Archived

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

naiduv

Do you use a 2.x or older version of uT?

Recommended Posts

I'm currently using version 1.3.6. But the client isn't called µTorrent, it's called Deluge. I use it for all the downloads that are >400MiB, since 3.3 can't handle those for some reason, won't write out blocks to disk after a while. When exiting it just craps its pants and freezes and needs to be shot. Latest 3.3 build 29625 even crashes with very big torrents, I did a test today. Apparently it's some memory leak and caching issue in 3.3 that has been "fixed" serval times now.

Unfortunately I can't downgrade to 2.0.4 from 3.3 with over small 1000 torrents I share on a private tracker. No, way I'll re-add them all manually to µT 2.0.4 or Deluge. So unfortunately I have to run µTorrent 3.3 in parallel.

Deluge misses some features that µTorrent has: "virtual" torrent names, renaming the torrent in the client's list which does not affect the actual name in the bencode data structure and thus does not unregister that torrent with the server. At least it allows me to determine the name of the folders for each torrent just like µTorrent, which is more important. Deluge is also quite ugly on Windows since it's a GTK+ application. But I'm very very happy with it. It hasn't crashed once during the 4 months I've been using it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Using 1.8.2 (build 15167) as this is the only utorrent version acceptable to one of the trackers I use. Version 3+ apparently "sends false headers rejected by tracker". So if this problem was fixed I would like to use a newer version.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm using 2.2.1, though I'd be happy with 2.0.4 which was also great for me. Another member summed it up nicely:

Stable; has never crashed

No disk I/O and caching issues

No ads

No social features

No streaming features

No multimedia features

No anti-virus integration

Clean and fast UI

Seriously, µtorrent became the king because it was tiny, fast, any computer could run it, and it had no stupid bulk. Everything since 2.2.1 has forked in an entirely different and highly annoying direction. It used to be that clients would get banned from different trackers when they got old. Fortunately, everyone seems to realize how dreadful the 3.x versions are so client-banning has virtually disappeared with the realization that a lot of people have no intentions of upgrading. As long as that remains the case, I'll be using 2.2.1 for years to come.

Who wants ads, streaming, multimedia, and social features in a content downloading program??

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Let me know which one, and everything you like/liked about it.

I've never had any problem with the older versions on desktop and laptop pc's but recently I started using 3.0 version and it crashes all the time and has to be restarted. I have a new modern pc with good ram etc. Version 3.0 doesn't like it when you click to much on the tags like trackers, speed ,ratings, files, peers etc. It will freeze and tell you that it's not responding, however it will work again as soon as you restart it.Hope you guys can sort it out, or I'll try and revert back to a previous version.:(

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I am currently using 2.0.4 b22450 and has worked fine for me that was the last one before trying ver 3 when it was inital released cause so much lost torrent and file that I got rid of ver 3 and went back to 2.0.4 b22450 and haven't had much problem using it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Still using 2.2.1, works perfectly. Mainly because of what other member summed already up

It is stable, no problems. I want only the pure file transfer features and

no ads

no social features

no streaming features

no multimedia features

no anti-virus integration

clean and fast UI

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'd just like to know, what is the deal with trackers that demand you use an older version of uTorrent and reject people using the latest version of uTorrent? I think users should be able to use whatever torrent client they want, and whatever version of it they want, and not be discriminated against by trackers. Some of these private trackers have very long and bizarre lists of rules, with their lists of supported clients (they use whitelists, not blacklists) not making much logical sense at all. And each one has a different list of supported clients. So if you want a bittorrent client that works with all of the private trackers out there, too bad, there isn't ANY client that is on all of their whitelists. This also discriminates against users of less-well-known torrent clients, such as the many open-source torrent clients out there, many of which are not well-known enough or too new to be added to the whitelists (for instance Tixati is on hardly any whitelists yet, although most of them do include Deluge, qBittorrent, and Transmission, along with older versions of uTorrent and a couple other clients).

I don't see any legitimate reason people should have to use an older, outdated version of a program, especially since older versions might have unpatched security flaws. I guess the newer versions of uTorrent have so many features allowing users to manage their upload and download speeds, maybe the private trackers don't want anyone with those features because they are worried someone might set their upload speed to something slow. But this is not a legitimate reason to block newer versions of uTorrent, those trackers have many other ways they can prevent leeching and monitor people's upload:download ratio. If people want to use an older version out of personal preference, this is OK, but it should not be forced on people by bittorrent trackers.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I agree with you but that's a decision made by the tracker operators, not by the µtorrent team so there's not much they can do. The only thing the µtorrent devs could do would be to integrate a feature to fake its identification and thus render whitelists and blacklists obsolete. I would very much welcome such a feature, btw. Many web browsers have implemented such features long ago because of people trying to block out certain browsers for no good reason although http is a free protocol (like bittorrent).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Once upon a time, uTorrent was a small efficient client.

Nowadays, it crashes on large downloads, and the disk overload problem is ever present.

Even _if_ I liked 3.x better, 2.x is a necessity for not having an unstable client that hangs/crashes ever so often, so I stick with 2.2.1 until you sort things out - or Qbittorrent gets an import torrent function.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
shut up sneaker. Sounds like you want the admins to commit fraud and deception.

Yes, in the same way that Chrome, Firefox, Opera and Internet Explorer commit fraud and deception. :rolleyes:

There is a good reason why people prefer older versions.

And these people can continue to use those old versions as long as they like - unless they get blocked by trackers, of course. But we all know tracker admins know best, so no reason to complain, right? Others have good reasons to the current versions.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
It has' date='[/quote']

So, it can just read resume.dat?... :P

Not quite, but it can be done without having to import each and every .torrent file manually.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Once upon a time, uTorrent was a small efficient client.

Nowadays, it crashes on large downloads, and the disk overload problem is ever present.

Even _if_ I liked 3.x better, 2.x is a necessity for not having an unstable client that hangs/crashes ever so often, so I stick with 2.2.1 until you sort things out - or Qbittorrent gets an import torrent function.

I have been using 3.x.x for quite awhile. I have tried both beta and stable builds. I have not had any problems with crashing in the 3.2.x stable series or the current 3.3.x stable series. There were many bugs and crashes with the 3.0.x and 3.1.x builds but the quality has improved a whole lot since then. I have also encountered bugs and crashes with beta builds (enough so that I haven't even tried alpha builds). However, the 3.2.x and 3.3.x stable series are both rock-solid and don't crash or have many bugs, at least not in my personal experience. I have run them on several different computers and used them with a bunch of different torrents, and I think the latest stable builds of uTorrent are quite good.

Also, as someone else already mentioned, qBittorrent DOES have that import torrent functionality. And I'm pretty sure both the uTorrent bugs you mentioned (crashing on large downloads and the disk overload problem) have been fixed, at least in the 3.3.x stable series. So basically, pretty much everything you said in that post is wrong and based on outdated info, it would have been correct if you posted it back when version 3.0.x or 3.1.x was the latest, but your info is way out of date now, sorry.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
It has' date='[/quote']

So, it can just read resume.dat?... :P

Not quite, but it can be done without having to import each and every .torrent file manually.

As far as I know, i can only import a folder of torrents, and since it doesn't read resume.dat it has no idea where the actual files are located.

Anyhow, lets not get sidetracked.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Also, as someone else already mentioned, qBittorrent DOES have that import torrent functionality. And I'm pretty sure both the uTorrent bugs you mentioned (crashing on large downloads and the disk overload problem) have been fixed, at least in the 3.3.x stable series. So basically, pretty much everything you said in that post is wrong and based on outdated info, it would have been correct if you posted it back when version 3.0.x or 3.1.x was the latest, but your info is way out of date now, sorry.

You presume too much. I constantly try new versions to see if the problems are fixed, and so far they still rear their ugly heads.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.