The soul of uTorrent

[LTF]

This is about the approach of the uTorrent team to their product, and the approach of the moderators to the forum users. It's a little long. I hope you will read it. If not, there's a tl:dr near the bottom.

 

 

I've been using this program for maybe 8 years. I've recommended it hundreds of times.

 

Yes, it's free (with adverts, and the hope we will upgrade to Plus).

 

Yes, the forums are also free.

 

 

The Program

 

But long time bugs go unfixed, while pointless changes are rushed to completion. And I do mean rushed; the change to the new torrent list code has introduced a large number of breaking errors which go unfixed for months, and existing bugs go unfixed for years, but hey, it's all good, because we changed our icons and removed the pause button and changed the spacing.

 

At this point, I for one:

1) can't stop most torrents properly without hitting stop and then moving that torrent up or down the list - only then do they stop (http://forum.utorrent.com/topic/89311-add-existing-torrent/ ). 

2) can't pause queued but not downloading torrents. I'm not talking about the lack of a pause button, though I hate that as I used it a lot, I'm talking about the torrent actually won't pause when I use the right-click menu.

3) can't seem to preserve the order of my torrents; they keep getting renumbered so they move around the list, generally either when utorrent is shut down unexpectedly or when I open uTorrent by clicking on a torrent file/magnet link to load it in to uTorrent when uTorrent is not running (6 months since reported, maybe a year since first noticed - http://forum.utorrent.com/topic/86556-multiple-ui-and-other-issues/).

4) have intermittent problems with moving files around the torrent list; sometimes when I press the 'move up' or 'move down' button my selection of torrents is deselected, meaning I have to reselect them, click move again, reselect again, click move again, reselect again, and so on. This does not seem to be a consistent behaviour but happens often enough to be annoying, it seems to happen more often when single torrents are selected. (- HINT - in this case, select every torrent between but not including the one you want to move and the target location in the list, and move those instead, eg if you want to move torrent number 20 to position 3 then select torrents 4 to 19 and move them DOWN one).

5) have a problem where if I roll the mouse wheel over the torrent list while holding shift then utorrent opens the file properties, and if I roll the mouse wheel over the file list while holding shift then uTorrent RUNS the file my mouse is over. I hit this a lot because I use shift to select multiple torrents, shift plus move up/down to move torrents to the top or bottom of the list, and I use shift to select multiple files for priority changes, while using the mouse wheel to scroll up and down the list

6) hate the new line spacing and can't find a way to revert to the old short of reverting to an old version of uTorrent (which I don't want to do).

7) just lost about 1.5Gb of downloaded data because Set Download Location and then Force Re-Check on a partially completed multi-file torrent seems to dump certain pieces already completely downloaded (possibly those set [temporarily] to skip, possibly those just not meeting some obscure setting). The data was there, and then it was gone.

8) have various file management problems where completed torrents don't get moved to the correct directory, and so on.

 

 

All but number 7 make the torrent list and uTorrent not fit for purpose: I can't control what does or does not download properly, or at all, moving torrents around in the list is hit-and miss at best, and when I do get the list position set right it does not remember the order of files I have set. Selecting multiple torrents or files using shift is a hit and miss affair. And thanks to the new line spacing, not only can I not control my torrents properly any more, I have a list that takes twice as much scrolling to get through than before (which also makes it more likely I will hit the problem with shift and mouse wheel).

 

And of course, no I can't have any of the features that I and others have requested ad infinitum.

 

 

The People

 

Meanwhile, well meaning people who are trying to help by pointing out bugs are getting ignored or trashed, normally with the sort of contempt that is the preserve of budget airlines and airport staff, snooty waiters at restaurants, and low IQ trolls on youtube. I can't help but feel that existing bugs are being flat out ignored because some moderators are not bothering to read posts correctly and are instead leaping to either lock the thread or delete it all together because they think they know what it is about when they don't, or they don't care, and potentially helpful users are being driven away for the sake of the mod's contempt for them.

 

I certainly have had valid posts deleted under fairly spurious reasons, with no discussion or debate (or way to contact the moderator in question and get a reply), and I have seen plenty of locked threads that to my mind actually had valid points. Rather than point to one of mine, how about this recent one from maevisance (http://forum.utorrent.com/topic/90680-big-usability-problem-in-34-build-30660/). The moderator in question trotted out the usual advice about the 'move to top functionality implemented by shift+clicking the "move up" button'. Yet I have to suspect that they never actually read the post in full or in detail as they COMPLETELY missed what the poster was saying: that when they 'select the torrent and press the up botton on the toolbar but the program automaticly de-selects the item', ie bug 4 above. I would agree that this should be in Bug Reports, that would have been a reasonable point for the moderator to make, or they could have pointed out that this is a duplicate of an existing report (http://forum.utorrent.com/topic/88049-please-help-queing-problem/) but instead they skim the post, misunderstand it, throw out an unhelpful reply, and lock the thread so the original poster can't clarify what they meant or reply to the incorrect 'help'. There are plenty more examples of this throughout the forums, and far worse.

 

I have had the exact same treatment more than once, with threads locked or deleted out of hand and with no discussion, not coincidentally from the same moderator, whose tag line is 'I never claimed to be nice'.

 

OK, that's fine, nice is not required here, though it would be perhaps more helpful, but the rush to ignore the poster's point and lock the thread stifled what may have been a useful bug report or an opportunity to figure out exactly under what circumstances the bug arises (which, since in my case it is intermittent, would have been helpful), and missed the opportunity to let the user know that this was a known bug (though if it's like me, the circumstances when it happens is a little more random than that bug report suggests, so it could be a productive expansion on that initial bug report).  Why lock it? If the mod in question had read the post correctly and informed the user that is is a duplicate of an existing bug report, or if he had not locked it so that other users could have done that, then something useful would have been achieved, and the user in question would perhaps have had a positive impression of uTorrent and its forums.  Instead the thread is locked, end of discussion, no bug report is generated, no information is gathered, the user is probably fed up with the uTorrent forums and perhaps uTorrent itself, and the thing goes unresolved (and as a side note, in part because this is not explored, the same bug keeps being brought up, eg http://forum.utorrent.com/topic/90809-move-updown-queue/ , which was also locked with no reply or explanation of why).

 

There are also far too many cases of some of the moderators (not just the one above) giving throw-away answers to serious points, showing rudeness, hostility, sarcasm and contempt, ignoring valid questions to focus on other points they wish to make, and so on.

 

Sadly this behavior rubs off on the other posters here, excluding people who leave and don't come back (or follow up, or answer questions about their bugs), I also see this sort of behavior being repeated, more and more, by long time posters here too.

 

And it wasn't always like that, I remember long and friendly conversations with several moderators and users five years ago, especially Firon, that lead to a change in the basic way uTorrent ran (it related to the upload limit being tied to the download limit).

 

I get that there is a lot of 'noise' here, a lot of newbies making the same reports that have already been made (I've done that!), and as in any public forum a fair amount of complaining, drama, swearing, and so on; I am constantly in awe that any of the moderators are willing to put up with it, I would absolutely not be able to work as a moderator on this or any other forum for more than a few weeks before walking away - but I would not allow my irritation or jaded outlook to detract from the point of these forums, which is to collect bug reports and feature requests, and allow discussion of topics relating to uTorrent.

 

 

All that being said, I would like to say that there are notable exceptions to this, some really helpful mods and posters, but they are drowned out by the other sort.

 

 

 

The Conclusion

<tl:dr>

 

To summarize, the development team are focusing too much on putting in new features and not enough on making existing ones work, for example the current torrent list is not fit for purpose, and it has features that it would seem only uTorrent's team like; and some moderators are too quick to lock or delete threads, often not reading them properly and mistaking what the person is saying but not providing any way for that misunderstanding to be corrected, or just being flat out rude, contemptuous and dismissive.

 

The combination of the two is a killer punch. Frustrated by problems with the app, we think that maybe the uTorrent team don't give a d**n about their users, their users' experience, or their users' wants, though we hope it isn't so, and then we come to the forums (either to help by reporting bugs or to ask for help) to discover that it would seem that is exactly the case, and moreover that discovery is accompanied by rude and dismissive behavior from the very people tasked with running the place.

 

And you want us to PAY to UPGRADE?

 

More and more now I see people walking away from uTorrent. If we figure that the users in this forum represent a sub-section of the average uTorrent user then we have to figure that there is a decent chunk of general users doing the same. Between the bugs and the unpopular UI changes (and I don't include the advertising in that, I guess that's just a fact of life, but everything else is fair game) and the way people are treated when they DO engage, or DO try to help with bug reports etc, I can't blame them. I'm going to stick with it for now, but certainly there was a while this morning after the recent update, when I was searching for a way to revert to the old torrent list spacing, and seeing the total rudeness and contempt with which decent people are treated in these forums, when I wanted to walk away too. But LTF (my name here) stands for 'Long Term Fan' and that's what I am, so I'll stay loyal... for now.

 

 

But I can only hope that the company that produces uTorrent will re-evaluate its priorities, to consider ensuring a stable and working product before making further changes and additions.

 

And I can only hope that they will consider allowing more flexibility in the UI so that users can actually choose what features are available, even if the settings are hidden deep (would it really kill you to have options to show or hide the pause button, to show or hide a 'move to top' and 'move to bottom' button, to choose narrow or wide spacing on the list, and so on, features that get requested so often that it drives the moderators crazy) so that we can adjust our user interface and user experience to match what we like, and so that the moderators can have an easier life with less repeated requests for the same popular features that apparently will NEVER EVER EVER be allowed? After all, what is the point of garnering public opinion if you are then going to ignore it so completely and utterly?

 

And I can only hope that the moderators will consider where they have got to in their interaction with the public, and consider whether a different approach would be more productive, and whether they want to, or even CAN, embody that change - and if not, where should they go from here?

 

In other words, I hope the uTorrent team will learn to listen to their users, and prioritze their needs and wants as they once did, rather than s**tting all over them for the sake of their own desires, convenience or flaws.

 

In hope,

 

James

 

[Edited to add back in missing link]

[ktetch]

I'm going to address this quickly, might come back to the rest later.

 

2) can't pause queued but not downloading torrents. I'm not talking about the lack of a pause button, though I hate that as I used it a lot, I'm talking about the torrent actually won't pause when I use the right-click menu.

 

 

This get's a big 'Duh'. Of course you can't. Pause means 'hold the connections you have open, open. don't request any pieces or respond to requests" To use a telephone analogy, it's just like putting someone on hold.

You're saying it's a 'flaw' that you can't put on hold, a call you've not made yet?

Think about it.

You can't 'pause' it, because you've not started it.

 

6) hate the new line spacing and can't find a way to revert to the old short of reverting to an old version of uTorrent (which I don't want to do).

All but number 7 make the torrent list and uTorrent not fit for purpose

 

So, you not liking the look makes it 'not fit for purpose'? I've had it for a bit, and it's not been a problem for me. You've got one complaint which is you not liking how something looks, and another completely misunderstanding basic functionality.

Now imagine you get 50 such comments every day. And more on IRC, where people argue that because they were misusing things, or something was broken but worked the way someone liked rather than how it should, they MUST FIX IT NOW. And have that go on for years, and you'll understand why people get so short. Especially when everyone seems to be an expert, and the more ignorant they actually are, the more of an expert they claim to be. like claiming there's a problem with something (like the pause) when the reality is the complainer doesn't actually understand what they're talking about.

[Pixels]

I see LTF's concern.  Especially with my laptop, now I gotta scroll up and down more so with my many torrents as there is more wasted screen space. Works great!  Not a bug..  Just looks stupid and wastes more space on a narrow screen and complicates things.

 

In the past, I have also seen a small neglect with respect to listening to users requests.  This is not only Utorrent but every software manufacturer who in their infinite wisdom decide for the masses that change is good and that simplifying things make it more complicated.  Microsoft is the worst offender. I am sure you need to update your version every time Microsoft breaks somthing in their own code and calls it a feature. (a commonly used excuse) But again it is YOUR software, and YOUR looks.  Nobody said Utorrent has to care about how others "feel" about the updates you guys make.  You obviously cannot listen to every request you get, decisions must be made and standards adhered to.  But there are ways to maintain a look simply by leaving a few advanced GUI options available to users who with to use your software with a "classic" look.  I would be very happy with such a feature, and would not pay any mind to how you mess up your GUI in every version you come up with in order to complicate things.  I liked Utorrent Pre V2.2, and ever since I look forward to these types of irritating changes whenever I update my client.  I think about how my money could be used with paying for a "Plus" version of Utorrent, when I look forward to someone changing my experience frequently.  Where did the day go where utorrent was simple and small and a straight shooter.

 

As far as your argument goes for not being able to pause queued items, wouldn't it be accurate to assume that if you pause a running task, the queued task shall begin?  If the queued item is paused, one way to assure it will be skipped?

 

Maybe I am an ignorant expert who doesn't actually understand what I am talking about.  Why else would users spend time showing up in contributing idea's?

[LTF]

Hi Ktetch,

 

Thanks for the reply.

 

Here's the short version of my long reply (at Pixels' suggestion). The more in-depth version is below. I would hope you, Ktetch, will read the full version before replying, but for other readers (who can then skip to Pixel's next post):

 

1) Your comments on Pause are just flat out wrong. The current system as it stands is anything but obvious and logical; it has multiple inconsistencies, errors, etc, and is unclear and confusing, using an obscure system that is either broken, inconsistent, or so complicated that I can't work it out in detail. The old system was well thought out, tried and tested, consistent, simple, and added functionality. Furthermore, given the existing bug with stopping queued items it is not entirely clear if the problems with pause are a feature or a bug. For more analysis of this, with specific examples, see below, 'About Pause', where I believe I've demonstrated this, and that my initial point was far from a 'big Duh'.

2) When you say 'So, you not liking the look makes it 'not fit for purpose'? [...] You've got one complaint which is you not liking how something looks, and another completely misunderstanding basic functionality' you are addressing two points out of eight, one of which you are missing the point on (or misrepresenting it), and the other is addressed above. You've looked (poorly) at 28% of the technical points I made and ignored the other 72%. I listed 6 bugs, another thing I think is a bug or incorrect behavior, and something that makes the results of the bugs worse (the list spacing), all of which between them makes it 'not fit for purpose'.  See 'Not Fit For Purpose', below, for more in depth discussion. As I say below, 'I don't know if you just skimmed and grabbed on to the two bits you didn't like without picking up on the other 72%, or whether you picked 28% of the points I made deliberately, but you are not exactly carrying the day here. In fact there seems to be a slight whiff of 'throw-away answers to serious points, showing rudeness, hostility, sarcasm and contempt, ignoring valid questions to focus on other points they wish to make, and so on' to quote my earlier post.

3) You complain of '50 comments a day' like mine, saying that's 'why people get so short'. Seriously, 50 comments a day by people who are trying to help improve a product should be seen as a good thing, not a bad thing. And frankly, if someone who is a moderator of the forums for a significant and much loved application has reached the point where they are so burned out by the user requests and comments then maybe they should consider stepping back, or taking a break, or changing their role, or pretty much anything to allow them to stop dealing with all the annoyances. As I said before, I couldn't do it for a month, let alone years, so I am in awe of the people who do, but when the forums are there to gather bug reports, user feedback, UI and other suggestions and the like, the people who work in them should reflect that. See 'User Comments' for more on that.

4) Re: Your comments that 'people argue that because they were misusing things, or something was broken but worked the way someone liked rather than how it should, they MUST FIX IT NOW. [...] like claiming there's a problem with something (like the pause) when the reality is the complainer doesn't actually understand what they're talking about.', I believe I've demonstrated that this comment of yours does not reflect me or my point. I point out that your comment shows utter contempt for the users. .According to you if users ask for something, or ask for something to be returned to how it was, then they're doing it wrong or don't 'actually understand what they're talking about'. It doesn't occur to you that actually the users might be making a good point, or know what they are talking about, and that they might be worth listening to, or at least considering the possibility of maybe listening to them. Nope. They're 'ignorant' because according to you they are 'claiming to be an expert' (which most aren't doing), and you are too busy cherry-picking their points and then misunderstanding or misrepresenting them to listen. Far too many users on these forums are dismissed this way, never allowing for the possibility that they might have a point, and that behavior (and others as per my original post) are, I believe, costing uTorrent users, support and loyalty, not to mention the race to be the best torrent client. See 'User Comments' for more on that too.

 

Hope that helps.

 

And now the loooooonnnnnnggggggg version!

 

 

 

A few points:

 

About Pause

 

This get's a big 'Duh'. Of course you can't. Pause means 'hold the connections you have open, open. don't request any pieces or respond to requests" To use a telephone analogy, it's just like putting someone on hold.

You're saying it's a 'flaw' that you can't put on hold, a call you've not made yet?

Think about it.

You can't 'pause' it, because you've not started it.

 

You say this like it's a ridiculous way to suggest it should work - and yet that's exactly how it has worked for years, so it can't be completely crazy. Well, I suppose it could, but that would mean that the development team, the programmers, the testers and the users have all been utterly ridiculous for years, and I don't choose to hold that level of contempt for either the fine minds involved in making and developing uTorrent over the years or the users who have made it so popular in that time. I believe there was a reason the system was made like that, a good reason, one that makes things easier for users.

 

Aside from that (and in these examples, to be clear, assume I have uTorrent set to download one torrent at a time unless Force Start is used, but the same seems to hold true for more download slots):

 

As it works right now, if you 'pause all torrents' then only the actively downloading torrents show as paused, the rest show as queued - which does not really match the language of the 'pause all torrents' command. Furthermore it's not clear: if (as before) the active torrents are paused and others are queued then would not the ones that are queued then start downloading? And if not then why not - they are 'Queued', ready to start downloading. Or does pausing one prevent all after from downloading? Or does pausing one torrent that is downloading also 'pause' the one download slot I have allocated?

 

Contrary to the above, I have just seen a situation where the first torrent was paused, the second was downloading, and the rest were queued - the first was started with 'force start' so the second started downloading, though this would probably apply if the second started downloading because the download speed of the first was too slow), and then I paused the first and the second continued downloading after the first was paused. Surely if pausing the first then prevents later queued items from going then that should not have occurred - unless the pause only applies to the torrent actually paused in which case the others should start downloading as needed, in which case I'd like the option to be able to pause queued torrents. Or the pause uses the one download slot allocated, in which case the second should have stopped, and the behaviour is wrong. And when the second finishes downloading, will the third then start downloading, or not? After all, after the first is paused, the second is not Force Started, it's just downloading as queued, so surely that queueing should continue?

 

And what if I want to pause the first and have the second start up (if you are wondering why I want to do that then as an example, maybe the first is a rare torrent with only one or two seeds that I've had problems connecting to, so I want to keep the connections to the seeds alive but just put it on hold briefly, but the second has only 30 seconds of downloading to go to finish it, and I want to finish it so I can open it)? If I pause the first then will the second start up or not? Why not? Or should it not? It IS queued after all. If the first is the only one downloading then how can I, or the computer, differentiate between 'pause all' and pause the first - I certainly can't tell the difference from what is displayed, and the computer presumably has to act according to some system that is currently not clear to me (see the paragraph above), and that's not good, because the system, any system like this, should be clear and as obvious as possible to the users.    (Oh, and I'm aware that I could 'Force Start' it, but why? It's queued, it's ready to start if there's nothing downloading)

 

And while we're on the subject of confusing UI cues and unclear behaviour, when I 'pause all', torrents that are downloading or seeding and have already downloaded some or all of the files and so have a status percentage greater than zero (ie the status has some blue bar in it) have the blue in the bar change to grey, presumably denoting the pause. Yet for torrents that are queued (and so, according to you, should not pause) and have a status percentage greater than zero, the blue bar ALSO changes to grey, yet they are still shown as 'queued'. So are they paused? Or queued? Or pausequeued? Or some other status, not stopped, downloading, queued, seeding or finished, but another one that shows as queued but are in fact paused or semi-stopped? It's certainly not clear.   This also applies to 'Queued Seed', incidentally.

 

And if indeed I can't pause a queued torrent, then why is the menu option still available? After all if a torrent is not stopped then I can't Force Re-check it, it's greyed out, and if an item is stopped then I can't choose pause, surely the same should be true for pausing a queued torrent?

 

And it's worth remembering that there is currently a bug, at least in my version, that when you stop a torrent that is 'queued' then THAT IS NOT REFLECTED IN THE LIST, the status still says 'queued'. In some ways it seems stopped, if you move it one step down the list then it changes to 'Stopped', but on the other hand other signs show it is not stopped, for example you cannot 'Force re-check'. So there's a bug that makes the status very unclear, which certainly doesn't help when trying to work out whether something in the queue will download or not, for all I know the fact that that I can choose the pause option for a queued item, and when I pause a queued item it does not change its status (and yet DOES have the status bar turn grey like it's paused) makes (or made) me wonder if it is not a feature, just yet another bug.

 

 

Perhaps not so big a 'Duh', at least from me. Seems like the behaviour is confusing and inconsistent at best, broken at worst.

 

 

And then there are the 'wants' in the equation. I like being able to pause queued torrents, it provides a third state to me other than 'stopped' or 'queued' that still preserves the basic state of 'stopped' and 'queued'. For example,  what if I have a mix of queued and stopped torrents, and I want to prevent some from downloading without changing their queued/stopped status, because I don't want to have to go back through one by one and start/stop the torrents appropriately? An added bonus is that I can sort by status and clearly see the paused (which were once queued), the queued (assuming I individually paused rather than pause all), and the stopped, which is handy. Having the pause adds useful functionality.

 

 

Of course the old system had its weaknesses, I didn't love the way if I paused something briefly, perhaps to let a web page or file download quicker, then it was a race between the web page downloading and the next torrent in the queue starting, but it was clear, well thought out, consistent, and I could work with it knowing exactly how it worked, unlike the current system, which is a confusing mess.

 

[LTF]

Continuing on:

 

Not Fit For Purpose

 

So, you not liking the look makes it 'not fit for purpose'? I've had it for a bit, and it's not been a problem for me. You've got one complaint which is you not liking how something looks, and another completely misunderstanding basic functionality.

 

Actually, as you quoted yourself, I said 'All but number 7 make the torrent list and uTorrent not fit for purpose'.

 

So NO, my not liking the look does not make it 'not fit for purpose', I never said that. I said that points 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6 and 8 together make it not fit for purpose, as I clearly said.

 

I made it very obvious, with a list of 6 bugs (points 1,2,3,4,5,8), a change that makes those bugs worse (point 6), and something that I would argue is a bug or incorrect behaviour (point 7), that THOSE were the reasons it is 'not fit for purpose'.

 

Specifically, The point you quoted is 14% of what I said made it not fit for purpose. And although I didn't clarify in that particular sentence, I later clearly said, after explaining the effects of 1,2,3,4,5 and 8, that 'I have a list that takes twice as much scrolling to get through than before (which also makes it more likely I will hit the problem with shift and mouse wheel)' - ie it's not just the look of the thing (though I don't like that too), it's the actual practical effect that the list is twice as long/tall, and so takes more scrolling to get through, increasing the effect of the other problems (1,2,3,4,5 and 8).

 

Or to put it simply, when you say 'You've got one complaint which is you not liking how something looks, and another completely misunderstanding basic functionality', you are ignoring at least 72% of what I said (and that's not even getting in to the comments about the forum side of things).

 

I don't know if you just skimmed and grabbed on to the two bits you didn't like without picking up on the other 72%, or whether you picked 28% of the points I made deliberately, but you are not exactly carrying the day here. In fact there seems to be a slight whiff of 'throw-away answers to serious points, showing rudeness, hostility, sarcasm and contempt, ignoring valid questions to focus on other points they wish to make, and so on' to quote myself.

 

Oh, and like you, I had it for a bit, tried it extensively, and then reverted to the old uTorrent to get rid of the new list, so it's not like I posted on the first day I saw it. I had hoped that uTorrent would change their mind on it, but no such luck.

 

[LTF]

And lastly:

 

User Comments

 

Now imagine you get 50 such comments every day. And more on IRC, where people argue that because they were misusing things, or something was broken but worked the way someone liked rather than how it should, they MUST FIX IT NOW. And have that go on for years, and you'll understand why people get so short. Especially when everyone seems to be an expert, and the more ignorant they actually are, the more of an expert they claim to be. like claiming there's a problem with something (like the pause) when the reality is the complainer doesn't actually understand what they're talking about.

 

 

OK, can do. Hang on, I'm imagining....

 

50 comments a day with serious points by someone who genuinely loves the product and desperately wants to see it get better, which is then dismissed out of hand by someone, a long-term member of the forum, who feels that cherry picking a couple of points while ignoring the vast majority of the post - and yet still misses the point of what little he tried to address! - and instead saying that the poster 'misunderstood', and implying that poster is 'ignorant' and 'don't actually understand what they're talking about', is the most productive way of dealing with this instead of actually addressing the points seriously.

 

OK, I'm there, I'm imagining it. Oh, who am I kidding, I don't need to imagine it, there are hundreds of posts like that throughout the forum, and on first sight you're just one more person perpetuating the toxic attitudes sadly all to often found here while failing to actually address any of the serious points made, though I will certainly allow for the possibility that that might change if you answer more of the post. I'd welcome the latter, it would be good to actually engage seriously with someone on this topic.

 

Bottom line, if you want to actually talk seriously and accurately about the points I actually made, by all means. If you just want to do a song and dance then join the choir.

 

 

Seriously, 50 comments a day by people who are trying to help improve a product should be seen as a good thing, not a bad thing.

 

And frankly, if someone who is a moderator of the forums for a significant and much loved application has reached the point where they are so burned out by the user requests and comments then maybe they should consider stepping back, or taking a break, or changing their role, or pretty much anything to allow them to stop dealing with all the annoyances. As I said before, I couldn't do it for a month, let alone years, so I am in awe of the people who do, but when the forums are there to gather bug reports, user feedback, UI and other suggestions and the like, the people who work in them should reflect that.

 

 

 

people argue that because they were misusing things, or something was broken but worked the way someone liked rather than how it should, they MUST FIX IT NOW. [...] like claiming there's a problem with something (like the pause) when the reality is the complainer doesn't actually understand what they're talking about.

 

 

I don't believe you've shown that I was misusing things, I don't believe you've shown it's working how it should, and I don't believe you've shown I don't understand what I'm talking about. I'd like to think the above demonstrates some small understanding of the system, the needs and the flaws, both existing and previous.

 

Of course, I get that you are just an advance member and not claiming to be an expert, because otherwise by your logic that would make you pretty d**n ignorant, and I'm sure you don't consider yourself that. I'm sure your points were just dashed out quickly and don't reflect the true depth of your knowledge of uTorrent and your understanding of my points.

 

 

But beyond that, while I indulged in saying briefly in a couple of places that I didn't like the changes made, my post is clearly saying several things above and beyond that (excluding the stuff about the mods and advanced users)

 

1) That there are bugs, problems, inconsistencies, whatever you want to call them, that make uTorrent 'not fit for purpose', and that I wish the uTorrent team would take the time to fix that rather than mucking about with shiny new features and changes that just bring more problems to the table.

2) That I wish the uTorrent team would consider the wishes of users when making changes or refusing to make changes.

 

 

I'm shocked, shocked I tell you, that you might ignore the first point and put that down to my 'ignorance' and my not understanding what I'm talking about, while just picking a couple of points and then missing those points, before dismissing the whole thing. That never happens here. Shocked, I tell you!

 

As for point 2, while you might consider it to be the same as what you said above, it's not. Your statement shows, as is far too often the case in these forums, contempt for the users. Clearly, according to you, if users ask for something, or ask for something to be returned to how it was, then 'they were misusing things', or 'something was broken but worked the way someone liked rather than how it should', or 'the reality is the complainer doesn't actually understand what they're talking about'. It doesn't occur to you that actually the users might be making a good point, or know what they are talking about, and that they might be worth listening to, or at least considering the possibility of maybe listening to them. Nope. They're 'ignorant' because according to you they are 'claiming to be an expert' (though I'm a little confused by that as many of the posters here who get short shrift declare themselves to be noobs, which by your logic means they must be pretty smart).

 

I don't like some of the changes made, though I do like some of the other ones. I don't presume to state categorically that I am right, but I am d**n sure that I can make a pretty reasonable argument for the changes or reversions I would like to see, and I'm equally sure that most of the uTorrent team will dismiss that out of hand (I hope not all of the team, Firon has had good dialogues in the past where user comment significantly influenced the direction of uTorrent, and I'm sure there are others). And then they'll do the same for the tens, or hundreds, or thousands of other users who will do the same, without, it would seem based on their forums, considering that maybe the users might have a point. And I think that's a shame, and I think those behaviors, and the other problems outined in my initial post, are slowly (and occasionally quickly) losing them users, support and loyalty, not to mention the race to be the best torrent client.

 

But that's OK, because according to you I, and others like me, are 'ignorant' and don't 'actually understand what they're talking about'.

 

Well, you sure showed me.

[Pixels]

LTF, I agree with alot of what you are saying, especially with regard to ktetch's sarcastic contradictory omnipotent condescending last paragraph. Like I am sure he has some stereotypes which are valid, but he is clearly showing signs of carrying weight of some other user posts. I too have an ability to speculate or misdirect a idea which insinuates.  Lovely tallent you have ktetch.

But can be better communicated if simplified. Thanks for edit to omit redundancies.(posts above)  Might reward you with a bit better attention for being to the brief point. 

[LTF]

Hi Pixels,

 

Yup, I get a little verbose when I'm (1) tired, (2) frustrated and trying to change things for the better, and (3) irritated by people missing my point and then condescending, quite possibly deliberately.

 

I've taken your advice by adding a much more concise summary at the top, and then left the in depth stuff for Ktetch's possible perusal and reply. I considered dumping it all together but at least some of it is required to demonstrate clearly how far off the mark he and some others here are, some of it shows how strongly I feel about this and how much I care, and some of it just reflects the level of frustration I feel about both the direction uTorrent is going, and the way the forums play out. I hope that the (too) complete answers will at least prevent multiple replies back and forth where I would have said what I have said above, and instead Ktetch can move on to whatever he'd like to say next.

 

Thanks for the good advice, much appreciated.

 

 

Oh, on another note, I keep seeing the 'official thank you thread' at the top of the forum, and I did just want to thank uTorrent and the people who worked on it for the great service and app over the years. It's precisely because of that that I give a d**n now.

[Pixels]

Doubt Utorrent will revert back to the usual row heights for torrents.  If you guys do, leave me a PM so I can turn on my autoupdate, otherwise I won't be using any new versions ever again.

[TunaSalad9]

I have to say I completely agree with the OP.

 

About 2 years ago I made a thread listing several bugs in Utorrent. My thread was immediately locked, with the moderator stating, "advanced features are not to be tweaked."

I created a second thread with the same information, this time stating at the top that the thread was about potential bugs and not specifically about advanced features.

I was permabanned for nearly 6 months for this.

 

I sit here today and the vast majority of these bugs are still present. They are present because instead of the staff on this forum considering the opinions of the posters, they constantly believe they are always right and that we are simply fools that are mistaken.

 

This attitude has caused harm to the development of Utorrent as many bugs, problems, and wanted features have been completed ignored by the staff here. In turn the developers never hear this feedback from their user base.

 

Please change the attitude; your program is pretty good. It could be great if you'd listen up.

If you are a developer and reading this, please consider speaking with community staff about being more open-minded and less sure of themselves in regards to Utorrent discussions.

[Marquis de Leon]

I'm with TunaSalad (assuming his post stays???). uTorrent could potentially turn this around with a more open-minded approach to PR. As it stands now, most feedback and bug reports are either ignored, or met with rude remarks from staff who apparently have the lowest job satisfaction on the planet.

 

Not to mention, trying to help other people yourself is like walking on eggshells. Simply giving advice on how to remove the intrusive ads and bloat is a bannable offense, and don't even think about linking to an old version, as that is the ultimate crime against humanity. A little open-mindedness would go a long way!!
 

[LTF]

Even the little bugs that would be a few minutes to fix don't get fixed.

 

For example, if you reload a torrent that has already completed downloading and been removed from the list then you get a dialog box offering you the choice to start again, to load it finished, or to not load it (Abort), but if you choose Abort then it still loads. I've got to figure that's probably just a mistake in the IF THEN statement, probably a missed NOT or FALSE instead of TRUE, it might take 10 seconds to fix once you find the appropriate function. I made the report a while back and it's still there... still, never mind, they changed the options menu item to "Show Bundles" instead of "Show Featured Content"...

[LTF]

Heh, just noticed a further bug relating to Pause, might be of interest to Ktetch and the admins:

 

Starting conditions: at least two torrents (I have about 60), with the first one downloading normally (not Force Start), the rest not (in my case due to having my settings at only one torrent downloading)

Step 1: Pause All Torrents

Step 2: Quit uTorrent

Step 3: Run uTorrent again (note that the first torrent is still paused, the second is now downloading - which adds more to my comments on the pause inconsistencies / bugs above)

Step 4: Resume All Torrents

Note that the first torrent on the list is now running under Force Start

 

v 3.4.1 build 30740 32 bit on Windows 7 Ultimate 64 bit

[Ryrynz]

All but number 7 make the torrent list and uTorrent not fit for purpose:

 

Please tell me you didn't pull this wording from either NZ or AU consumer guarantees laws.. if this happened to be just your poorly chosen words then fine.

I'd still recommend you read on what your words actually mean, I get enough uneducated individuals pulling this line in retail without knowing what it actually means.

 

What your preferences or expectations are of particular features have absolutely nothing to do with purposeful fitness of a product.

 

[LTF]

Hi Ryrynz,

 

No, I didn't pull this wording from any consumer guarantees laws. I live in a non-english-speaking country where there are no consumer guarantee laws worth talking about, though am originally from the UK, so I don't really follow any of that stuff.

 

That said, as I understand it, 'not fit for purpose' means that a thing / product / whatever cannot carry out the purpose for which it is intended, including flat out not working.

 

In my opinion uTorrent, due to the items I listed, cannot be adequately used for the purpose intended. It could be argued that is not so, as the sort of thing that would really and clearly make it not fit for purpose would be it not loading torrent files or not downloading and uploading data, but I consider a hugely significant part of the purpose of uTorrent to be torrent management, ie deciding what you want to download/upload and when and in what order (if you disagree then imagine a torrent client that would upload and download torrents in a random order and fashion!), and the (broken) torrent list is the largest part of that by a long way, and in that sense it is NOT fit for purpose.

 

So it's not about my preferences or expectations of particular features, it's to do with the fitness of the product for its main purpose.

 

Given that we're not talking about retail here, does that fit with your understanding of the phrase?

 

Aside from that minor point about the phrase I used, what did you think of the overall point?

[Pixels]

By the lack of actual acknowledgement of your post ( only critiquing your wording ) you could only guess what Ryrynz thinks.

 

But he has a point, as I too did not fully comprehend the words you chosen.

 

Remember, the more wording a person uses, the more unclear the point becomes.

 

Rather then you making a post with references to multiple issues, you could have done one item at a time.

My only issue was with the increasing of the row height.  I could only imagine that the developer intentionally did this to irritate the user and give the user an option to customize it at a later date if they endorse the software.  They haven't responded by now, so it is unlikely they ever will.

[LTF]

...another weird one with the torrent list, a download with data still to get (at this precise moment 49.0MB downloaded, 6.8MB remaining), a download speed of 59-80kB/s and upload of a few kB/s, and an ETA of infinite - and it has been that way since it started, and until it ended, despite the speed being pretty consistent.