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

[Zarggg]

Check the tracker status lines for any potential errors. If you're not sure what to do about them or what they mean, post a thread in the Troubleshooting forum.

[litlbit2001]

I use UTorrent 2.2.1. It is stable and it doesn't give me any problems with Windows 7 pro x64 at all. The only problems I have is when someone with 3.0 or later they aren't connectable to me. I hate it when users use 3.0 or later versions of Utorrent. Seriously those versions are almost always banned in private torrent sites or users should be discouraged to use anything 3.0 and later. The versions SUCK PEOPLE. Of course that's my opinion and a lot of others opinions.

[tommyhome]

Tried some 3.x builds but just could not get them to match the performance of 2.2.1.

Also, 3.x has pesky ads and apps, if I wanted bloatware I would not use utorrent at all.

 

For me 2.2.1 lets me add the RSS feeds that I want and then I can forget about even looking at it, it just does the job.

 

I've also helped some friends use 2.2.1 instead of 3.x.

 

What would the reason be to use anything newer?

[mike20021969]

What would the reason be to use anything newer?

 

Apart from new features, I've seen it mentioned that there are security issues with older versions.

But no-one seems to say what these security issues actually are...

[Marquis de Leon]

Yet another 2.2.1 user here. The day uTorrent ditches the intrusive advertising and bloat and returns to its roots, I'll happily upgrade. Until then, you're just shooting yourselves in the foot.

This IS, after all, the client which gained fame for being tiny. I've been using some form of uTorrent since 2006 when I ditched Bloatzureus. But the new versions have given me few reasons to update past 2.2.1, and plenty of reasons NOT to.

I've seen this happen time and time again with countless projects. It always follows the same cycle: 1) greed takes over, 2) the experienced user base jumps ship first, followed by the more casual/novice users who get advice from the experienced users, 3) the project fades into irrelevance.

Oh, and you could start by actually addressing the concerns of your users instead of being snotty and deleting their posts.
 

[Ryrynz]

I use UTorrent 2.2.1. It is stable and it doesn't give me any problems with Windows 7 pro x64 at all. The only problems I have is when someone with 3.0 or later they aren't connectable to me. I hate it when users use 3.0 or later versions of Utorrent. Seriously those versions are almost always banned in private torrent sites or users should be discouraged to use anything 3.0 and later. The versions SUCK PEOPLE. Of course that's my opinion and a lot of others opinions.

 

You should try other clients, qBittorrent or Deluge seem to be the most popular and supported.

[georgex1]

Well, i've never been a raid person, but maybe raid0 would be something to consider.

I have 2 seagate 750gb drives for games, movies, tv etc. That's where the majority of my torrents go.

Or is it possible to set up a temp dir, as my c: is an ssd and i wouldn't mind if utorrent used 4gb as cache.

 

From my experience, the solution for this is to upgrade to v3.2.3 (never above), some settings may help: coalesce writes (disable write each piece at finish), sequential download to favor sequential disk write (shift F2 hidden menu), read cache is a must if you seed a lot.

I also use PrimoCache (free beta) - you can define some write delays (helpful to smooth the I/O spikes if not coalescing). You may even allocate some level 2 cache (fast hdd / ssd).

Or maybe Dataram RAMDisk (4gb limited free) - but this solution doesn't help when large or multiple torrent downloads exceed allocated ramdrive.

[Dorel]

I went back to the old 2.2.0.23071 because I can choose , when there's garbage files on some torrents , which ones to download . Like extra pictures with music albums and such .. Happy with it , and I will not change .

[DreadWingKnight]

Yeah, we didn't take that away from you in the new versions dorel.

[mike20021969]

So 18 months of this thread, there's 12 pages regarding people likes regarding uT 2.x.

 

naiduv, just curious to know if and how these opinions have been taken on-board to influence uTorrent's development?

[TCPIP]

Am still using 1.6.1 since perhaps 2006 or so... The only thing that I am missing there is support for Magnet URIs. I've tried running a copy of the recent 3.4.1.x side-by-side and have been disappointed with upload speed limiting issue. Limit did not work even though I selected all options to limit upload speed, including option to apply limit to uTP connections and option to apply limit to traffic overhead. It's a wee bit confusing if I am being honest...

[angelbeats96]

I'm not using 2.x or older versions like some of you here but I'm still on 3.3.2 (build 30260).

 

That said, do you think it's a good idea to update to the latest version? Or the version I'm currently using is sufficient enough for basic torrenting?

[Ghosthree3]

Using 2.2.1 Build 25302 (which I actually can't tell is any different from 25273, patch notes don't exist), edit: now using 25273. Prefer it because of it's cleaner interface, the ability to choose the directory the files in the torrent will be saved to, not just the folder a folder with that torrent's name will be saved to from the add torrent window. I think I had an issue with v3 choosing which files I did and did not want specifically from a torrent as well, but something in my memory says that was fixed later. I've had less drive reading and connectivity issues (actually none), it's a smaller file (probably not a big deal these days) that uses less memory (a big deal) than the modern versions, and it has no ads. I know ads can be disabled, or could, with some tweaks. But even if I went to that effort, that garbage is still sitting on my pc, possibly loaded in memory.

 

2.2.1 is very minimal, if I remember what µTorrent used to be marketed as (might still be?), it was offered as a tiny bittorrent client that had almost nothing but the bare minimum. Well 2.2.1 has that, it allows you to download and seed multiple torrents that are remembered by the client easily and efficiently. It allows you to schedual when you want this to happen (actually important for some people due to on-peak/off-peak). It allows you to categorise your saved torrents (probably not crucial but very helpful for people with lots of saved torrents) and set up automatic RSS downloading (some people depend on this). I can think of nothing more that a torrent client NEEDS to offer.

 

I use µTorrent because of how lightweight and minimal it is, if I wanted a program more than double the size that used a lot more memory but offered a whole range of features, I'd find another client. µTorrent to me, will always be aimed at that niche, for the users that don't need or want all those extra features. I can think of nothing that the v3 series improves on for the necessary components listed above, and a lot of things it worsens. If 3.0 offered something important, like 2.0 did with udp tracker support, I MIGHT consider upgrading to it. But as far as I know the technology for sharing torrents has not changed significantly in a long time, as such, there is no need to change anything at my end either. So I'll be sticking with 2.2.1, my tiny bittorrent client.

[digitalman6103]

I created an account just because of this thread, I started using utorrent around the end of 2010 and every time that a update arrived I just clicked yes. As time went by I noticed (obviously) ut freezing up and having other related crashes. But at that time I was completly new to computer use and torrenting , I was using XP on a old 2002 Compaq with 100 GB hdd and 512mb ram, and and kind of extra memory use was vital since I was allways on the verge of crashing, and I have to say each new version of ut saw my problems grow, Ill shorten this up I stopped using the new builds at 3.1.3 build 27636. I switched back to 2.2.1 build 25273 and my freezing and crashing basically ended. So yes I would like some new bells and whistles and that compaq has since been dead but on every machine I use I dont touch anything newer than 2.2.1 build 25302 Now Using A Gateway with 750 GB hdd and Dual core pross with 3 Gig of ram which is still archaic and slow but my 2.2.1 that has at least 500-700 torrents in various stages of use active and stopped with changes being made regularly as per needed.Its still running like a champ.  Now if you could take any Build before 3. and mix that with all the extras since, You would hands down have the finest client barnone,thanks for making this thread I hope  the devs find the compromise to improve the brand back to that little tiny bittorant client that really worked on any machine.

[Melquiades]

I kept upgrading thinking that the newer versions would be better... but the last one was the drop that spilled the glass. I went back to the last installer i had on my machine (3.1), and I even might go back to a 2.x version if i find it.

[j7nj7n]

I have recently migrated from v2.2.1 which I installed following a recommendation a couple years ago, to 2.0.4 with Sequential download and DHT patches, and µTP, LPD and rate_control disabled. The process went well, the size of my resume.dat and settings.dat files decreased because some anti-virus related settings were removed, and "maxavgdl" bloating did not occur anymore. The appearance of the icons also improved (no more flat Metro look with oversized icons).

I have been annoyed by the changed beahvior of the "Set Download Location" in 2.2.1, where the torrent name was automatically added to the path as a subfolder if it didn't match the chosen directory. I felt a need to google up the meaning of the Yes/No/Cancel prompt several times, because it's just not intuitive. After I accidentally moved some files, which I didn't expect to happen during "setting" of the path, I made a decision to downgrade migrate for this reason alone.

From version 2.2.1 onwards, the program appears to change the language in which it addresses the user on the UI, perhaps to target a different demography. The function of some dialogs is now less clear than it was before. In µT 3 the definitions of path and torrent name were further confused in the Add Torrent dialog. Then, if I choose to delete a torrent, I dialog pops up asking for a comment to "fellow users", if I tick the checkbox "Don't show this dialog", this doesn't just disable the silly comment prompt (the new dialog) but the confirmation entirely. I have tried other 3.x versions, which now launch internet explorer pages to show "plus" and "devices", on the status bar there are links to twitter, which are messaging systems and nothing whatsoever to do with µTorrent.

After perusing the changelog, I got an impression that all the bugs that are being fixed result from incomplete superficial features to do do with autoupdates, devices, plus, offers, ads, dna, features which should never be there in the first place.

In short, changed behavior of basic operations, which by now I have already developed muscle memory for, as well as decreased stability because of the presence of additional parts of the program, are my reasons.

I am running 1.6.1 as my main client, which works very well at high speed with most private trackers, most of the time. But some new functionality added by the new developer team is occasionally useful, such as: relocation of individual files, source port ranges for advanced routing, magnet links, functional and fast webui, scheduler state for seeding only.

Potentially useful improvements: IPv6, uTP.

The need for these is kinda a problem created by modern networks and new versions of µT in the wild. I've encountered peers which had the bt.tcp_rate_control enabled, and would upload very slowly until I touched them by UDP. I have tried to use UDP in several versions, on both ethernet and wifi connections, including in BTSync (where there is no option not to use it), and it was always much slower. I suppose it was tuned for modems, so maybe it works for some people.

On a properly configured OS, all the new settings for port forwarding, socket buffer, and new protocols aren't needed.

Of the top of my head, the only function I miss from 3.x is the creation of torrents with large piece sizes for modern data sets. I have a 3.x for this job here.

[PiusX]

I am currently using 2.0.4 and so far I hadn't had any problem with using it or file sharing with it. I tried myself with v3 when it came out and it messed up my torrent tracker and file and file save location that I got rid of v3 and went back to v2 and never had the problems again. So for me 2.0.4 is more then enough for my needs.

[KoDAk]

2.0.4 (22967)  STILL  THE BEST

have most useful features  

no play crap features... 

simple \  stable

can up\down  from IPv4 \IPv6 at one time   new ver. use  only some one

[Alea iacta est]

Still using 2.2.1. Works like a charm.

 

I switched back to there somewhere around the 3.1 or 3.2 versions. Everything just kept breaking and new patches would just go and break something else, install packages were bundled with all sorts of rubbish, ads started appearing, and appearantly you had to setup a whole bunch of settings yourself before things actually just worked fine like they used to. Has this changed? Is it worth checking out the new 'stable' versions, or are they still usually broken and are people still referred to the 'beta' version, which then also is broken?

[bozhan]

Tried using the new version and had trouble with the new interface and the reduced advanced options choice!

Still using 2.2.1 till this day and haven had any troubles. I am on Win 7 x64.

The only feature I am missing from the 3.x versions is the ability to search through your added torrents using the search field in the top right.

However, the lack of that feature cannnot overwhelm me to switch to 3.x, cause the changes to the interface are horrific!

It takes way too much space for no reason, and therefore prohibits for a nice overview of the added torrents.

If the reason behind it was to boost the touch capabilities and the new High DPI screens, the make it inteligent and give the choice to optimize for touch, high dpi or choose to keep it as it was in 2.2.1.

 

Thank you!

P.S. I am also very interested in how the 13 pages of 2.2.1 praise will/have influenced your development. Judging on the last few releases, it seems that our opinion in simply neglected and discarded.

[Pfc_J]

No, not using something 2.x or older, using 3.3.2 (30586).  Not upgrading any further since I believe this is the last version that through advanced setting you can get rid off all the adds, and has new features like udp tracker support and peers tab in webui.  Actually I only have one issue with 3.3.2 and that's setting a download limit haults all traffic.  This thread should be called "What version of utorrent satisfies your crap to functionality threshold?".

[Ryrynz]

You can get rid of the ads in 3.4.2, just not the Facebook and Twitter icons, so instead of just "believing" things why don't you download it, run it and then know for certain?

By doing so you could have saved yourself time not writing your pointless post and you could have saved me reading and replying to it.

If you have a question, sometimes the easiest thing to do is to actually answer it yourself by doing the obvious.

[eugenkss]

I do not use an older version like 2.x.

Nor do I use the latest version.

 

I will stick with 3.4.1 build 30703, as long as newer version have the unreasonably big line spacing and no option to turn it back to the more compact one!

[Pfc_J]

You can get rid of the ads in 3.4.2, just not the Facebook and Twitter icons, so instead of just "believing" things why don't you download it, run it and then know for certain?

By doing so you could have saved yourself time not writing your pointless post and you could have saved me reading and replying to it.

If you have a question, sometimes the easiest thing to do is to actually answer it yourself by doing the obvious.

 

Your not telling me anything I don't already know, dick.

[Ryrynz]

Your not telling me anything I don't already know, dick.

 

And yet you asked anyway. You had all the tools and prior knowledge to answer your own question but you didn't. If that's not a failure in the truest sense of the word I don't know what is.

Your language just highlights further your own frustration at not being able to answer the obvious. Congratulations.