1.1.7.2 = perfection

[Grnch]

I just wanted to say that the current version of uTorrent just became my number one torrent client. When using earlier versions, the only real problems were lack of queue ordering and the resume.dat bug. Now it's just perfect. Very functional, with a well designed and usable GUI, yet memory/cpu footprint is negligible. I can't believe I thought Azureus and BitComet were good clients, with all the pointless crap crammed into them making my machine crawl!

[MrTufty]

All I want now is DHT support and the ability to change the folder a torrent is downloading to, and I'll be happy! Previous BitComet user too, uTorrent has so far proved to be significantly better!

[kingnick]

Well µTorrent is definitely the best minimalist client by far but I guess it's all about personal preference and my opinion is that Azureus still has superior features and performance but at the heavy cost of high system resources but I'd say µTorrent is in the top three clients along with Azureus and BitComet.

I only use Azureus now for DHT and try to avoid using it whenever possible in favour of µTorrent.

My Top 3 BT Clients

1. µTorrent

2. Azureus

3. BitComet

[BlackLion]

Well µTorrent is definitely the best minimalist client by far but I guess it's all about personal preference and my opinion is that Azureus still has superior features and performance but at the heavy cost of high system resources but I'd say µTorrent is in the top three clients along with Azureus and BitComet.

I only use Azureus now for DHT and try to avoid using it whenever possible in favour of µTorrent.

My Top 3 BT Clients

1. µTorrent

2. Azureus

3. BitComet

Well said and my sentinments exactly, I could have written this post word for word, substituting BitComet for Azureus LOL nice post

[Getthings]

My favourite before uTorrent was ABC, also a mini client and quite well featured.

(Its written in Python and uses very little resources)

I now use uTorrent exlusively as it seems to connect to new clients quicker and gives me a faster download as well as using even less resources!

[luish]

Well µTorrent is definitely the best minimalist client by far but I guess it's all about personal preference and my opinion is that Azureus still has superior features and performance but at the heavy cost of high system resources but I'd say µTorrent is in the top three clients along with Azureus and BitComet.

I only use Azureus now for DHT and try to avoid using it whenever possible in favour of µTorrent.

My Top 3 BT Clients

1. µTorrent

2. Azureus

3. BitComet

I just need in µTorrent RSS options and it will rock..

btw, every1 should visit .. Tape it off the Internet , I think that will rock

Keep up the great job !

[PAStheLoD]

uTorrent , Azureus , BitComet .. that's the new order !

DHT thats a standard feature nowadays, the 3 directory modell: moving totally complete torrents (only the torrent that finished seeding to 1.0 .. or some specified ratio should be considered complete) that's just one step from the current state, and not a big feature at all, but that's what is also needed for the true perfection ;]

[erissiva]

DHT = Leeching = Bad

[Grnch]

DHT = Leeching = Bad

Not necessarily. I can see DHT being helpful when the tracker has connection problems or goes offline. All those peers that suddenly lost the tracker could still find each other and continue downloading, until the tracker comes back up.

I would have nothing against DHT implementation in uTorrent, provided that DHT is only activated IF the tracker for the torrent is offline AND the torrent doesn't have the private flag set.

Any other use of DHT would be trying to turn BitTorrent into a network like eMule, which as we all know doesn't work all that well for fast downloads (although availability of rare files is great). The trackers are the magic spice that make BitTorrent perform so well. If you want a distributed network, use eMule (with Kad).

[BlackLion]

DHT = Leeching = Bad

what is bad are those semi-sucky pub trackers that make DHT even necessary in the first place. DHT has a place and if the client u use respects the private flag (I use several private trackers that flag their torrents) then there is no leeching issue. the Comet's latest offering (.060 i believe) does that and when I use it on private trackers that set the private flag I do not have the option to enable DHT. problem solved. At least temporarily LOL

[oxymoron]

Why would I need a Top x client list?

µTorrent does, what I need.

Its not slower (maybe even a littel faster) than the client I used before (Burst).

I tired Azureus -- horrible. (I do not own a highend pc)

I tried the original client -- too little features.

I tried Burst -- okish, but more that two torrents at a time made my pc unusable for anything else.

µTorrent is perfect for _my_ needs. And as long as I get reasonable speed I've no need to test anything else.

[CainKellye]

The features I really need are already in uTorrent. Quite some ppl want DHT, so it should be added, and I think that shuld be the last new feature - for a time at least.

And then the devs could revise the code, make improvements to the downloading/uploading so uTorrent can really be the best, smallest and fastest BT client.

(Improvements can include the sorting of completed downloads, of course.)

[ScubaSteve]

yea i agree it is extremely good. only thing i would like is DHT, udp , and ability to use multiple trackers when creating a torrent.

[winMX_67]

Only one thong to go....UDP.

[BlackLion]

Only one thong to go....UDP.

winMX i cant resist this.......

I have to ask the question, HOW can you combine thongs and bt???? :twisted:

[boo]

Only one thong to go....UDP.

ya, DHT, UDP, Digital security(or whatever people said it was called) and improved seed and peer handeling

[Knight]

The only thing I want added to utorrent is an file dialog when you first open a torrent like with g3 and bc

[chaosblade]

What Knight mentions is something id like to see aswell (though i'd rarely use it i guess).

I definitly agree with CainKellye's Thinking.

UDP tracking IS the most useless feature ive ever seen in the bt world.

[Esstee]

Nice "BT client" - its small and does the trick.

I would consider this a great option for people who's systems are not up with the times or who don't want to commit with installation on there machines (off location etc.)

As for those of you who seem overhelmed with Azureus resource hogging, you need to understand that Az performs right up where it belongs considering the job it performs. I have 2 machines at home both are average performers. But mostly they are geared to run current software ex: Photoshop, Office etc.

The least of the two is a 2.4Ghz /1GB ram the other is a 3.2Ghz /2GB Ram. On each of these systems Azureus runs right where I would expect it to, depending on the task and active seeds the ave. load is 70 - 90MB and 0 - 3% CPU.

One one machine which I run as a tracker I have 3000+ torrents aka 20 000 files and a few plugins, under those circumstances Az uses up 130MB of active memory and 3-7% CPU depending on the activity load.

I recommend uTorrent to people I know to access my tracker because its tiny and to the point. However I would like to point out that uTorrent is not Azureus and vice versa. They are in all respects totally different breeds of BT clients. I think its safe to say they both have a place in the BT technology software race and I don't see the sense in selling one out over the other. If someone wants power and have the system to back it up then by all means choose and enjoy Azureus, similarely if someone wants a simple and very light BT experience then uTorrent definately does the trick

Thought it was worth pointing out.

PS. performing speed /performance test between BT clients requires planning and resources. downloading a few files and posting this or that app. sucks is hardly a viable performance review. At the very least you would need to setup a stable and dedicated swarm on different mediuyms and perform a series of test to draw conclusive results.

[chaosblade]

I agree with most of what you said, But i dont believe uTorrent and azureus are different. Here's what i believe: uTorrent acts like a BT client, as it should. Azureus acts like a BT client, and RSS feedreader, a firewall, and ten other things it shouldn't really do.

[Esstee]

I personally like the Az package, not because I needed it but because it simply existed and I came to make use of it. Before Azureus came along I was using a large array of technology to accomplish a certain task. So now I can do everything with a single app. It's kinda of nice that way.

Like many things around us when it comes down to comparisson our personal preferences often help conclude the final verdict.

A good example would be in mechanical design software. we have two primary packages LLC IronCAD and Dassault industries Catia. They are both similar in many ways but one of those (Catia) is an engineering monster. Fully unlocked it could easilly weight in at $80 000.US and hurls enough design power to makes even worlds leading manufacturers cry. IronCAD On other would be just the opposite! its fast, innexpensive and gives its designers an environment without compromising creative freedoms.

Both of these softwares are similar on 1000's of fronts. But when you get right down to it, they are in fact different, simply because one will be used in ertain cases and the other is simply geared to serve a broader range.

Just as you mentioned Azureus has a large set of unecessary options, I have heard very similar lines regarding the Catia software. With this in mind I cannot argue. But on a similar note, myself and thousands others share the fact that Catia exists and that it does serve an indespensable role in the industry.

To make a long story short, the point is simply that we have a fine BT client (uTorrent) and on the other end another Azureus. It is simply not possible to compare the two on a level platform without taking into consideration the list of functions found within each package. As it is with Catia and IronCAD people will find Azureus an indespensable and usable tool and all this can take place without stealing the shine from uTorrent.

I write this in reference to my earlier post and to help destinguish the differences between uTorrent and Azureus.

[REL749]

I thought DHT is NEVER supposed to be enabled when using private trackers.

If you people are trying to support DHT, you either use public sites as your primary, or love to break private tracker rules.

DHT is unnecessary

[Ultima]

DHT is unnecessary

... says the person who uses private trackers... Not everyone uses private trackers, so for them, DHT is a totally legitimate way of obtaining seeds/peers. I've said this a thousand times already, but I'll say it again. If the tracker administrators were serious about protecting their torrents, then enforce a rule requiring that all uploaded torrents have the 'private' flag set. Then ban clients that don't adhere to it. Seeing as how µTorrent respects the flag (it should, right? It does create private torrents after all...), it really shouldn't be a problem if DHT support is added.

Besides, the devs are going full-steam into adding DHT support to µTorrent =

[REL749]

you either use public sites as your primary, or love to break private tracker rules.

As I already said, if you support DHT, you use public trackers as your primary source.

Why tell me that not everyone uses private trackers? Should have got the hint in my last post. :?

[Ultima]

If you knew so well, then why'd you say that "DHT is unnecessary?" You should have noticed why I quoted what I quoted.