A proposed new main-screen GUI for uT 1.6.x . What do YOU think ?

[LoneWolF]

I don't really like it, but it looks easier to use for beginners so as a optional option I think its good.

[Harry Poppins]

rafi, it was "nah fuck that, -1" before, that's the change:

Harry Poppins: I think it's a good idea, I wouldn't use that interface myself, but it would be great for newbies.

That's actually a coincidence, I had only read the first page of replies when I posted (I hadn't read your post). After I posted, I was pretty amazed to see how similar my post was to the one just before it (by 00), almost down to the wording.

[rafi]

and btw rafi, isn't this a discussion? i can post a couple of times that's not voting..

Sure, I was just joking ...

[winMX_67]

Looks like the mac transmission client.

Eh, +1

[dezzo]

I prefer the current interface myself. It displays more information than the proposed one here. The columns work well with the current interface.

The proposed one doesn't look bad.... perhaps it's a good base to build on for an *optional* basic/beginner interface in some future version?? (If anyone else suggested this already, sorry. I didn't read the whole thread.)

[Ultima]

I prefer the current "quick overview" by a lot. I thought µTorrent was about non-bloating, and such a graphical interface is far in the land of bloatiness, IMO.

What's so "graphical" about this layout? Having an icon per torrent? So that's bloaty? What are "all" those status icons in the current columns UI? Bloat as well? Graphical progress bar? Already there in µTorrent. I don't see your argument, at all.

Let's vote for them all, guys, adding them (even as options) and bring this fantastic client down to it's knees by making it far bloated than Azureus.

Cool, isn't?

So I guess new features just shouldn't be added. Ever. We should just leave µTorrent alone -- stifle its progress.

QFT - what's wrong with a minimal client.

Truth? What truth? If you don't want ludde to add new features, just stick to 1.5, or 1.1.1. Simple enough, no? And there's nothing wrong with a minimal client. Just like there's nothing wrong with adding this interface. Explain how adding this interface makes it un-minimal? lol, I guess displaying less information means un-minimal. By the way, the goal for µTorrent was never to make a minimal client in the first place. It was to make a featureful client that used minimal resources for what it could do. Can it use less resources than it already does? Sure. But you'd necessarily have to lose a lot of important features. Disk cache, anyone?

Apologies for being so sarcastic/cynical. I've just seen too many baseless arguments so far, and really can't bear it any longer.

Me? I prefer columns UI by far.

Am I against it? No.

Why? It's good for µTorrent.

How? Makes it more appealing for newbies. µTorrent's already easier to configure than most other clients out there for newbies, but the interface can easily be daunting for them. Or is there something so wrong with giving them something they might be more familiar with (Firefox's download manager)?

You don't like it? Switch back to the current interface, not hard at all. Or stick to 1.5 if you can't stand new features, or 1.6 if you think adding the interface will "bloat" µTorrent.

Why am I even defending it in the first place? There are no real disadvantages with it for anyone, since the current interface is left untouched. ludde is serious about adding it, so it's not like he's making it to satisfy his boredom (which would lead to bloat).

[tjobo]

No. Please no. Keep µtorrent a ubloated client (even if it's optional).

[Ultima]

Explain how it's bloated, please? I have not seen one good argument thus far.

[Tarkus]

Bloated = features that person doesn't want

AFAIK, there's no expiration on 1.6, so keep using that if you don't want any additional features.

[Ultima]

That's exactly what I see -- if someone doesn't like a particular feature, they toss the term "bloated" around. lol that's one very subjective word then. Since that seems to be the case, people shouldn't be using that word around all over the place. Having an arbitrary definition means that the word has absolutely NO meaning; after all, I can say bloated means feature parity with Azureus. Since µTorrent won't ever become Azureus or carry the ridiculous number of features or options that it has, µTorrent can never become bloated. Would I really say that? Never, because there is a limit. This feature just doesn't reach that limit.

If I didn't make sense in that rant, yeah, oh well. The general gist is still there.

[Firon]

Here's the thing, there's always new USEFUL features (well, sans this one maybe) AND fixes. There's ALWAYS fixes and improvements to go along with a build. I mean, 1.5 -> 1.6 may not've had major features, but it had a lot of improvements, including speed ones. So, even if you don't like the features, there's always fixes and stuff to upgrade for.

[Ultima]

lol good point, but if someone can really prove that µTorrent is using an increasingly appreciable amount of resources with each feature added, without any real gain in usefulness or productivity (for users overall, not a single particular user), then there might be a bad trend. But so far, most (if not all) of the features added that might've increased resource usage a bit have had real world uses, and are used by many people. ludde's been sensible in his choices for µTorrent, and has failed to disappoint thus far. This feature is sensible, in my opinion, no matter the fact that I will probably never use it. Just like I never use the RSS downloader. I still wanted it, because it had potential, and time has proven that it is VERY useful.

[Harry Poppins]

I don't see what the big deal is, the way uTorrent is coded, another feature like this optional interface is not going to slow it down in any noticeable way. As far as I'm concerned, in this context "minimal" doesn't mean a minimum of features, but rather a minimum of redundancy and inefficiency in the way these features are implemented. Azureus isn't "bloated" because it has too many features, it's bloated because it's too much for the Java platform it runs on. Just my opinion.

[Ultima]

On a related note... inf's argument (I think it was inf) on the IRC channel was that people should learn how to use µTorrent's current interface, that it shouldn't be dumbed down for them in such a way that they never learn to use µTorrent. That's the closest argument I have come to accepting, but it still doesn't change my opinion. For some people, they just don't care about how µTorrent is downloading its torrents, just like they don't care how their browsers do what they do to display web pages. What do people find attractive about Firefox? That it's less complicated than Internet Explorer. That it's more customizable. That it, by default, doesn't have too many widgets and buttons on screen (people used to hate Opera because of the sheer number of interface elements it had enabled by default). Nothing wrong with doing the same for µTorrent. It doesn't make µTorrent any less functional, any more resource hungry, and for people who have the same opinion about .torrent files as they do about .html files, this is a Good Thing™.

[Optimus]

It's too noisy for me. Optional, please.

[davybutcher]

One key piece of info is missing: ETA.

[Ultima]

@davybutcher:

http://forum.utorrent.com/viewtopic.php?pid=190207#p190207

@Optimus:

http://forum.utorrent.com/viewtopic.php?pid=190110#p190110

http://forum.utorrent.com/viewtopic.php?pid=190235#p190235

[rafi]

What are "all" those status icons in the current columns UI? Bloat as well?

I knew I missed something... better replace the "type" icons with status icons here too...

lol good point, but if someone can really prove that µTorrent is using an increasingly appreciable amount of resources with each feature added, without any real gain in usefulness or productivity

It reminds me of the IP resolving to flags issue. A very nice feature that I really wanted to use, but that at the time - I remember suggesting to not operate this feature when the tab is not shown, so to save net/CPU resources. No one (=ludde) wanted to listed to me then... and I'm glad he finally done it now...

I mention this - so that also for in this case of alternative GUI - not forget NOT to "manipulate" it's objects when it is not being used ...

and why don't you, Ultima, add some constructive comments on how to make it better too ?

[Omegatron]

let us have a choice

[dAbReAkA]

here's a suggestion from me:

in front of the torrent name add the label in []

so that if u have a torrent with name Torrent 1 and it has label Label 1, it will look like that: [Label 1]Torrent 1

the label can also be bold

if category No Label is currently open just show the torrent name without any [] in front

[hyynes]

It seems half you guys have used this new GUI. Is there a download around somewhere?

Also, I like it.

[rafi]

hyynes - no, it was unofficial, just a prototype for the IRC channel users.

[hyynes]

hyynes - no, it was unofficial, just a prototype for the IRC channel users.

Thanks.

[-$$$$$-]

@-$$$$$-: We already did say that it'd be optional. And it looks like a mix of Firefox's download manager and Transmission's interface -- what's wrong with their interfaces? What's wrong with this interface? What makes it so horrible that it must be avoided? We can't accept your criticism if you don't provide a reason.

take it easy Ultima what i said doesnt really sound as harsh as it seems.

btw it indeed look like Firefox!!

Whats wrong with the interface? nothing

what's wrong with this interface? nothing (functionality speaking)

what make it so horrible it must be avoided?

i find it very ugly especially since i used uTorrent from the start and it looks awesome the way it is.

this is my personal opinion. you will make it optional?

then i have absolutely no problem. ill take it similar to SKINS but where you can change the GUI.

and why not, you could make many different gui and one can choose the one they want as long

as you keep the original intact, it would help N00bs and or people that like to change the looks perhaps

of uTorrent.

as for me, i like the normal uTorrent looks not this one. just the looks.

im sorry for the criticism and the way it sounded earlier. i should've explained myself better.

[Ultima]

Oh I was totally chill at that time -- sorry if asking a barrage of questions made it seem otherwise, they just popped into my head at the time xD

And yes, it will be optional.

I just went on my frenzy only yesterday after seeing the same "bloat this bloat that" "reason" come up, like, almost every other post.

@rafi:

Because it's just a proof of concept. And basically everything I could think of being changed about it was already listed =P I'm just deflecting (thus far) unproven comments.

Oh, and can you make it painfully obvious (in the first post) that it'll be optional? Perhaps the first thing that should be written on that post might be IT WILL BE OPTIONAL. People just seem to repeatedly miss that critical part and think that it replaces the current columns UI, and then use that (wrongly) against the interface. If it weren't optional, I'd be lobbying against it as well.