Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

fudu

What was the point?

Recommended Posts

It's been 5 years since uTorrent Linux was announced, and not only does utserver receive no love (once a year?...), clearly a native GUI is light years away. Just don't understand the point of saying you're going to develop something, and then just silently push it aside... I remember when the Mac version was new, yes it had bugs at first but everything was brought on par with Windows (at the time the 3.0* abomination didn't exist -_-), in a professional timely manner. Even the Android version has surpassed Linux. Honestly it was better off when the recommended way to run uTorrent on Linux was with wine and version 2.0.3 windows build. Someone will probably get angry and delete this thread, it's not a troll thread; just wondering what the hell happened. Why was Linux kicked to the curb? If Deluge (a MUCH smaller organization, therefore MUCH less resources available) can maintain application support across all 3 major operating systems, with native GUI frontends for each one, why can't a GIANT like uTorrent? 5 years is a VERY long time considering the amount of progress made.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It has been a long time since I first modified our embedded product to create uTorrent Server for Linux.

 

uTorrent Server for Linux has been considered a lower priority since there were relatively few users expected to install it.  The business folks here thought it was a good idea since it took me only a couple of weeks to prepare the program, since we could then see how well accepted it was.  One advantage of releasing this product involves the expected average and median technical ability of uTorrent Server for Linux admins being higher than uTorrent Windows users; that turned out to be useful in finding a bug relating to localization.  A few users reporting problems with localization on uTorrent Server for Linux led me to develop a fix that got localization working properly; when the Mac developer reported the same problem on the Mac, I was able to tell him how to incorporate my changes to fix it, saving him time and trouble and helping get a fixed Mac product out sooner.  That was an example of a small set of relatively knowledgeable users contributing problem reports, me getting their problem resolved, and resulting in our being able to easily fix a product with a much larger user base; I bring this up sometimes when people consider not supporting less-popular platforms.

 

Even back then, I didn't think that it was likely that BitTorrent would release a torrent client with a native GUI for a POSIX platform other than Mac, mainly because of the relatively small number of users expected for the product.  Running the Windows product under wine seemed like the best solution.  I did try to build uTorrent under winelib, and got the help of one of the regular contributors to wine who was also a uTorrent user (who told me that it was better just to run the Windows client under wine rather than attempt to integrate winelib into a Linux product).

 

BitTorrent continues to try numerous initiatives to make money, so we can continue developing products and reward investors.  I haven't been working on the uTorrent Server for Linux project for many months because I am now working on Sync, which is expected to have a better chance of making money than is uTorrent Server for Linux.

There is a significant challenge to migrating uTorrent Server for Linux from the current 3.3-based code base to 3.4 or later code bases.  The Android product developers finally worked on that challenge (I helped them with that migration); that work may help in getting uTorrent Server for Linux migrated, but I still think there's some more work to do.  I'm not seeing anybody take that on around here, and I don't expect it to happen in the short term, and possibly the long term.

 

BitTorrent has its resource limits like any other company or open-source project, and attempts to prioritize.  Our priorities may differ from those of the group producing Deluge.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks for the confirmation.... Good to know it's a product that was never intended to be finished, and that essentially nobody gives a crap about it as of 2015.

I will continue to use uTorrent 2.0.1 under wine or Deluge while I'm using Linux. 

 

Maybe the downloads page should reflect the above info, that it's for testing and debugging, and point regular users to the 2.0.1 build with Wine. Not all Linux desktop users are nerds, there's many of us who just want a regular desktop experience. At present it's boasting about a version that doesn't even really exist--if BitTorrent can't handle developing a UI for the torrent client, it's not of much use to the general user, and it's ok to say, "We don't have the money to do this", because that's what it's boiling down to. A little bit of truth goes a long way  ;)

 

It should permanently be labeled a BETA or ALPHA, to reflect true accuracy, and even a note informing casual users that it's not even being developed actively; followed by a link to the 2.0.1 build, which works flawlessly with Wine. It's all about usability here, uTorrent is uTorrent, whether the build is for Linux or Windows, doesn't matter. Windows/Mac have polished, bug-free, native UI products, Linux nobody gives a damn about; why have casual users download something nobody gives a damn about? Much better to be referred to Windows builds. There's nothing wrong with admitting incapability, nobody will think less of BitTorrent, on the contrary I'd be thankful to not have to waste time with a BS version and just be referred to the Windows build right from the start!  :)

(Just please don't refer us to any 3.0+ build, for the love of god; that's insulting. Doesn't work with wine anyway (nor should it))

Seems BT really lost it's ways after the last 2.x builds, but that's another topic entirely, not related to this one.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Some good news regarding uTorrent Server for Linux.  A month or so ago, I was transferred to the Windows client group.  One of my first assignments was to make the 3.4 code line run on Linux.  I'm pretty close to that; I've got the product building and running, and unit and system tests are passing.  I've got some code reviews for other engineers to review, and then the code will be merged into the 3.4 code base.  I hope to see a new version of uTorrent Server available on the web site sometime later this year.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

mcdonald, I have a question that I consider more necessary. Regarding 3.4 code based, is there a feature implemented about "skip hash checking"

I made this request before, For the long time i had kept backup settings of uT and it was more easy to copy/paste on new system.
But... Recently I've broken unintentionally
, I have to load and do hash checking for 1100 torrents.

Usually this process for me lasts almost 3 to 5 days, i seed big files over 7GB per file, "skip hash checking" It is much more necessary in these cases. Final question: whether there will be a skip hash checking on version 3.4"???

 

Please reply me about this request, I have much interest to know...

 

Thank you very much for continued forward uT on Linux
 

Nili

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

There's a Windows uTorrent beta going around that has most of the changes I've made so that uTorrent Server for Linux can be built from the same code base as is uTorrent for Windows and Mac.  So, progress is being made.  The changes will need to be merged into a release branch after a successful beta, and then I could conceivably build a 3.4 version of uTorrent Server for Linux.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks for sharing those info back mcdonald, i'm excited too about 3.4 :)

Didn't get a reply about "skip hash checking" feature in any case. I have started loading back thousands of VIDEO_TS slowly on my copy μT

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Progress is continuing.  The Linux code was in an alpha on Windows (containing the generic changes necessary to make the code compatible with the Linux build, and including some memory leak fixes).  That was OK, so the Linux code was merged into the then-current beta, which was again OK.  Now, it is merged into the stable release being rolled out.  I've developed Jenkins projects for the Linux products, automating both building and testing.  As long as the rollout goes OK, next would be to set up the stress test environment used for the previous releases of uTorrent Server for Linux, and then run the stress test on a release candidate.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Awesome news donald!

I hope within this year we'll have ready to use. Can't wait to test it. Thanks for making progress.

 

Kindly regards,

Nili

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Some progress, but not enough, unfortunately.  The rollout was OK.  I've been moved to another project.  The client group runs automated builds of Server for Linux, so that the Linux code doesn't rot.  There may not be resources to release Server any time soon.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites