Why utorrent does not support linux os directly???

[kai3393]

We need many do many step using wine by supporting utorrent.Why cant u directly provide us utorrent that support linux os directly

[jewelisheaven]

... Future cloudy, ask again later.

Doing "native" versions of the same app requiring *nearly the same* code duplicating with extra window dressing for different WMs... If you want it, why don't you try to do it? It works in WINE, many people report it works fine. If you are having trouble on your linux, try it with a live cd Ubuntu style... it's mentioned alot.

[Firon]

Uh, because it's a lot of time and development effort for a small userbase. We don't have unlimited resources.

[Ultima]

And no, open sourcing the client isn't happening for the foreseeable future, so for anyone who intends on offering that as a "solution," don't.

[zariluz]

Its a pity. Is well known that uTorrent is the best lightweight BitTorrent client nowadays. That acceptances is probably the reason why you wanted to migrate it to MACOS X, spite of its its userbase is smaller or (for MAC fans) al least the same as Linux. Don't you think, leveaing apart for a moment your fear on opening the source, that liberating it would make a better and wider client, also ruling on Linux based systems?

[Firon]

The OSX userbase is actually larger on the desktop. A lot larger. Nearly 10 times as high.

[Ultima]

Market share estimate inflation for desktop Linux seems to be a common thing nowadays (I've seen reports of market share being like 1% in the last few days, then 2% the day immediately following). Heh, likely not by a long shot.

It has nothing to do with "fear" of opening the source. It's just the decision made by the higher ups in the company that own the code, simple as that. Open source is great, sure, but it's just not in the cards -- again for the foreseeable future.

[FrostyCee]

Market share estimate inflation for desktop Linux seems to be a common thing nowadays (I've seen reports of market share being like 1% in the last few days, then 2% the day immediately following). Heh, likely not by a long shot.

http://www.linuxinsider.com/story/67031.html?wlc=1257132783

^ Good read there on why Linux's TRUE marketshares CANNOT BE MEASURED...

Summary if you don't want to look that link over:

[pre]Windows & Mac OS's marketshares can be measured a multitude of ways:

Sales of physical media & the OS itself reporting back to it's parent company being

the most obvious. There are hundreds of different distributions of Linux, not to mention

Linux can be built from scratch with just the kernel, which can also be rebuilt.[/pre]

Linux marketshares have been reported to be MUCH higher on server environments & isn't the µTorrent brand trying to get away from the "piracy" scene that it is constantly blasted into? Yet there is no legitimate version for one of the biggest OSes running on servers? I thought they wanted more businesses to see bittorrent as a legitimate way to save bandwidth on high-end servers... To do that you need to market to the Linux community.

"In September 2008 Microsoft CEO Steve Ballmer admitted that 60% of servers run Linux versus 40% that run Windows Server." [source]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Linux#Market_share_and_uptake

Not to mention that the marketshare is expecting a big increase when Google's Chrome OS (which will be Linux Based) is released in about a year.

It's definitely something to think about...

[Ultima]

Sure, desktop Linux usage can't be easily measured, but market share wasn't the only focus behind any decision on a Linux port anyhow. Yes, Linux's large share in the server market is well known, but...

Market share estimate inflation for desktop Linux

So how'd you go from discussing desktop Linux market share to discussing server Linux market share and piracy? Sounds completely like a red herring to me.

Also, Chrome OS is almost undoubtedly going to be a cloud-centric OS, so I'm not sure why that would play a factor in any decision about a desktop application anyhow. People who end up attracted to Chrome OS likely won't be interested in desktop applications; those that are interested in desktop applications likely wouldn't be choosing Chrome OS in the first place. Chrome OS isn't the ace up Linux's sleeve.

[avatarl]

uTorrent = closed source. Linux doesn't like closed source. End of story I suppose. The only closed source I've seen been used in Linux is some display drivers and that's that (if at all). I don't remember any other free software piece not being under some version of GPL. Seeing as BT.inc actually paid to acquire the closed source, I don't see why they'd want to open it up (at least not soon).

Also, a number of sites like Net Applications monitor stuff like that on a regular basis.

Here http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Usage_share_of_desktop_operating_systems

In case you don't like the graph, stats are also given.

http://www.linuxinsider.com/story/67031 … 1257132783

^ Good read there on why Linux's TRUE marketshares CANNOT BE MEASURED...

Nice article by the way, for a bunch of "OH NOES, I DON'T BELIEVE THE LIES, LINUX IS 10%+". Pretty good arguments there. I am still not sure how browser reports to stat companies somehow fail to give the real pic. Does everyone tell Firefox to fake OS info or something?

FYI I have been using a number of Linux distros at times, have already used the usual more user-friendly (K)(X) Ubuntu, Fedora, OpenSUSE. Then again, I'm pretty pleased with either Vuze, Deluge and KTorrent there (ok Transmission was too basic) and I don't particularly care about Linux's usage share. If anything, the lulz I get from the usual fanboys is the same I get from any rabid OS fanboy. Just for the record, I've been hearing "This is the year of Macs!" "This is the year of Linux" for every year for the last 2-3 years at least. Maybe people should drop the slogan and focus on the numbers and better promotion.