ColdArmor Posted December 6, 2005 Report Share Posted December 6, 2005 text percent > gfx Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
snowflake Posted December 6, 2005 Report Share Posted December 6, 2005 I am for this feature, because it is easier and more intuitive to tell the progress from graphics.I don't see CPU usage as a problem because we can hide/unhide the columns?? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Animorc Posted December 6, 2005 Report Share Posted December 6, 2005 Maybe we could have an ASCII progress bar Like |||------- = 30% done Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Animorc Posted December 6, 2005 Report Share Posted December 6, 2005 I'm sure I shouldn't take your sarcastic post seriously, but just to clear out any misunderstandings: I'm definitely not arguing to have a progressbar implemented. I find it totally useless. My earlier post is to be taken as sarcasm as well.Edit. Ooh... The sarcastic post which I'm responding to was deleted :/ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
z00z0 Posted December 6, 2005 Report Share Posted December 6, 2005 Ok, you have a side, we have a side. But life goes on, cheers The funny thing is using an ASCII progressbar is not such a bad idea afterall - using characters like some nfo files have:████░░░░░░ -> 40%. See? (Hope it is visible in the forum, too.) Using it with colors could give us some visuals, but won't eat any cpu. (With Unicode you could make even prettier ones ) A trade-off? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
z00z0 Posted December 8, 2005 Report Share Posted December 8, 2005 My Firefox gone mad. Some of my posts got doubled or deleted. Sorry Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chaosblade Posted December 8, 2005 Report Share Posted December 8, 2005 Useless feature to increase CPU load for no reason at all. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ben Posted December 13, 2005 Report Share Posted December 13, 2005 assuming most of your torrents are over 10 megs, and you arent on a 16mbps connection.. the progress bar; if split up into 10 boxes made of text; wouldnt change nearly as fast as all the other information that is displayed in uTorrent. i like it Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hendrix Posted December 13, 2005 Report Share Posted December 13, 2005 yeah im for this too... and as always.. an option for ppl who dont want this! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
xamenos Posted January 1, 2006 Report Share Posted January 1, 2006 Its just a simple progress bar... Its not going to eat any CPU...bittorrent is for people that use modern machines and an ADSL or cable line... So assuming this, a progress bar would add a 0.1% cpu load everytime it refreshes (and that could be from 1 sec to one minute+) on a modern machine (and I would state the example of my backup pc which is a 1GHz PIII)... If you think that its going to burn your machine, then ask the developer to remove the useless availability bar to even the impact..Some people voted for the RSS reader but I didn't see anyone complain about the extra CPU that this could add (and is not a feature for a light bittorrent client)... and now people are complaining for the optional progress bar and the minimal CPU load that would addhttp://www.niteshdw.com/utorrent/index.php?a=browse&s=4Simple download bar for each torrentAdd small download bars for each torrent. With many active torrents, it's much easier to check your downloads with a quick glance on the download bars than with reading all the % numbers.158Yes65NoNov 27, 2005 Bad Featureyeah.... this is what we call democracy (ofcourse if ludde is not willing to add this, then is his program and he can do whatever he likes but I assume that this decision was not taken by ludde) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ultima Posted January 1, 2006 Report Share Posted January 1, 2006 You'd be suprised how few resources the RSS feature uses. It doesn't have to be redrawn every window update either (which is set to 1 second by default), unlike with a progressbar. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
xamenos Posted January 1, 2006 Report Share Posted January 1, 2006 well it doesn't have to be redrawn every 1 second... What I had in mind is to be a progressbar with the percentage in the middle that redraws everytime a piece is finished... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ultima Posted January 1, 2006 Report Share Posted January 1, 2006 Well the fact is that it would have to redraw every time the window is refreshed/redrawn. You don't get to pick and choose. What you're proposing is that the progressbar shouldn't be updated until a piece is completed, but that doesn't stop it from having to be redrawn. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MagusG Posted January 2, 2006 Report Share Posted January 2, 2006 I like this feature idea. Hope to see it implemented sometime.-Mag Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
z00z0 Posted January 2, 2006 Report Share Posted January 2, 2006 @UltimaAnd what do you think about the text progressbars like the ones posted before? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
boo Posted January 2, 2006 Report Share Posted January 2, 2006 text progress bars are better, but a bit tricky because its '-' has its certain length.People want progress bar because it's easier to see, so why not make the current percentage of completion in bold numbers instead Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nexx Posted January 3, 2006 Report Share Posted January 3, 2006 You don't get to pick and choose.Yes you do. Right click on the column header to select which columns to enable/disable Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ultima Posted January 4, 2006 Report Share Posted January 4, 2006 lol you're picking and choosing one part of my point... read it in context. If you read the whole thing, you'd notice that I was talking about picking and choosing when the progress bar gets refreshed if it is enabled. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Socrates Posted March 11, 2006 Report Share Posted March 11, 2006 One question: µTorrent doesn't draw the gui when it is minimized to tray? So if there would be graphical download bars they wouldn't use any cpu when µTorrent is minimized. When i want to check the download progress of my torrents, i would open µTorrent, it would draw the gui once or twice, i'd take a glance and minimize it back to tray. I had an overview within a few seconds because of these bars and they wouldn't use any cpu while µTorrent is in the background, minimized or in the tray.I don't know whether your understand my theory/explaining or not because my english-vocabs are mostly picked from dictionaries, so i try it again on german for those who understand it:Wenn man davon ausgeht, dass µTorrent das GUI nur berechnen muss, wenn sie im Vordergrund liegt, haben die Downloadbalken insofern einen großen Vorteil als dass man, wenn man das Programm aus dem Tray oder sonstwoher öffnet, einen schnelleren Überblick hat und die CPU-Belastung nur rel. gering bzw kurzzeitig ist, da man das Programm in der Regel ja nach 1 - 2 Sekunden wieder schließt. Solange µTorrent im Tray oder im Hintergrund liegt entsteht keinerlei Belastung durch das GUI und wenn man spielt oder irgendwelche cpu-lastigen Aufgaben erledigt, bei denen die Sparsamkeit von µTorrent von Vorteil sind, hat man das Programm ja in der Regel im Tray oder minimiert.Liege ich da richtig? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ultima Posted March 11, 2006 Report Share Posted March 11, 2006 Yep, it doesn't draw when trayed. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Socrates Posted March 11, 2006 Report Share Posted March 11, 2006 Ok, so the cpu-load-argument is invalidated, because for the most time the download-bars DON'T use more cpu... (except the users who are sitting in front of their computers the whole day and watching µTorrent downloading ) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ultima Posted March 11, 2006 Report Share Posted March 11, 2006 People do leave it up (I know people who have multiple monitors), and CPU load is increased when being viewed, so it doesn't actually invalidate the increased CPU usage argument. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Socrates Posted March 11, 2006 Report Share Posted March 11, 2006 The people who leave it up or watch it on a second monitor could turn the graphical bar off... besides i'd say that these ppl are a minority. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ultima Posted March 11, 2006 Report Share Posted March 11, 2006 Minority or not, it still doesn't invalidate the ramped-up CPU usage argument. In any case, I don't know for sure how much of a resource usage increase it'd bring, and I don't care whether it's implemented or not =P Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jult Posted March 11, 2006 Report Share Posted March 11, 2006 I think this is the most unnecessary feature request thinkable. It's already there.basically another column in the main view that shows the percentage complete in a graphical progress bar. this way its easier to scan through the whole list and see which one is almost done in a sec.Click on the [Done] tab on top of the percentages, the one which is at almost 100% will be at the top! How hard is that? ;-)And then, are you not able to look at the bar below? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.