Jump to content

uTorrent Changes: A response to your feedback


bigfalls

Recommended Posts

I don't mind ads in a free software. Developers need money to live too. But I draw the line at malware, and that's exactly what Search Conduit is. And, as long as there is no possibility to not install this gobshite... this is just proof of poor developing skill. The client base can register a very sudden drop with that. And, although I uninstalled that toolbar and related add-ons, it took me 15 minutes to eliminate all traces. Firefox was affected, IE too. All my search engines replaced by Search Conduit. And again, no option to refuse their installation. Poor show, poor show indeed. And thank God for my antivirus. I'm still gonna use this client for a while, though, seeing that my AV managed to block the malware from installing (first install was made with Utorrent added to exceptions), but, if this stops working, I am outta here. Gonna switch to another client.

Again, I don't minds ads,even toolbars, but to force me to install what I don't want, and injecting security breaches into my system... Shame on you.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 184
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Dude, they CANNOT. Yes, there are some checkboxes on the site BEFORE you download the installer, but after the double-click, none whatsoever. After you start the installation, the only things you can change are the location and that stuff about some artists.

LE: And I did a fresh install. Somehow, I doubt that if the installer comes as an update, I'd have even that small choice from the browser.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Dude, they CANNOT. Yes, there are some checkboxes on the site BEFORE you download the installer,

Look through the screen shots, they are taking DURING a clean install of version 3.2.3

that stuff about some artists.
"that stuff about artists" IS where you should be selecting "No Thanks"
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Was surprised and also disappointed that uTorrent suddenly got bloated up with ads. The least you guys could've done was organize them in such a way that they would appear to "blend in" with the client and not look so blatantly obtrusive. In either case, I've uninstalled uTorrent and started using Vuze again. :)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I really don't understand the exodus from uTorrent to Vuze. I actually started using uTorrent because Azureus was too much of a memory-hog.

People are discouraged when they see the ads, and don't know that they can just disable them, and how to do that... BT better note it clearly on the update dialog!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

rafi, that's a very naive view. for quite a few people the addition of ads, even if they can be disabled, has been the final straw. for a long time utorrent has been getting bogged down with bloat, the ads are just the icing on the garbage cake.

it really is strange that instead of all the perfectly viable alternatives to utorrent people would choose vuze, though. that client has never been good.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

rafi, that's a very naive view. for quite a few people the addition of ads, even if they can be disabled, has been the final straw. for a long time utorrent has been getting bogged down with bloat, the ads are just the icing on the garbage cake.

I am trying to point to actual technical facts, not related peoples' psychology... 95% of the added features to uT ( and maybe some are "bloat") are user selectable. Just don't use what you don't need. The rest of the functionality is still good (except for an annoying 5% that is not...).

And they do try to improve root-functionality (like the files-IO) in the latest releases.

The fact that the app size is now ~1000KB size, does not bother me what so ever. It's RAM-memory size-stamp is still small as it was. Also, I'm not sure you can point to any of other "competitor"client with under 1000KB size.

You can call that being naive, I call it - being practical and judge on usability. The example of people choosing Vuze, just demostrates it, and points to poor judgement...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

wait, you don't mind the executable being over 1MB, but want me to provide examples of competitor clients that are under 1MB? i've been considering deluge for a while, but it would be a pain to migrate all of my torrents from utorrent 2.2.1 to deluge. i guess i'll have to bite the bullet and make the switch when utorrent 2.2.1 becomes too outdated. if utorrent cleans up its act by then i will update instead.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

wait, you don't mind the executable being over 1MB, but want me to provide examples of competitor clients that are under 1MB?

Please don't misquote me... I said, I don't mind uT being ~1M (instead of the ~300K of 2.2.1) when I can choose to *not* use what you call "bloat" features, and that you are welcome to see if anyone else get's even close to 1M, that shows the amount of bloatware inside... :P

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The size of the .exe file is nothing at all to do with the rnning footprint.

The Firefox browser executable is only 896KB in size, but it can and regularly does use over 400 MB of memory after around 30 mins of CPU time.

uTorrent is using under 60 MB after being active for 69 HOURS.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The size of the .exe file is nothing at all to do with the rnning footprint.

Already said that. Plus, peeks depend on the size of cache you have defined, and your fill-rate (=connection speed). I suggest you test it over LAN and get back with more results... :P

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Adds, Apps, Facebook, Twitter, Ratings, Search Bar, etc are the last things I ever wanted in a torrent client.

uTorrent was cool back in the day but now it's really just a joke, and the only thing keeping it in the number one spot is lack of a better alternative.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

"my" bloat = questionable/useless/mandatory features = larger EXE file. What does "your" bloat mean?
and the only thing keeping it in the number one spot is lack of a better alternative.

Aha' date=' so the rest are worse... And all he above features' list can be removed/disabled/not-used ...[/quote']

stupefying.

and no, file size is not a good indicator of bloat. if it were, things like executable compression could be said to remove bloat.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

uTorrent was cool back in the day but now it's really just a joke, and the only thing keeping it in the number one spot is lack of a better alternative.

Lack of a better alternative for downloading/uploading torrent/magnets.....

There are always alternatives for downloading what you want...

Like my predecessor Nostradamus... my prediction is this form of downloading will be a thing of the past, sooner or later! :cool:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...

The thing is, the alternatives are worse. Vuze requires the security-flaw-ahoy Java and has a toolbar too, Deluge has a bad GTK UI and is 12MB, Qbittorrent is better, but it gets stuck when closed and the .exe stays around forever, and is 8MB. TPB's recommended Torch freezes at 90% install.

When I tried Ubuntu out, Transmission was great, but they don't deign to support mere Windows users.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.


×
×
  • Create New...