Running as a service

[atm999]

all linksys routers have QoS now, and those run 40-80 USD

[spin]

I have dual coaxle cable connections in my house. 2 seperate IP's. 2 seperate computers. No routers! My wifes computer is the one downloading all the time and she rarely uses it so I dedicate her bandwidth to improving my productivity. Lucky me! No lan network. I connect to my other computer via http because i can control the security more efficiently because that's what I'm used to. So i definetly agree to running it as a service. This way she can't accidentally turn it off or it can't be interrupted when my son sits down at her computer. I also don't want them to be able to see what i'm downloading on the interface. So hiding it comes in handy. I don't want my son to sit down and see a file downloading called "Big Boobed Blonde Bitches" or whatever porn fetish I happen to be downloading. So unless you can just add it to the startup reg. and completely hide access to uTorrent, then i recommend running it as a service.

Right now, I have to add it to the startup registry, and then I just switch user, thus denying my son access to the folders that the files get downloaded to.

So I'm happy with the current situation, but if it helps you seed longer, than i'm all for it!

+1

[WebReaper]

I don't want my son to sit down and see a file downloading called "Big Boobed Blonde Bitches" or whatever porn fetish I happen to be downloading.

Problem is, if it's running as a service, you might not be able to see what great p*rn your son is downloading.

[pronkax]

Is there any feedback if this option will be implemented ?

[mat128]

"Not necessary", "i don't really think this should be priority", "i'd imagine a lot of people don't use utorrent that way"...

Blablabla. Just guesses...

I think to have the option "Run as service" would be a great idea for all people with a home network and a server that is constantly on. This way you can auto-trigger torrents to start downloading on the server, and no resources are taken from the client, which can be switched off. Brilliant! I'd love to see that functionality!

And I don't think this is difficult to implement either...

I am in the same situation, however, my server is always logged on a user, which runs the utorrent client. I setup auto import from a specific folder, which is shared with write permissions. The completed torrents are also automatically copied into a folder which is setup for read access, that way, I download torrents using my computer to the network share, and a few hours later I get the file in my completed torrents folder! I am also using microsoft terminal services (mstsc) to check the status of the download.

[Firon]

pronkax: unlikely.

[pronkax]

It's a shame... Would have made my choice on which torrent client i should use a lot easier.

I still don't understand what the added value is for a web interface if you can't run UTorrent as a service.

[WebReaper]

I still don't understand what the added value is for a web interface if you can't run UTorrent as a service.

Why do you need to run uTorrent as a service to access it remotely? I don't. I have it running on a headless XP box which auto-logs in and locks itself so nobody can access it.

I'd run it on a W2k3 Server machine but I can't find a Windows Server driver for the Wireless NIC.

[nascent]

I too think not adding the ability to run as server would be a mistake. Just because there are people that say it is pointless, they can either not use it - or will find after trying it it is more useful to them than they thought.

WebReaper: If it auto logs itself in - then by the time it "locks itself" it can be hijacked.

Edit:

Lol, was just making sure you knew incase the machine was in a public place or office.

[WebReaper]

Nobody's saying it would be pointless. I think it's more a matter of priority of development.

Not quite sure how anyone could hijack my machine really. They'd need to be in my house, know where the server is, and would have to bring their own VDU, keyboard and mouse. And if somebody's got that far, whether they get access to my stash of downloaded torrents is - frankly - the least of my worries.

[gdap]

The only problem with having a computer that auto logs in is that you can't then start up UTorrent as another user without logging in as that user first. This is why running as a service would be ideal for computers that are mainly used by others but on which you'd like to have running UTorrent as another user.

[WebReaper]

Why would I want to run uTorrent as another user?

[atm999]

So you can have all your settings and torrents on all logons, not just one.

[nascent]

We're going back to the silly mentality of "If I don't want it, it shouldn't be there".

The idea of making it an option is just that... It'd be optional!

Many people will use this feature, whether you as an individual do or not doesn't concern us, nor should our request of this feature be any of your concern.

Edit:

µtorrent-Guest: You're missing the point, he was asking how it would work if the "Run As Service" option was implemented and used.

[µtorrent-Guest]

atm999: you can have that also right now by making µT selfcontained in a directory that is "worldwritable"

[WebReaper]

We're going back to the silly mentality of "If I don't want it, it shouldn't be there".

Who is? I don't see anyone posting that. I see people asking questions so that potentially they can then help other users solve their problems without Ludde needing to do development - such as the response from uTorrent-Guest.

[pronkax]

Ok, if you use any other option for running the application full time, without " running as a service" it will stay buggy. Believe me, I know. I design IT infrastuctures for large corporations and the only way to run a server app. is to have it running as a service.

Don't get me wrong, I do understand most people here won't use the application the same way as I would want to which is with "running as a service" enabled and the webui running under apache/IIS.

The reason is because I want to be able to upload torrent files to the server and start them from office.

I've tried Azureus but that doesn't support "running as a service". I've been happy for a while with "Torrentflux" but it became more and more unstable with every release.

For me there is no other solution then having an app that supports "running as a service" else i just won't install it. It has to be running 24/7.

I also understand this tool is freeware, so i'm not pushing it. If the development team doesn't want to implement it, I can understand it. But then Utorrent just simply isn't for me.

[atm999]

I know this is an old feature request, but is there any chance that it will be implemented?

[giblet1973]

Being able to run as a service would be very useful. Many of us are starting to have dedicated machines for running torrents, especially with our old computers fetching very little as resale when we upgrade. Personally I have 5 machines in my house - 2 media centers, 1 firewall, 1 that only has utorrent, and 1 machine that is my normal desktop pc.

[shkbobo]

I've got 2 computers just for µTorrent, and another on the way...but I just set it to high priority in the task manager and tweak it a little.

Service would be nice, but if it interferes with anything, definately not.

I'm impartial. :x

[emorgoch]

I've been running off AZ for a while now as I found it able to get higher download rates for me. However, just tried out uTorrent 1.6 and I must say that I'm much more impressed with it than I was back when it was still 0.x versions.

As for running as a service, this is something that I'd really like myself. I know a lot of people have spoken up about this, but there's one main reason that I want it that has yet to be mentioned yet.

For many of us, we live in a multi-user environment. For some, that means many users using the same computer, logging each other in and out, or controlling each other's sessions. For the rest of us though, our multi-user environment is based on a series of networked computers, everybody running their own computers at the same time, doing their thing. In this instance, if the 3 or 4 (or more) people sitting in that private LAN all want to download stuff, they typically each start up their own BitTorrent client, each trying to filter traffic out through the LAN to the internet. Well, I'm pretty sure that most of us here can understand that having 3 or 4 clients running at once, trying to maximize their own connection gets pretty messy, easily able to completely flood your typial SOHO routers (Stupid underpowered Linksys...).

Now, even if these 3 or 4 people are actually computer savy, able to figure-out how much they can push each of their repsective clients before the WAN gives out, you're losing a lot of efficeincy here. This means that you either have to keep track of everyone elses usage, constantly monitor who's up and running, who's not, set how many connections to have open, etc.; Or you can just set everyone's client to be minimalistic, and severely lose out if you're the only one that's online at that time.

At home, I have a server box that I use as my Web/MySQL server just for personal enjoyment, And has also been relagated to my BT server to help free up as many resources on my main desktop as possible. Once I moved in with other people, having that computer available was useful. Get everyone set up with RDP and having a global account that everyone can log into to run / control BT. But in the end, it's still a pain in the ass trying to manage that. Or even getting everyone use to RDP'ing into the server to use it, making sure they remember to "disconnect" rather than log off.

But as a properly designed "service / server" application, we get a much better situation. A single dedicated machine, running that main "torrent engine" (for lack of a better term), controlling the seeds and leeching from a single instance, and clients interacting with this engine through their own client side application over a TCP connection. However, I'm not going to dilude myself here: This is definitly a much larger task than the current client is designed to handle, with it's own set of quirks that would need to be worked out (multiple users connecting at once, connection security, etc.). Maybe it's a goal worth working towards longer down the road, or (probably more appropriatly) spawning a new project that uses uTorrent as a basse to build upon.

But at a more simplistic level, with the coming of the new WebUI, the separation of the engine from the GUI is already happening. Haven't actually seen/heard what the interface is going to be like or what it will provide, but at the very least, the basic back-bone from which to build a basic service-level ability to run.

This is a feature that I've seen asked for by users for over a year now by various other clients. And yet, I've seen no mention of it being something that's being worked on. Just suggestions for workarounds that don't provide half the functionality that a true implementation (even at a basic level) would provide.

I know this has been a bit of a rant, but thanks all for listening.

[techgnostic]

I would also like to see this implemented. I don't understand the opposition to such a feature.

My reasons have already been stated by other people, multi-user environment, both users use uTorrent.

[WebReaper]

I don't understand why people keep citing 'opposition' to this feature.

Most people have ventured the opinion that this feature should be low-priority as only a minimal proportion of users would need it (or even know what it is). I've not actually seen anyone say it shouldn't be implemented at all.

[techgnostic]

Okay, that's fair, I respect their opinion. For the record though, that would not be my opinion.

[ramibotros]

i know in the future utorrent would start doing this. web interface is much more practical with it..

e.g. i want to turn on my pc, and have utorrent running all the sudden alone without thinkin about it. and so my friends can use me as their "torrent-server" and automatically access my utorrent..

it even makes sense with the RSS downloader .. i dun need to see the thing starting up everyday. When things work alone it's just better. I'll open the interface when i want to watch the ep. utorrent has downloaded..

the thing that most makes sense about this is that it'll start up the same way for all users, so i have a guarantee that my windows will open and download with utorrent, unnoticably, whatever user logs in.

So basically, because utorrent has long-time-taking automated proccesses (seeding till 150%, rss downloading, web-serving, .. ), it needs to give the easy abbility to run in the background.. That's what services are for actually..