• Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Posts posted by jron

  1. I absolutely loved uTorrent up to version 2.0.4. After that' date=' things started to go down hill.

    The addition of apps/extension is a neat idea; however, I have absolutely no use or desire for them. For a web browser, they make sense. For an application designed to just run in the background, they don't offer any advantage. Thankfully, 2.2.x allowed you to hide the apps panel, which made this less of an issue.

    Since then, what has been added? A featured content section with a giant arrow pointing at it, a transcoder, social functions (ratings and comments on torrents), and a few other things including ads in the setup wizard. Not to mention a "Plus" version, which just tacks on a bunch of other things I have no use for and frankly hate.

    Now you are adding ads to the UI. I don't really see any appeal in the current or next version of uTorrent.

    If you want to get money out of me, and restore faith in your product, release a "lite" version of uTorrent. Hell, I would gladly pay the "Pro" price for it. Strip out the apps, ads, social functions, all the "Plus" features, transcoder, setup wizards ads, and so one and you've sold me.

    All I want from uTorrent is what is was originally designed to be, a minimalist and no-nonsense client. Just a basic downloader with no bloat.[/quote']

    Very well said, SimpleToe. I really appreciate your thoughtful comments and your very concrete, alternative suggestions. I wonder how many would buy a "lite" version as you suggest with exactly the properties you list, with the only additions being the security, performance and "fundamentals" (bug fixes, better magnet link handling, etc) we've added over the years. I'm very interested to hear others' thoughts on this idea.

    Still listening...

    It is a shame that it took something like this to make the uTorrent team understand the primary reasons uTorrent succeeded while nearly all other Windows based clients died a slow death during the 2.x days. Why did uTorrent succeed? The obvious: Performance, simplicity, code quality (assumed), and footprint. I'm honestly shocked that it took this long to backfire... I registered three months ago just to ask about known vulnerabilities in 2.2.1. I was hopeful that someone clever enough was creating binary patches to fix known issues...

    The answer to uTorrent's current problems is both obvious and depressing from a technical and financial perspective: Start over with the 2.2.1 code base. It is hard to admit that millions of dollars have been spent to break functionality, complicate usability, and add "features" that nobody wants or uses, but it is for the best. Fix any known issues, vulnerabilities, and slowly work quality features into the 2.2.1 codebase with feedback from the community. This should have been the pro version from day one. Charge for it and profit. Put the B-squad development team on the 3.x code base and feel free to continue adding more junk that nobody wants, ads included. This should be the free version. It hurts to know the source code to a brilliant piece of software could be lost forever. Take advantage of the investment you made!

    The 2006 announcement: "Together, we are pleased to announce that BitTorrent, Inc. and uTorrent AB have decided to join forces. BitTorrent has acquired uTorrent as it recognized the merits of uTorrent’s exceptionally well-written codebase and robust user community. Bringing together uTorrent’s efficient implementation and compelling UI with BitTorrent’s expertise in networking protocols will significantly benefit the community with what we envision will be the best BitTorrent client... It supports our goal for improving the user experience. The developer of uTorrent put a significant amount of time and know-how into optimizing the client for user experience and we think he did a great job."