functional sure but I can't stand their appearance. uTorrent 3.x looks like a proper Windows program and this one of the reasons why I keep using it. Personally I see the best solution is having five clients. This fills everyone's niche AFAIK. uTorrent - As it is (advert driven, see Rafi's guide) uTorrent Pro - As it is with no ads with extra useful features over uTorrent (paid client) or perhaps just uTorrent without ads (Registered uTorrent) uTorrent Pro/Lite - (SimpleToe edition) (paid client (perhaps a bit more expensive?)) Bittorrent - (advert driven) Bittorrent Pro - no ads and extra useful features over Bittorrent or just registered to be ad free (paid client) If ads could be removed via registering then that brings the clients down to three.. but I'm not sure that just removing ads is enough.. I guess it depends on how intrusive they are. The trick really is to make the application valuable to people, have people appreciating it, spreading the word. The best way to do that? Listen & respond to your users. If I really appreciate something I'll generally pay for it. With regards to the different uTorrent versions I guess it depends on whether anyone using uTorrent is finding the current additions useful. The above scenario keeps things as they are (least fuss) for the people that happy with what they have.. I think it's in poor taste to remove features after adding them but perhaps the users can decide afterwards on what's worth removing if they deem it unnecessary. So this is what you guys should do, charge me $10 for a lite version (I'll buy it) release updates for it as often as you can (I'll appreciate it) work hard on fixing bugs and adding a few nice features to new versions 3.4, 3.5 etc. Then get to work on releasing version 4 with some major additions. Charge me ~$5 for an upgrade to version 4 since I paid for 3, but keep fixing up 3.. back port necessary fixes to keep people happy. Charge me $10 or whatever for version 5, if that's useful I'll buy that too. Your goal is to create the "best" torrent program in the market. Version 3 at the end of the day needs to hold the same respect as 2.2.1. This is what you guys need to aim for right now. Get somebody in the forums AdamK perhaps? And get some much needed customer relations. Let US help to push ideas on what's needed and what's not (your forum is a goldmine thanks to certain individuals) I just want my 1MB client back (remove ratings, apps etc) but please before 4.0 add a search bar for searching inside torrents!! along with a better labelling system. This really is the turning point for uTorrent. I'd really like for all you guys to comment on my post, thanks! From the new response thread Awesome news! So a lite version could be on the cards.. I hope so.

Gotta ask. Why do I see updates on the web for new versions of uTorrent before new versions are posted here? If there's time to upload a new build, why no time to update a thread? BTW guys uTorrent 3.2 build 27708 stable is out, although not officially, I'd rather wait to see a change log first.

from the page rafi linked. Does this comment hold any water?

He speaks words of wisdom. Let us invest. long-click-rename! long-click-rename!

I'm with osmosis on this one..

No ... Like a knife through the heart rafi. I know how to select/deselect it.. I was thinking if someone was downloading a fair amount of torrents that had samples things could be a little more friendly? More of the set and forget type of thing rather than having to tick/untick things all the time. There's been the odd time where I've downloaded samples when I haven't wanted to but there may be people who would like the prompt to download/view the sample before committing to downloading everything in one hit .. not rafi though, obviously a man who knows what he wants.. Oh well, carry on.

Would anyone else like to see a dialog that went something like this? Sample file found in torrent (Sample.mkv etc) Do you wish to download and view this first? Yes / No / Skip.

And suddenly.. bromance. Does having labels being treated as folders interest anyone? The current method makes me want to keep at least one finished torrent in the label just so I don't have to recreate it once it's deleted. :/ BTW, if anyone here use's Firefox or one of it's clones (Waterfox, Pale Moon etc) check out uTorrent Status, it's quite awesome. I managed to get the author to spit out a new version. You can find version 0.3 here

I know he's away ATM, I wasn't suggesting he do it..it's just that he happens to be keeping tabs on things in the forum and there was plenty of time to say "Hey we're calling the next build after RC8 final!" Anyways... +1.. tho... Thanks, I'll just believe I scored two points tho.

Someone really should have updated the beta thread with the changes in 27568 and also posted that this build was to be released as stable.. maybe even thanked the team for testing? Perhaps worth noting for next time Adam Also for what it's worth.. depending on the amount of time taken for 3.3 I hope they continue to bug fix 3.2.x if needed. uTorrent could use a proper stable base. People shouldn't still be recommending 2.2 so let's hope 3.3 finally puts the nail in the coffin.

Recycled bug.

Excellent decision Adam.

And yeah I saw the same thing on another site, claiming RC8 was the stable.. also I don't get why we have an alpha 3.2.1 3.2.1 should be "stable" 3.2 IMO 3.2 should contain all the bug fixes required to be "stable" like the ones added to 3.2.1 and of course Rafi's magic list. 3.3 should have all the new features from 3.2.1 and any other bug fixes required. Why rush to release? Anybody that really wants new features can always jump to the latest alpha or beta. You guys aren't doing yourselves any favors releasing "stable" build after "stable" build. Releasing a bug fix build just before finalizing another bug fix build? C'mon...

Hey Rafi, are they fixing more bugs than they're making?

Considering the amount of time you take to test, keep track of and document them I should bloody well hope so. You've done an excellent job of that over the last seven odd years, you're a real asset to the uTorrent development team and the community and come off as a great guy to boot and I respect you a lot for that. Indeed, RC12, 13 sure.. what's in a name? It doesn't bother me that much but.. it flies in the face of other software development cycles users are experienced with. RCs with uTorrent are more like late beta cycle builds than true release candidates judging from the issues I see being addressed, it just doesn't give a good impression and honestly I really think counts for something. I think one way of helping to create a good impression would be releasing fewer builds (perhaps with more internal testing) that have more fixes rather than more frequent builds with less fixes. Holding off on the release candidate "phase" and letting the beta receive more thorough testing by the community would give a better overall impression of the project also. We know a stable build doesn't mean all bugs are fixed, I don't think there are many people that expect that, we'd just hope the more problematic ones that are known about that are be fixed providing they can be done reasonably quickly. It's a question of what's non critical? We've hit RC with 3.2 and there have been some significant issues found. If it's taken this long to find those, why not wait it out a little? Yes, sometimes the benefits of the new version outweigh the bugs of the old. I would think that if people are experiencing issues they would switch to the beta build to see if things are improved there. If there stability bug fixes are being committed in a release candidate (if you define a release candidate as being a stable build) it might pay to ask, are we rushing this? Impression and word of mouth.. these things can make a product sink or swim. I know all about that, pretty appalling testing on Adobe's part. I reverted back within minutes of updating it Let's hope they learned from that one!

Hehe, that's a little cheeky Adam I was going to mention something as well but looking at the uTorrent history of considerable release candidates before a stable release, I thought it was unlikely to change now, so decided against mentioning it. Basically ask Rafi if it's good enough to be an RC Okay that actually isn't a bad idea, but seriously now it all comes down to what issues are being reported, which is what you're currently doing I guess. I wouldn't think you guys go.. "hey almost time for a release let's make it an RC already!" A release candidate should only go up to say RC3 or so at the highest. People expect an RC to be.. good enough to be released as stable barring no major (or multiple minor) issues, basically IT IS as far as the devs are concerned THE stable release. Now personally considering all the issues still being fixed, I think 3.2 should still be in beta with an RC being posted once Rafi's posted bugs have all been fixed. Many users might think the same, but it's your software, you don't need to do what people expect, it's just nice if you do Thanks!

Issue with the WebUI, when I add a torrent and press okay the Add torrent box stays open on the screen.