uTorrent vs Azureus

[Firon]

We did give reasons and our very own flawed tests to show that his tests fail at proving anything, you didn't really read the thread very well. Criticism is one thing, crappy flawed fanboy tests are another. On some forums I've been to, 'evidence' like that gets ya banned if you keep it up.

What the hell do you expect people to do when someone posts completely bogus and flawed claims?

[Ultima]

I'm not so sure Rag did a "crappy flawed fanboy test." Just a crappy flawed test ;P

If he were really a fanboy, I'd expect him to have said stuff like "Oh look at that, Az kicks µT's ass!"

[Firon]

Good point.

[splintax]

Azureus is a 6MB jar (compressed, uncompressed it's like 13), not including the core DLLs and default plugins.

right.. close enough the Win2000/XP installer is 7MB...

[deeppal]

We did give reasons and our very own flawed tests to show that his tests fail at proving anything, you didn't really read the thread very well. Criticism is one thing, crappy flawed fanboy tests are another. On some forums I've been to, 'evidence' like that gets ya banned if you keep it up.

What the hell do you expect people to do when someone posts completely bogus and flawed claims?

Did u read the part I said abt the comments made at the start? Whats the pt of explaining well 2 or 3 pages down when he gets bombarded at the start.

U cant expect utorrent to have everything azureus has or work the same way, just accept it. Utorrent is a new client but definately has more potential than azureus which has reached its peak.

[spriseris]

i think its enough to prove that uTorrent is not good as Azureus. U are not mentioning that i did the test multiple times and all that stuff, couse u want people to belive how good uTorrent is.

I think it was obvious that this was the original poster's attitude from the start. Other comments about (paraphrased) "why does utorrent fail and azureus does not" and "convince me to come back to this client"...

It seemed to me that he just wanted people here to admit Azureus is better than utorrent..

But that's just my opinion.

[hofshi]

but what if he does? it's his own opinion, and it's a legitimate one.

Although I switched from Az and I strongly believe that µtorrent is far better, it doesn't mean that others can't think otherwise. maybe for his own specific needs Az is better.

[spriseris]

If he doesn't like it, why does he have to come here and provoke people and bash utorrent?

Erase utorrent, switch clients, and move on. Why does he have to come and say "utorrent is not as good as azureus"... Sure it's his opinion, but he says his opinion is "proven" and therefore his post is just trolling.

The definition of trolling is "provoking other users to respond with flames" -- which is exactly what happened.

[Ultima]

@spriseris: Hm... I must have overlooked his post when he wrote that... Good point, it does seem like he already went into this "test" with a biased opinion... I'm still giving him the benefit of the doubt though. It's easy to write something like that when you see a bunch of posts by a bunch of people in the forum who get hotblooded (overstatement, but you get the point ;P) whenever someone comes in and compares it with another client (favoring the other client).

[deeppal]

@spriseris

If the thread starter gets bashed from the start, how can u say he was bashing utorrent ? If u get provoked with one sided arguments and pple refusing to even listen, u are gonna keep stating ur legit points?

The same way its his points, the same way its urs. So he cant be wrong if u are not.

He did not bash utorrent from the start. He only started using those statements after seeing small kids refusing to say their toy cd be alittle smaller than anothers.

Man ! Its spastic to see people who cant have an open mind but then cut down other people who dont agree to their pt of view. Are we a bunch of dictators? Or are our forums not to discuss the possible flaws of the client, if any?

U might have been frustrated by countless threads like this but that does not give u guys the reason to bash the thread starter and then say he bashed utorrent. So what after 6 bashing posts, people start to talk more logically? Is the guy gonna listen?

Geez utorrent members need to lighten up

[spriseris]

maybe u didn't understand the point of this post... i actualy like uTorrent its just that after testing it seems that Azureus has better way of connecting.. i am trying to figure out why is it that uTorrent fails where Azureus works, and i would like to see uTorrent improve on this point so i can use it again.

This was his post (post #3 in this thread) before anyone flamed him. This post is trolling. He said Azureus is better and utorrent fails and needs to improve. THIS POST PROVOKES PEOPLE. Trying to lighten the blow by saying he likes it, before he says it's a failure and needs improvement, does not change the tone of what he said.

(paraphrasing) "I like utorrent but it's a failure and needs to improve. Why can't it be more like Azureus?"

Defend him all you want, but that's what he said.

[Switeck]

We can argue all we want about which is better.

Tests are just useless data if you don't know context.

We really need to be arguing about what in µTorrent might ever cause it to perform badly when another client in the same torrent is doing well.

That's why I find disaster threads so interesting, not that I'm trying to "down" µTorrent or even because I think it's probably a flaw in µTorrent...but I always wonder how such results could happen.

[hofshi]

@deeppal , @Switeck : I couldn't agree more with what you've said. It's kind of destructive that people put words in the thread starter's mouth in order to "win" an argument. This kind of attiture will not let us µtorrent users hear other thoughts and will prevent us from seeing what needs to be improved in this great client. Not listening to others will not make µtorrent better. The oposite is probably true.

[xamenos]

maybe u didn't understand the point of this post... i actualy like uTorrent its just that after testing it seems that Azureus has better way of connecting.. i am trying to figure out why is it that uTorrent fails where Azureus works' date=' and i would like to see uTorrent improve on this point so i can use it again.[/quote']

This was his post (post #3 in this thread) before anyone flamed him. This post is trolling. He said Azureus is better and utorrent fails and needs to improve. THIS POST PROVOKES PEOPLE. Trying to lighten the blow by saying he likes it, before he says it's a failure and needs improvement, does not change the tone of what he said.

(paraphrasing) "I like utorrent but it's a failure and needs to improve. Why can't it be more like Azureus?"

Defend him all you want, but that's what he said.

Rag did not say this. he didn't even mean that indirectively. These are just your words.

As I said before I am a utorrent user myself but I was not offended by his posts. Until people started to bash him all together but still he was less provoking than others in my point of view.

And yes I have read all posts in this thread. What "bleh" indicated as the correct test method uses actually what Rag did but with more torrents. Azureus might use a better method of choosing what peers to connect and that makes it faster. From my experiences I found that Azureus was faster downloading on MY machine but I couldnot continue to use it because of the slowdowns that it was causing me. I am just talking about myself here. Other people might have different results and thats respectable... Rag asked for more users to do the same test but I have not seen other people post screenshots...

And as I said before, what matters is the result. Ut downloads X and azureus downloads Y in Ztime... If X<Y means that Azureus is "faster" or say better "its more productive". And then I tell you to read above why...

[Rag]

i never came here to provoke uTorrent users, just to show my testing and to see tests from other users, and in hope that this error could be addresed and fixed in the next release.

i am glad that some users did understund me and stand up for me to explain what i was trying to say.

english is not my home language and i couldn't expres myself the way i wanted, also defending myself from u guys was very hard, i am glad that some did understand my point.

[hofshi]

@Rag: thank you for your efforts, and for taking the time to help further improve µtorrent. I hope that your tests will be useful for the devs.

[bleh]

Well, my post was about the need for MORE tests, to indicate a very ROUGH estimate of how a client would behave vs another.

To make an truly accurate test, these are just a few of the conditions you need to consider:

*network conditions (router packet handling, packet size, packet format,network OS)

*connection conditions (speed, syncronicity, provider specific bans, port bans, firewalls, operating system)

*client specific settings (is your client optimized, and what constitutes an optimized client on a particular connection?)

*tracker (tracker config, tracker bans, clients participating in the swarm, seeder to leecher ratio, overall speed ratio, your ratio vs the swarms)

And this is just a *fraction* of the variables you'd need to consider!

So, I really wouldn't even dream of claiming that µtorrent was better than any other client in terms of speeds, because I know that I have a statistically good chance of being completely wrong, so in conclusion:

Speed comparisons between bittorrent clients are dependable on a incredibly large array of different variables which all need to be implemented into an even bigger array of different tests,

this to ensure that the statistics are as unbiased and as unslanted as possible.

[Kurz]

In other words to get a accurate test you would need uniformaty in the internet. Which is impossible.

Or slant the results one way or the other. Personaly i am happy with 300KB dont you think?

[Firon]

No, you can get accurate enough, but 2 short tests is nowhere near enough to draw a conclusion, especially without knowing the hardware, software and settings that may be influencing it.

[stevvi]

Seeing as we're going round in circles I could actually quote myself here (but I won't). Over a period of time and a fair number of "tests" with different people one would expect the results to be 50/50 between the 2 clients if the 2 clients are equall. The law of averages sees to that. Now, it does seem that the majority of people who post fall on the side that Az is quicker than uT and it also does appear to be true that, in torrent site forums (that I read), uT is getting a bit of a rep as being slow on speed. This fact alone should make the devs at least look into the matter.

Yes, I do realise that the folks who post are usually the ones who have something to bitch about rather than heap praise but just saying "adjust the settings" (why aren't uT's default settings as quick as Az's, for christs' sake?) or getting insulted (who in their right mind would get insulted/provaked just because someone questions their choice of torrent client?! Get a life!) doesn't really help them out too much or do uT's rep any good.

I think we all agree that "2 short tests is nowhere near enough to draw a conclusion" so why not do more? I don't have time (especially at this time of year) to organise it myself but I reckon I can stretch myself to install Az again for the sake of bad "science". Any takers, or are you all too scared

[Firon]

Azureus doesn't really have default settings, it has a wizard to set settings according to your connection, which is an advantage it has over µT, but it does force you to learn at least a little to put in good settings.

If you look over on their support forums on sourceforge, you'll find the same exact problems that you find here. "Azureus kills my internet" "my router doesn't work with azureus" "my speeds spike" "why is it so slow" I'm still of the opinion that it's SETTINGS SETTINGS SETTINGS, since most µT users actually don't have such problems.

And µTorrent needed a little bit of tweaking with speed, yes. But not for 99% of the internet connections. The only ones that were affected were users that could do more than 1MiB/s, and even then it worked for most of them (mostly uploaders), since it only manifested itself with a low number of threads (now it does 8MiB/s+ on a single thread). The issue's been fixed in the betas.

[Ultima]

@stevvi:

You're actually talking about the law of large numbers, not the law of averages... whatever that is... (oh how taking AP Statistics is helping me so ;P) Edit: Crap nevermind, the law of averages is just the layman's terms for the law of large nubmers xD

Sounds like an interesting plan... Personally, I don't care how Azureus (or any other client for that matter) compares (to a high precision) with µTorrent speedwise. I know from my experiences that it can go just as fast as any other client, and that's enough for me. No wuss here, just a satisfied user ;P

[deeppal]

Azureus doesn't really have default settings, it has a wizard to set settings according to your connection, which is an advantage it has over µT, but it does force you to learn at least a little to put in good settings.

If you look over on their support forums on sourceforge, you'll find the same exact problems that you find here. "Azureus kills my internet" "my router doesn't work with azureus" "my speeds spike" "why is it so slow" I'm still of the opinion that it's SETTINGS SETTINGS SETTINGS, since most µT users actually don't have such problems.

And µTorrent needed a little bit of tweaking with speed, yes. But not for 99% of the internet connections. The only ones that were affected were users that could do more than 1MiB/s, and even then it worked for most of them (mostly uploaders), since it only manifested itself with a low number of threads (now it does 8MiB/s+ on a single thread). The issue's been fixed in the betas.

U can manually set all those settings that were set in the wizard anyways. They also have a wiki to show good speed settings etc etc.

Dont bash me, I use utorrent. Haha

[Firon]

I know you can, but it's still an advantage for the average user who doesn't know that much about torrents in general or what he has to do.

[Switeck]

One thing I heard suggested by beta-testers of BearShare was BearShare could configure itself based on knowing which ISP and service plan the user was using.

...Or even warning that certain ISPs block/throttle file-sharing traffic.