Make size of µTorrent paramount.

[K.Rool]

What I mean is, between all these feature requests, please don't forget that the client was once not more than 80KB big. Don't bloat it up too much -- I can live with less features, there's a load of other clients who can do that, if it means letting the client be small and ultra-easy on the memory

[Ultima]

Size was never ludde's main focus, and it won't be. It's been said many times already that his main objective was to write a fully-featured client that was also extremely optimized, not an ultra-small client that has to skimp on features. To that end, the memory usage from 1.1 to 1.5 has not increased significantly. The same can't be said about 1.5.1, but that's because the cache system was improved, so more memory had to be used (a bit). It can still be decreased by modifying the disk cache options, though I wouldn't do that, as the cache was improved so much that it works without breaking a sweat even on a hundred mbit line -- heck, even on a gbit line!

The client's still not bloated, and while a tiny bit of feature creep... creeped in, most of the other features are actually used by a lot of people, so they can't really be classified as such.

If I had to guess, I'd say at least a good 80% of the features included are actively used by people, but that's just a number I pulled out of thin air based on observations of posts made on the forums and such, and it might be an even higher percentage, but who cares ;P

[Nefarious]

size isnt really that of a priority for anyone actually, it's just nice to see such a great app in so little

many developers could learn of it

[Switeck]

The longer you use it, the more features you'll likely use.

For instance -- I currently don't use the RSS feeds, but will look into them in the future.

[Ultima]

The RSS feature really seems nifty, and is really well made, but I highly doubt that I'll ever use it, as I don't download anything on a periodic basis, nor am I ever waiting for something to be released and fear missing the download ;P

[Firon]

I <3 RSS.

And size isn't really what matters (though ludde does care about it too), it's ultimately the memory use. And that will definitely be kept low.

[Dark Shroud]

As long as it fits on my portablt 60gig hd I don't care.

But in the currect full version (1.5) I use everything except the RSS & Scheduler. My DSL doesn't have restrictions based on time nor does Dattebayo have an RSS feed. So I currently have no use for these features, but I might so I'm glad they're there because I know how useful they are to my friends.

[RXP]

If you like the version with less features, just use that version

[Dark Shroud]

This isn't BitComet. With µTorrent you need to keep up to date. Compared to other clients µTorrents updates are large steps forward. 1.5 has peer encryption and the next version will have many options includeing the new cache. I'm looking forward to NAT Traversial myself.

[RXP]

But if you want a tiny exe, then you have to sacrifice features.

[Firon]

Not really.

[Dark Shroud]

1.4 = 130 KB

1.5-build-437 = 154kb

1.5.1-beta-build-460 = 169kb

But if you want a tiny exe, then you have to sacrifice features.

Yeah you're right, we need to watch out. µTorrent 1.7 might take up a quarter of a floppy diskette all by itself. I bet it'll be bloated with crap we don't even need, like Azureus DHT and a pause button for Tetris.

Ludde you need to be careful, your program is quickly turning into a hog like Azureus. By the end of 2009 the µTorrent.exe could be a whole gig in size.

[/sarcasm]

[Firon]

461 is 171KB... And it has the brand new OS-independent UPnP code. And non-modal dialogs. And other stuff I can't remember.

[Determination]

Just removed line breaks, that'll drop the file size.

[Tarkus]

461 is 171KB... And it has the brand new OS-independent UPnP code. And non-modal dialogs. And other stuff I can't remember.

[Ultima]

@Determination: Now, if that'd only work for binary compiled files... xP

[sabret00the]

Just removed line breaks, that'll drop the file size.

[Kupotek]

I would die without utorrent's rss, it's the best ive ever used. Rock on.

[Lys]

You have to remember the EXE packing, without it, it is more like 400K.

[Firon]

Naw, only like 350k or so.

[WebReaper]

What I love is the way most people are downloading movies and music which are tens, hundreds or even thousands of megabytes in size, and yet people seem to care about whether a single exe is bigger than 200Kb.

Whilst the requirement for efficient CPU and memory usage is paramount, I really couldn't give a stuff what size the actual exe is. I mean, when I'm downloading 50+Gb per month, my hard-disk usage is not going to be impacted if utorrent doubles in size.

[Nefarious]

is not about downloading, it's about how portable it is, you can keep utorrent like it is right now on a floppy disk (not that anyone does or should) but then again u can't with most of the clients out there

[WebReaper]

But who cares? Given the whole point of P2P is to download large amounts of data, what's the point in it being portable? I mean, I could run a bittorrent client on my PDA, over GPRS, but with a couple of Gig storage space and expensive bandwidth, what would be the point?

[Kazuaki Shimazaki]

The critical thing is memory usage, not disk space, which any half-*ssed BTer should have GBs of. I know, however, that a program on my computer becomes a measurable drag if it consumes above say 10MB of RAM. If it goes over 20, the drag becomes quite annoying. So far, uT does not reach the latter point unless the DL speed is nearly at flank, but I'm still interested in keeping it small.

There have been many features added that are useful and there had been substantial improvements in base capability, and I agree completely with them being added even if I may not use some myself. Still, there are a few that aren't, and when I see such a feature, my eyebrows raise ever so slightly in concern...

[Ultima]

It's okay to splurge every now and then, so long as you don't go overboard. That's how I'm judging ludde's addition of some features, and so far, it's been within the range of "okay" ;P

Even if the client does get more useless features, as long as they don't get in my way, or add resource usage, I still wouldn't care.