Separate names with a comma.
Discussion in 'General Software' started by Sirje31337, Nov 4, 2005.
In your opinion what is the best client for torrents?
I've pretty biased towards Azureus as it is the only one I've used. Check it out. http://azureus.sourceforge.net/
I use Azureus also. Been loyal to me, so why not be loyal to it
Recent convert from Azureus to uTorrent.
uTorrent has every critical feature that AZ has and has the smallest footprint of any all-in-one BT client
I'm pretty sure both azureus and utorrent are in the top four best torrent software progs out.
I use them both but still lean towards azureus more especially since i got 2 gigs of ram so i don't care how much memory it uses. I Think it's using 300- 400 megs right now, maybe more, I'm just guessing since taskmanager doesn't tell you exactly what the prog is using.
I use bittorrent...What are the downsides to that (sorry to threadcrap)
There is nothing wrong with just using the standard client. The other clients just add on a lot more features that you might like, like speed limiting.
As for my answer - I'm also a recent convert to µTorrent in windows - much smaller footprint than Azureus and has most of the features I care about.
In *nix though, I still use Azureus.
Well, uTorrent it is. Thanks guys. I've been using BitTorrent since I can remember. I just decided I don't like it yesterday thought, so thanks.
Azureus... I tried a few others and this is still the best. One feature that has me hooked was when I had NAT problems it alerted me... It even alerted me which protocol I should use when opening the ports (UDP).
In my experience, BitComet has always gotten me faster download rates than anything else. Also, azureus always took up so much bandwidth that I couldn't use the internet for anything else. Even if it was DLing at 5kb/s.
Azureus has been working fine for me especially since it tells if something is not working.
Bitcomet has been my choice for awhile but recently i have considered changing to utorrent since bitcomet has such a large memory footprint.
Please explain your logic behind this. As it has been stressed more then enough times that the protocol is the same between all clients.
Switched to uTorrent from Azureus pretty recently as well. Has all the critical features, no memory leaks, uses a lot less ram and cpu time.
Can't the protocol be the same while the implementation is different? Are all network cards that implement the same media equal in performance?
Because the matter of performance being looked at is not the implementation of the protocol, it is the means the protol uses to communicate. I want a specific explanation as to why his claim the BitComet downloads faster than other clients. It uses the same protol to communicate to all other clients, and to say that just because it is implemented differently, the other clients will treat that implementation with a higher priority lacks a lot of base.
i used azereus personally too, other than the fact java takes up so much memory usage, it's great. but that might just because i only have 512mb of ram at the moment.
The other clients don't have to treat different implementations with more or less priority to notice a performance change. They simply block more for slower partners and block less for faster partners.
Which is exactly my point. It is not the BT client used that determines the downloading speeds, it is almost entirely at the whim of the other seeds and peers
Your initial assertion was that all the programs implement the same protocol and therefore have the same performance. Different implementations of the same protocol can exhibit different performance characteristics.
I'd expect network throughput and latency to the other hosts to be the governing factor for download speeds in bittorrent. But it's not impossible for the implementation of the client to affect download speeds.
Went from azureus after 8 to 9 months to uTorrent due to change from java to non-java and small resources and has everything azureus and will have more soon.
Ok, im a total Azureus !!!!!!...mainly because its the one i started on and now i know how to tweak teh shit out of it to maximize performance...
I know azureus will slow your PC down when its scanning files, but other than that, what are all these memory leaks and system hog things ppl are talking about?
no problems, and it is pretty fluff-free
Azureus corrupted my HDD, twice.... I then used ABC which worked well, but finally started using uTorrent and found it to be pretty good, smaller and less cpu intensive than ABC which makes it better for my HTPC system.
I was trying to infer through questioning(sorry I'm a philosophy major and have taken a liking to this method) that the protocol was reliant on the seeds/peers to send their data by their own selection and not the user's selection(of himself)
Although I can agree that the is the possibility of a client coded specifically to only interact with clients of it's own build(thought I doubt any coder would lack the morals and dignighty to do such a thing)
I'd certainly look beyond azureus if youre losing data
am i the only one who uses bittornado?
yeah, too bad too because Azureus had some nice plugins (safe peer, rss importer) and some good features that I was just starting to get into. But it's wasn't worth it having to reinstall windows every couple of weeks because my partitions became corrupt. I've been running uTorrent and so far so good.
µTorrent ▶ *
Azureus is the best.
I'm the best, but Azureus comes in a close 2nd. J/K
He's right Azureus is verdy verdy nice.
ok i just switched to utorrent. need a little help and didnt want to make a new thread. i came from bittornado and it had options to use ports from XXXX-XXXX now in utorrent i only see one option called 'port used for incoming connections' and thats XXXX well i have a router firewall and i can foward ports XXXX-XXXX. so what should i fowrad my ports too if say the port used for incoming connections is 1234? 1234 - ???? is there a way i can tell that im not behind a firewall?
and is there anything else i can do to make it faster?
I've used ABC, Azureus, BitTornado, and uTorrent.
Out of all of them, I liked Azureus and uTorrent the best. What uTorrent has going for it is the small resource footprint and most of the more commonly used stuff in Azureus. ABC and BitTornado were like uTorrent so which ever used less resources was best IMO.
Azureus I liked because it had everything I wanted. What was most useful to me was the advanced seeding rules that I could set. I usually do my part to seed and what uTorrent severely lacks is a priority seeding rules that can be set. I like to boost the priority of torrents with no seeds. My seeding list has over 200 items so that's where Azureus rules at.
Basically, for general use, use uTorrent. If you are into making yourself into a server and can seed lots of different torrents, then Azureus clearly owns that department.
I had been using uTorrent for a while. It's true the app is tiny, but it would bog down any web-browsing whenever it was running and downloading something. I switched back to the generic BitTorrent app, and the problem is gone. It's a nice idea, but needed more testing.
perhaps you need to limit your upload more in utorrent.