Jump to content

µTorrent 3.4 RC


Recommended Posts


Installer sets executable path to %appdata%/utorrent instead of %programfiles%/utorrent

Installer does not offer option to change default installation location.

Yes' date=' that's the whole reason for 3.4. Can't be installed in Program Files to do autoupdates without UAC.[/quote']

There's no UAC in XP.

Is there a way to override this?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3.4.0 build 30309 and 3.4.0 build 30314 are now available for download...No changelogs for either build.

A very seldom bunndle download is also available...(uTorrent-3.4-beta-feature-dev-pane-html-30309-bunndle.exe)...http://bundles.bittorrent.com/current/index.html

It took an ANNOYING *6* tries to get 30314.

WHY is it so much trouble just to simply post a direct link to each build?

Yeah, maybe a changelog immediately is asking a lot, but I *seriously* don;t think that asking for a direct link to each build is.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

They're test builds. You aren't supposed to get a direct link to them.

Well we have been getting indirect links to lots of them for months and it has been reported many times.

Read the many posts, emails etc.

If we are not supposed to get a link to then remove the links.

They cause a lot of confusion and sometimes damage.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Build 30305:

On torrent list the second column sort doesn't work

Downgraded to 30300 and it works fine!

EDIT: Downgraded to 30300 and second column sort works fine but network ko!

Build 30304 seems ok: network & second column sort, maybe doesn't work something else! :/

Link to comment
Share on other sites

As mentioned earlier in the thread, they are TEST BUILDS, and as such YOU should not be using them!!

The ONLY builds that should be run OUTSIDE of the developer team are the ones that appear on the PUBLIC end of the CDN, if it ISN'T on there you should NOT be using it or complaining about it.

Stop downloading builds from 'leaked' URIs and you won't see so many variations in builds numbers.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If that's what you're going to claim, then as an IT/Process/Project Management Professional, I'm going to say that you have a *significantly* screwed up system. Simple as that. Lackadaisical in implementation.

You don't WANT people to DL then, then it's real simple - DON'T MAKE THEM AVAILABLE.

Sloppiness on *your* part will not resolve questions on OUR part.

There may be Betas, but honestly, it's been quite a while since we saw anything run "professionally" here - it's more like Mom & Pop, fly-by-the-seat-of-your-pants development & deployment.

Link to comment
Share on other sites


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

This topic is now closed to further replies.
  • Create New...