uTorrent Gains Popularity, Azureus Loses Ground
Written by Ernesto on December 16, 2007With an install rate of more than 5% on Windows PCs worldwide, uTorrent is now by far the most popular BitTorrent client. Azureus, the most installed BitTorrent application of last year fell back to the third place.
The graph on the right (click to enlarge) is based on data published by Digital Music News based on reports from PC Pitstop, a company that gathers data by “inspecting” the computers of users that try their free online virus / spyware scanners. The data used in this report are collected from Windows registry and table entries of over a million PC’s.
The percentages reflect the percentage of PCs that has these applications installed. September last year Azureus was installed on more than 3% of all PCs but their install rate has declined by more than 30% this year, while uTorrent’s install rate nearly tripled.
In the table below we have listed the 5 most installed BitTorrent applications. It is interesting to not that Azureus moved from the first to the third spot over the past year. The BitTorrent mainline client is now runner up. This means that BitTorrent Inc. now owns the two most popular BitTorrent clients.
The percentages in the table indicate the install base of the most popular BitTorrent clients:
| Rank | Application | Installed on % Desktops |
| 1. | uTorrent | 5.56% |
| 2. | BitTorrent (a.k.a. mainline) | 2.28% |
| 3. | Azureus | 2.11% |
| 4. | Bitcomet | 1.89% |
| 5. | Bitlord | 1.27% |
From the data where the report is based on we further learn that Limewire’s popularity is slowly declining. However, with an install base of almost 18% it is still the P2P application that is installed on most desktop computers. Unfortunately Digital Music News has trouble interpreting their own data, they claim in their press release that it is 36.4%, but that is the market share compared to other P2P clients (shame on you!).
Apart from this tiny mistake, there are a few more concerns about the usability of the data. For example, install rates do not equal usage. The fact that someone installed a P2P client does not mean that they actually use it. So the report can’t say much about the popularity of a filesharing network or application. Secondly, it could be that Azureus and BitTorrent Mainline are installed on almost an equal number of PCs, but that the BitTorrent mainline client is hardly ever used. For instance, novices may start with the mainline client, but move on to better BitTorrent clients later on. Lastly, the report is based on a sample of people who voluntarily did an online spyware scan, something to think about.
Perhaps an even more important comment on the data collection for this report, uTorrent doesn’t necessarily use the Windows registry. So the real install rate for uTorrent might be even higher. Also, Azureus is a true multi-platform client, whilst this test is only for windows based systems.
In summing up we think it is (despite all the flaws) safe to say that uTorrent is becoming more popular while Azureus is losing ground. Whether this is due to negative factors affecting Azureus (such as the rebranding to Vuze, Java or the heavy use of resources), or positive factors around the mainline and µTorrent clients (such as the small install size, and low system requirements) it certainly shows a slide for Azureus.
Previously: BitTorrent, A Boon To Independent Filmmakers
Next: Hessians Hope to Weave Election Magic
174 Responses (Add yours or TrackBack)
That sucks, I love Azureus.
uTorrent clearly pwns
but these charts are inaccurate because most people who do online virus scans are computer illiterate
Limewire has been slipping up ALOT lately. I personally miss Kazaa.
http://paidandpopular.blogspot.com
[quote comment="240747"]uTorrent clearly pwns
but these charts are inaccurate because most people who do online virus scans are computer illiterate[/quote]
agreed.
The functionality of Azureus is pretty damn good, but, Java is a memory/cpu hog and needs to be replaced.
I just wish more people would use better clients, the original Bittorrent program is pretty pathetic in terms of functionality. Just proves that even though, the protocol was made by the same people, it doesn’t mean its the best client.
i was really glad when the newest version of utorrent came out. my computer has never liked java.. the system clock goes absolutely nuts whenever its running.
or, not the newest, but the stable 1.0 2+ years ago
I use Azureus Bit Tyrant version 2.5 MINUS the ‘Vuse content layer’.
The so-called ‘Vuse content layer’ is nothing more than adware and spyware that uses EVEN MORE resources, plus, it slows the application down. I will never install the ‘Vuse content layer’ period. I tried it once BC it was an update, but rolled AZ back. Its a horrible interface too, they simply try and sell people stuff. If Azureus is third thats the reason.
The latest Azureus is just terrible.
uTorrent does all you want without all the crap you don’t want ;)
Personally, I only use bitTorrent because of the masses of content available on it.
I find the gnutella network to be faster, less restrictive, and less restricted. Except that it limits search results to those of perhaps one or two dozen hosts, which sucks.
If it could troll a few hundred thou, or even mill, other boxes than you could get entire (open-copyright) seasons and albums just as easy as Torrent - and you wouldn’t need to down the whole thing; just what you want.
:) yeah yeah, I know. wrong place. anybody know where there’s a newspot even half as good as Torrentfreak, but for gnutella? (honest question)
uTorrent beats Azureus hands down - the only reason I’m using Azureus is because there isn’t a Linux version of uTorrent. If there was, I would switch right away. But KTorrent has been getting better, so I might have to switch to that. There’s no doubt that Azureus/Java hogs RAM and CPU cycles, something that must be pretty detrimental to its popularity.
I’m on Kubuntu and I use uTorrent through WINE, why? Because it is so much better than all the other clients out there that I don’t mind a little delay when I start it up. It’s not as if I ever close it anyway.
Uh, James, you don’t need to “down the whole thing” with bittorrent either. Seasons are usually just file folders of single episodes and any good bittorrent client will let you select which of the files/episodes you want to download. That said I think uTorrent is the best, and I’ll miss it when I move to the mac.
Find a definitive benchmark of what people are using on their pc’s and it may hold some water. Using one websites statistics on what people have installed doesnt really count for anything. From a personal standpoint, I cant stand utorrent. Its like the tonka toy of bittorrent in its simplicity, which may be fine for some people. Sure Azureus uses a good chunk of RAM, at least 100mb, and 0-2% of cpu, but thats what they are there for. If you spent all your time bitching about what applications are using what ammount of resources you’d get nothing done. Being as I deal with people using bittorent on a daily basis in a support role, I deal with far more people having problems with utorrent than Azureus, perhaps Azureus users are slightly more adept than utorrent with the main problems stemming from Azureus being lack of knowledge on the users part. Most of which cant even figure out how to set it up. For those people then the simpler utorrent is more at their level of understanding. One thing that lets utorrent down significantly is its complete lack of peer banning. As an example, U didnt have a torrent client installed at one point and rather than have to set up Az for a single download I opted for utorrent. An hour later and 60 hash fails I still had sod all. So I went and grabbed Azureus, set it up and completed the download in 8 minutes, with 3 hash fails and 6 peers banned for sending bad data. For that reason alone utorrent will never be as good as Azureus.
I use Azureus but all my friends I try and teach all use uTorrent. It’s just much more simple to comprehend. Port forwarding for example can be a nightmare in anything but uTorrent. The plug-ins for Azureus are pretty nice, that’y the major point missing in uTorrent imo.
Cheers!
Funny that most of the people running utorrent use an online virus scan and give the website carte blanche to connect to their pc and audit their system. That’s scary.
µTorrent is by far the best torrent program I’ve ever used. It eats so little memory you barely notice it working. With Azureus it’s like trying to run two games at once. It has some nice touches (like all those neat pictures) but µTorrent does everything I NEED it to do.
The downfall of apps. usually is from being over bloated. I mean what the hell is this vuse or muse or vise whatever the hell they call it.
It’s not needed. It’s BT, and most people just want a client that handles torrents, does it well, and that’s all.
same reason i stick with Winamp. It plays mp3’s etc. It’s not an over bloated piece of garbage like Windows media player.
Why make thinks overly complicated when the basic function is all you need?
As quoted by one smart individual.
=Make things as simple as possible, but no simpler
— Albert Einstein
What version of utorrent u guys use
Vuze isn’t a good thing, and I certainly think that Azureus should use less resources, but it’s got two things that make it far better then uTorrent;
It’s multi-platform and it’s open source.
I don’t use the piece of filth that is Windows so I don’t use uTorrent. I’d also rather the source code be known to the world.
[quote]Port forwarding for example can be a nightmare in anything but uTorrent.[/quote]
What are you talking about? It’s simple in Azureus.
First, set it to forward on your router.
Second, go to Tools then Connection and set the port there.
Simple.
Once I switched from Azureus to uTorrent because I accidentally upgraded to Azureus with Vuze. It worked fine for a while until one time for some unknown reason it kept on opening too many ports and froze my computer. I had to uninstall uTorrent and find a 2.5 version of Azureus on the net. Now Azureus updates without the Vuze and I’m really happy using it.
Azureus made any computer it ran on slow, like norton did when it would scan. If I set uTorrent right, I can surf teh internets and shoop pics and not notice a slow down on performance.
I guess I take back the port forwarding Azureus night mare comment back. It’s just definitely more easy in uTorrent than Azureus imo.
Azureus has lost its popularity, because is so hard on the computer. Unlike uTorrent, which is only a little over 200k on disk and takes very little processing to run.
All the added features in Azureus were nice to try out, but it just bogged down the client. Having something that is quick, simple, organized, and can run in the background is a must for the new generation of torrent-ers.
It’s a shame the “new generation of torrenters” can’t spend some money on CPU or RAM upgrade, considering all the money they are saving on leeching all latest and greatest in music and movies.Oh well, they are spending it on a iPod or iPhone. I guess if you are still running a P3/P4 or Athlon/Sempron with 512MB-1GB of RAM uTorrent is like the bittorrent messiah. Hell on my Athlon X2 with 4GB of RAM i can DVDShrink a movie, download a torrent and surf the net with no noticeable disruption. I guess it is a matter of perception whether Azureus is hard on your system or uTorent is the best thing since sliced bread.
@2600,
i love it when people use that reasoning, that we have all this money saved from not buying the media we download so it should suddenly be in our bank accounts. :-D
What the hell!
uTorrent isn’t safe anymore now that BitTorrent Inc. owns it! God only knows what they’ve put in the code!
How are people so stupid?? They’ll download anything as long as it comes up on Google!
> but these charts are inaccurate because most people who do online virus scans are computer illiterate
Amen! and a slap on the wrist to Ernesto for this article. The title is very misleading. It should be “uTorrent is more popular amongst clueless noobs” What technically-literate people use is another matter.
So what. I’m on Linux and I use rTorrent. Ha! What’s that supposed to mean now?
I don’t even *have* a registry, let alon SpyWare…
How about the technically-literate people enlighten us all then?
[quote]So what. I’m on Linux and I use rTorrent. Ha! What’s that supposed to mean now?[/quote]
I just remembered about rTorrent… It’s probably more lightweight then uTorrent.
uTorrent is so heavy on resources, you should all use rTorrent now :D
It’s a pretty good client, actually - just a little annoying trying to remember how to do everything with the keyboard.
Still.. wtf are people thinking allowing a site to scan their pc’s for virus’s and spyware?
Bloody hell.. no wonder people get caught sharing content.
the one to blame is sun for the abomination called java. java couldv been the ms killer, but nooooo.. sun screwed it up BIG time.
for azureus blame the java programmers for programming in java lol. too bad they are not a coding wiz like ludde.
Well i don’t think i am speaking for myself but azureus was the shit back in the day with azureus 2, but things went down hill when they merged with vuze and now only azureus vuze client is only available for download. I do not like the azureus vuse client at all so i went to utorrent, which is pritty much exactly the same as azureus.
I think that is a major reason why azureus isn’t as popular.
Azureus used to rock hard. I mean, it was the finest, most stable, most informative BT client out. By far.
Then it got slathered in all this annoying Vuze crap. It’s turned into a complete disaster. Usin Vuze is like trying to watch tv with my fat annoying mother in law. There is simply nothing good about Vuze.
Now I use btdownload and uTorrent. Good riddance Vuze.
I don’t want to sound mean… I really liked this website and check it fairly often. But some of the news here have no real essence other than to fill in spaces. I’d rather see no news than some boring ones.
I installed utorrent and uninstalled Azureus. Then when i used utorrent, I started to get errors on my Harddrive. Then I lost all my movies and Tv shows. So In my opinion, Utorrent sucks ass. Azureus never gave me a problem
uTorrent pwns all, end of story.
For all those complaining about not having a lightweight Linux client (rTorrent excluded due to no gui), check out Deluge. http://deluge-torrent.org/
Very fast, low footprint and supports the most desired features via optionally loadable plugins.
If you _are_ using uTorrent, remember that any build after 474 (that’s v1.6, folks) is owned by bittorrent.com (friends of the MPAA) _and_ is closed-source…
(hint-hint…)
kthxbi
P.S. Azureus blows dead goats these days - & any of you twats that say uTorrent is for nubs only, I’ve been using computers of one form or another since 1979 & am currently a CISCO contractor & I binned Az for uT yonks ago.
uTorrent (pre-474) is lightweight, friendly, & does EXACTLY what it says on the tin - fuck your JAVAbloat bells-n-whistles.
Have a nice day now, y’hear…?
=]
uTorrent is the best, nice and lightweight unlike Azureus which uses freakin java and locks up my XP and Vista systems…yeah ok thanks azureus…GO UTORRENT!
[quote comment="240948"]P.S. Azureus blows dead goats these days - & any of you twats that say uTorrent is for nubs only, I’ve been using computers of one form or another since 1979 & am currently a CISCO contractor & I binned Az for uT yonks ago.
uTorrent (pre-474) is lightweight, friendly, & does EXACTLY what it says on the tin - fuck your JAVAbloat bells-n-whistles.
Have a nice day now, y’hear…?
=][/quote]
I hope you realize that uTorrent is a stripped down version of Azureus. just FYI. I agree on the resource hungry part, though. but with 2-4GB Ram becoming so norm, a software consuming 70MB in the BG hard affects gaming or daily stuff like browsing and playing media files.
uTorrent is proprietary, so I won’t even touch it. Also, I’m running Linux and *BSD, so it isn’t natively available to me.
I’ll stick with Azureus and rTorrent.
Good. This will filter out the newbies that complain about Azureus. Hopefully this is a wake up call. I’ll stick to 2.5 for now.
> uTorrent is proprietary, so I won’t even touch it
righto. uTorrent is just another spyware ap fooling everone.
What sort of people do online “virus scans” anyways?
As for Az using up too much memory…that’s just a matter of opinion because it depends on your computer. Considering all the extra things you can do with Az it’s safe to say that the extra use of memory is well worth it.
Anyone know where I can download uTorrent build 474 v.1.6?
Some of us like to cruise in a plush, warm, accessory laden motorhome with lots of toys. We really don’t care about how fast we are cruising or how much gas we are burning.
Some of us like to zip along on a basic scooter with little in the way of creature comforts. We may be a bit chilly at times, but we can get there fast and not use much energy.
Azureus is for the motorhome types, uTorrent is for the scooter enthusiats. There is plenty of room for both on the highway, so whatever turns your crank.
Mind you, I am anxiously awaiting to see what is included in the shiny, new 2008 models. I’ll cautionsly dump either vehicle in a microsecond if someone builds a flashy hybrid (no loyalty whatsoever).
[quote comment="241049"]Anyone know where I can download uTorrent build 474 v.1.6?[/quote]
Check their site?
One of the reason for uTorrents success is of course the low memory usage. I rather have a app that only does the basic things which I need than a app that does multiple things but at the cost of memory.
@ #14 - Don’t you love it when noob wannabe’s talk out their ass? :P
“Find a definitive benchmark of what people are using on their pc’s and it may hold some water. Using one website’s statistics on what people have installed doesn’t really count for anything.”
Here’s a definitive benchmark for you. Just look at the peer list of any torrent you have running. Way more uTorrent clients listed than Azureus. In fact it appears to be about the same proportion as the percentages mentioned in the post. And I’d say that’s about as definitive as you can get because this is showing actual usage, not just installs.
“One thing that lets utorrent down significantly is its complete lack of peer banning.”
What a tard. uTorrent not only DOES have peer banning, but it does it quicker and more efficiently. It’s one thing to be an ignorant, uninformed fanboi. It’s quite another to put that ignorance on display for all to see by talking crap on a subject you are painfully clueless on.
“So I went and grabbed Azureus…..”
I have my doubts that you would be capable of grabbing your Azureus with both hands. :P
@ #47 - You can get all past builds of uTorrent as well as older versions of just about anything at this cool little site.
http://www.oldversion.com/
You can turn off the Vuze layer to get the old 2.5 look with the 3.0 features. In my experience it downloads much faster than uTorrent, and I like that it’s open source. Resource usage isn’t even that bad, it’s at 80,000K right now for me; firefox uses much more.
And #50, Azureus’s PEX and DHT is incompatible with uTorrent’s, so you will see more of whichever client you are using at the moment.
Long Live rTorrent!!!
[quote comment="240768"]uTorrent beats Azureus hands down - the only reason I’m using Azureus is because there isn’t a Linux version of uTorrent. If there was, I would switch right away. But KTorrent has been getting better, so I might have to switch to that. There’s no doubt that Azureus/Java hogs RAM and CPU cycles,
something that must be pretty detrimental to its popularity.[/quote]
uTorrent runs great under linux. Install wine, create an account for it with, utorrent the only app starting, and run it as an Xvnc session. Put in the web interface and you’re good to go.
[quote comment="240745"]That sucks, I love Azureus.[/quote]
Same :(
azureus still remains the best.
Azureus has it’s pluses with nice pluggings and such. But for us who want to be able to play a game, browser the web, or pretty much do anything while downloading a torrent, should use the “low consuming” uTorrent.
[quote comment="240783"]Uh, James, you don’t need to “down the whole thing” with bittorrent either. Seasons are usually just file folders of single episodes and any good bittorrent client will let you select which of the files/episodes you want to download. That said I think uTorrent is the best, and I’ll miss it when I move to the mac.[/quote]
No you wont. Check out Transmission. compact,Fast and stable
I’ve used both Azureus and uTorrent and I have to say uTorrent is just simpler and easier to use.
I tried to like Azureus because it offer many features that uTorrent lacks. However, I found myself not needing them and probably only a few user actually do. If they should offer a light weight version of Azureus, without all the bells and whistles perhaps then it would win over more people. But for now, it really is a resource hog especially because it uses java as its code. I’ve had way too many times when my CPU got up to 100% just running Azureus with huge memory leaks. A bitorrent program shouldn’t need to use all 3.0 GHZ of my P4 and +500 MB of ram just to run.
Perhaps they fixed some of those issues in the past several months, but I think I’ll stick with uTorrent (version 1.6 build 474) just because its so stable, simple, and easy to use.
[quote comment="240822"]Azureus made any computer it ran on slow, like norton did when it would scan. If I set uTorrent right, I can surf teh internets and shoop pics and not notice a slow down on performance.[/quote]
Wow! What a bunch of tards!
Make them go away!!
[quote]uTorrent is so heavy on resources, you should all use rTorrent now :D[/quote]
Oh God More Tards!
the irony uTorrent is owned by Bittorrent Inc owned by MPAA is not missed
I liked Azureus, but it was just too much of a system hog.
Dunno how much it changed, but the last time I used it, it still had more features than uTorrent has now.
Using uTorrent now, because of size and speed however, it still has some annoying issues. Like the tendency to slow down (or completely block) internet browsing, while downloading files with a big amount of peers (even if rate is limited).
Azureus running 4 torrents,
downspeed=3-4MiBit/s upspeed=2-4MiBit/s
Working set = 55K
Virtual Mem = 70K (private bytes)
Virtual Size = 290K
CPU-usage = 1-3%
This is acceptable in my book, I don’t consider it excessive resource-usage for a Java-app ..
I’m sorry but there’s no discussion : Azureus is the most advanced torrent-client out there, no other clients come close in features ..
These facts are as useless as a straw pole vote! How many people use these spyware checkers anyway? I don’t. This is useless dribble.
Best part is, utorrent can run on linux using Wine!
rtorrent (http://libtorrent.rakshasa.no/) the best out there. if your a nix user that is.
[quote comment="241085"]You can turn off the Vuze layer to get the old 2.5 look with the 3.0 features.[/quote]
Uhhh NO, thats NOT good enough dude….’the so-called Vuse content layer’ (creme de la crap) WILL NOT exist on my computer….period. I don’t trust it, I don’t like it…….period. It seems to be akin to spyware and adware. It $ucks BIGtime.
uTorrent is just fine to use if you have a vpn tunnel or a modified version of peerguardian because they both block bittorrent inc in all ways/shapes/forms/fashions (if you set it up right) ;)
azureus 2.5.0.4 <3
Resistance is futile. You will be assimilated.
I am currentoy using uTorrent, but I know that all the power/experienced users will switch to Azureus…if only it didn’t hog my system so much!!!
I also use uTorrent, even though it isn’t available native on my platform (Linux 64bit). It is the greatest bittorrent client for my use.
I’ve done speed testing with uTorrent and Azureus. Azureus downloads torrents faster, hands down. I have no idea why this is the case. But despite the fact that uTorrent *is* nicer to use, I have now removed it from my system because it’s just doesn’t get me the content as quickly as Azureus. I was very surprised to see that no-one else commented on that here.
[quote comment="240785"] Being as I deal with people using bittorent on a daily basis in a support role, I deal with far more people having problems with utorrent than Azureus, perhaps Azureus users are slightly more adept than utorrent with the main problems stemming from Azureus being lack of knowledge on the users part. Most of which cant even figure out how to set it up. For those people then the simpler utorrent is more at their level of understanding. One thing that lets utorrent down significantly is its complete lack of peer banning. As an example, U didnt have a torrent client installed at one point and rather than have to set up Az for a single download I opted for utorrent. An hour later and 60 hash fails I still had sod all. So I went and grabbed Azureus, set it up and completed the download in 8 minutes, with 3 hash fails and 6 peers banned for sending bad data. For that reason alone utorrent will never be as good as Azureus.[/quote]
Like you I do a lot fo torrent support. You’ll find me right now (amongst other places) in the Utorrent support channel AND the Az channel. I personally have been following and supporting µTorrent for 2 years - I was the one that got Ludde and bluetack talking about when they added utorrent.com to the blocklist, over that retspan misunderstanding.
I am also quite well known to the Az des - myself and gouss has endless talks about Az, and especially about az’s features and system usage. I even have a printout somewhere of him telling me “Az really needs 2ghz processor and 512Mb of ram - back in 2004. That is min specs for games NOW, 3 1/2 years on, was WAY above reccomended specs then. Bittorenting is nothing complex, it’s a simple data transfer protocol, with error checking. There is no way, NO WAY, it should take so much on system resources.
By the way, you kind of shoot your credability to hell when you talk about Ut’s lack of peer banning. It most certainly does ban on hash errors, and has done for a long time. In fact, 18months ago, when, I think it was Mediasentry, were attacking torrents with clients sending out garbage, it was Az that was choking, not the others.
The only sort of peer banning µt doesn’t have, is manual, and the reason is simple, and understandable - ‘know-it-alls’ that ban, because they think they know better. As for smarter users - I doubt it; else there wouldn’t be comments like this (from earlier on today) “what does forced seeding mean? how is it different from regular seeding? in your opinion is it better to force seeding, or to regular seeding. (I want to help my ratio go up)” Theres a hundred more I’ve collected just this week, of questions answered in FAQs.
2600 - in short, attitudes like yours are what has made the software industry the cesspool it generally is now.
I bet these numbers include warcraft’s torrent downloader as part of Bittorrent, Inc’s numbers.
Ktorrent, transmission FTW
bitlord my lord
I ditched Azureus once it stopped being a clean Bittorrent client and became a huge bloated mess plastered with videos and various other junk.
Its obvious that Azureus was cut-n-pasted into the Vuze system without much thought for integration. What were they thinking?
uTorrent is a far better designed and laid out piece of software … but I didn’t know about it’s change of hands. v1.6 here I come …
Oh the horribly cumbersome Java Virtual Machine!
I’m happy that uTorrent is taking over.
Now if they’d only support Linux systems :)
Too bad a non-free client is replacing a free one. I agree Azureus is one of the most insanely resource-hogging applications I’ve ever seen and I loathe Java, but at least it’s free software, and I have heard it can be run on free VMs as well. µTorrent is not only non-free for no good reason, but it also requires a non-free and quite worthless operating system to run (I know it works under WINE — although not very well). And its developer seems like a shady person with a “shut up, I’m the developer here” attitude.
It’s not free(as in beer or freedom)??
I never knew that(well, I haven’t really checked into it, because I’m not using the Win32 platform)…
But since 99,99% of uTorrent users are Windozers(the 0.01% is for WINErs), then I don’t have a hard time understanding the not-caring attitude towards the license of uT.
sad…
And Azureus with sun java_vm or without sun java_vm, it’s still java, and it’s still bloated with features not used by most peers.
[quote comment="240768"]uTorrent beats Azureus hands down - the only reason I’m using Azureus is because there isn’t a Linux version of uTorrent. If there was, I would switch right away. But KTorrent has been getting better, so I might have to switch to that. There’s no doubt that Azureus/Java hogs RAM and CPU cycles,
something that must be pretty detrimental to its popularity.[/quote]
i use utorrent on linux: wine is the answer.
[quote comment="241432"]I’ve done speed testing with uTorrent and Azureus. Azureus downloads torrents faster, hands down. I have no idea why this is the case. But despite the fact that uTorrent *is* nicer to use, I have now removed it from my system because it’s just doesn’t get me the content as quickly as Azureus. I was very surprised to see that no-one else commented on that here.[/quote]
weird, because to me it’s the other way around. utorrent gets the content much faster than azureus. and i’ve made comparisons 2-3 times.
[quote comment="241480"]You’ll find me right now (amongst other places) in the Utorrent support channel AND the Az channel.[/quote]
Under what name?
[quote]By the way, you kind of shoot your credability to hell when you talk about Ut’s lack of peer banning. It most certainly does ban on hash errors, and has done for a long time. In fact, 18months ago, when, I think it was Mediasentry, were attacking torrents with clients sending out garbage, it was Az that was choking, not the others.[/quote]
Umm… not necessarily. The recent MediaSentry e-mail leak pointed out that they were focused on damaging uTorrent rather than Azureus.
And Azureus’s hash banning system is better than uTorrent’s - check the changelog for uTorrent’s 1.8 alpha builds.
I used to use Azureus, but now I use uTorrent. As much as I love Azureus, it eats up too much resources. uTorrent does almost everything that Azureus does minus the resource eating. Azureus is a great program, but in my opinion, uTorrent is slightly better.
[quote comment="241049"]Anyone know where I can download uTorrent build 474 v.1.6?[/quote]
Google ‘oldversion’
HTH =]
[quote comment="240876"]> but these charts are inaccurate because most people who do online virus scans are computer illiterate
Amen! and a slap on the wrist to Ernesto for this article. The title is very misleading. It should be “uTorrent is more popular amongst clueless noobs” What technically-literate people use is another matter.[/quote]
But they are a much smaller sample size of the total population, and therefore statistically much less relevant. :)
[quote comment="241816"][quote comment="241049"]Anyone know where I can download uTorrent build 474 v.1.6?[/quote]
Google ‘oldversion’
HTH =][/quote]
Or just read #53 like you should have.
one thing remains truthful.
bitcomit and bitlord rly do suck some rhino’s but.
Dunno.
Azureus seems to run nicely enough on my *nix box, provides an effective and functional web UI (handy, since we use a shared install on my LAN), the RPC support makes it possible to check torrent status from my Mac’s Dashboard, and the RSS plugin support allows me to watch the TV shows I want with effortless time shifting (I work odd hours).
I neglect to see the downside.
Well, I haven’t tried uTorrent, but Azureus would only get about 40kBs max; usually more like 20-25 kBs.
Just switched over to bitComet, and wow! I’m getting ~170 kBs.
Limewire can get about 400 kBs, but only when downing multiple files; probably 130 kBs max / file.
I do know that the school here throttles/brutally throttles all p2p traffic whenever they can get away with it.
I also know that we “technically” (speedtest) have
I don’t know if the reason bitComet is so much faster than Azureus is because ‘Comet is a bit of a “bully” whereas normal clients/Azureus are , well, downright oppressive about maintaining a fair ratio;
or if perhaps ‘Comet packets are less detectable/easy to filter for whatever equipment and software this school’s IT dept uses;
or something else.
But hot dang, imagine whatever your current download speed is, suddenly getting multiplied by about 8, just because you switched clients; weee-haaah!!!
PS - Thanks to school, I can’t believe anyone in the world, let alone North America, can download at rates over 500 kB/s :(
Well, I haven’t tried uTorrent, but Azureus would only get about 40kBs max; usually more like 20-25 kBs.
Just switched over to bitComet, and wow! I’m getting ~170 kBs.
Limewire can get about 400 kBs, but only when downing multiple files; probably 130 kBs max / file.
I do know that the school here throttles/brutally throttles all p2p traffic whenever they can get away with it.
I also know that we “technically” (speedtest) have 3,700 kb/s down and 57 kb/s up.
I don’t know if the reason bitComet is so much faster than Azureus is because ‘Comet is a bit of a “bully” whereas normal clients/Azureus are , well, downright oppressive about maintaining a fair ratio;
or if perhaps ‘Comet packets are less detectable/easy to filter for whatever equipment and software this school’s IT dept uses;
or something else.
But hot dang, imagine whatever your current download speed is, suddenly getting multiplied by about 8, just because you switched clients; weee-haaah!!!
PS - Thanks to school, I can’t believe anyone in the world, let alone North America, can download at rates over 500 kB/s :(
Personally, I like a client with as much power (hard customizability, as opposed to “skins”:) as possible.
That goes in Azureus’ favor.
Also, if my client were hogging the system (+35% CPU, +35% RAM), I would ditch it for a better one. But Azureus uses ~2% CPU and ~5% RAM on a 3+ year old laptop; I’d say that’s within reason; again,
That goes in Azureus’ favor.
But Azureus is now owned by whoever does Vuze; and vuze doesn’t look good:
“It will also sell content protected by digital rights management. The company claims to have “distribution deals with 12 television, film and media companies”. On (date), the BBC announced that hundreds of episodes of its programs will be made available through Vuze…However, the Vuze-platform is not GPL-licensed and you can not install Azureus using the latest installer from the Azureus SourceForge page without first accepting the Vuze-license .”
Wikipedia, on Vuze
Not pretty; looks like, however “bloated” [not in my experience] it may be, azureus has fallen to major corporate interests.
NOT in Azureus’ favor.
At the same time, uTorrent is owned by BitTorrent Incorporated, which has also fallen to major corporate interests.[and is not under the GPL].
My conclusion, switch to open-source clients! Check out BitComet; they may have broken some formalities, but from what I’ve heard, they’re a pretty good one.
[quote comment="241861"][quote comment="241816"][quote comment="241049"]Anyone know where I can download uTorrent build 474 v.1.6?[/quote]
Google ‘oldversion’
HTH =][/quote]
Or just read #53 like you should have.[/quote]
Or just blow me, bitch…
“Azureus with huge memory leaks. A bitorrent program shouldn’t need to use all 3.0 GHZ of my P4 and +500 MB of ram just to run.”
I don’t think it’s possible for Azureus to have true ‘memory leaks’ because of Java’s garbage collection. Any datatypes without a reference will be removed from memory automatically.
Personally, I use Azureus. I have more faith in open source, and I program in java regularly, so I can look at the source code and see exactly what Azureus is doing. I can’t do that with uTorrent.
[quote comment="241990"]But Azureus is now owned by whoever does Vuze[/quote]
That would be the same bunch of developers who wrote Azureus in the first place.
[quote comment="241990"]azureus has fallen to major corporate interests.
At the same time, uTorrent is owned by BitTorrent Incorporated, which has also fallen to major corporate interests.[/quote]
So… what? How does this affect either client? Just because there’s a “coro
[quote comment="241990"]My conclusion, switch to open-source clients![/quote]
And what do you recommend?
[quote comment="241990"]Check out BitComet[/quote]
A closed source client.
I want linux version! Anyway I’m quite happy with Deluge which is nice uTorrent look-a-like.
Hmm. Not sure what happened to my last comment. I’ll try again.
Just because there’s a corporation involved, it doesn’t make the software bad. Why does it matter who owns it?
The “Vuze” side of things is being worked on more, but there are still changes going on the core and in the original interface. And UT seems just the same as it always has. So I can’t say I really see what the problem is.
[quote comment="241480"][quote comment="240785"]By the way, you kind of shoot your credability to hell when you talk about Ut’s lack of peer banning. It most certainly does ban on hash errors, and has done for a long time.[/quote]
In my opinion 60is hash fails on a torrent under 100mb with relitively few peers that didnt finish in over an hour of downloading time, shows that there either is no peer banning or that it doesnt work for shit. Especialy when Azureus managed to ban the offending peers and the exact same torrent with the same peers finished in under 10 minutes. I’ll believe what I see with my own eyes thanks.
As for Vuze, welcome to the future of bittorrent. 2p2 is the new content delivery system of choice and Vuze is the benchmark that will be used when the utorrent devs pull their finger out and start offering premium content via their own client. Why should it matter to thieves that you can get free or pay to own media via you’re bittorrent client, or any other mediam for that matter. Has downloading warez screwed your head up that bad that you simply refuse to pay for anything anymore? Still, no one is forcing anyone to buy anything. You dont want it, dont buy it. But on the same hand, dont fkin complain because the bittorrent protocol is actualy starting to be used in the manner that it was designed for. If you dont like it, piss off back to gnutella.
[quote comment="240817"]
It’s multi-platform and it’s open source.
I don’t use the piece of filth that is Windows so I don’t use uTorrent. I’d also rather the source code be known to the world.
[/quote]
You know you can be open source and multiplatform in C++ ?
If they wrote azureus in wxWidgets instead of the shit that’s Java, I would be using it instead of uTorrent.
C++ wins big time.
[quote comment="241990"]Personally, I like a client with as much power (hard customizability, as opposed to “skins”:) as possible.
That goes in Azureus’ favor.[/quote] so, a client you can play with, rather than one coded to do the job properly quickly and efficiently. Shows why no matter how fast copmuters get, tasks still take as long as old versions on old computers.
[quote]Also, if my client were hogging the system (+35% CPU, +35% RAM), I would ditch it for a better one. But Azureus uses ~2% CPU and ~5% RAM on a 3+ year old laptop; I’d say that’s within reason; again,
That goes in Azureus’ favor.[/quote] Psst, you might want to check the resources used by the actual program, rather than just the caller program.
As it says in my bio, I did attempt to try and benchmark torrent clients a few years ago. On hash checking, az took twice as long as the python clients, and they took twice as long as the C++ ones. What took Bitcomet 3 1/2mins, took az a little over 13. mainline, tornado, abc all took around 6 mins.
I might give it another try, and see how it goes now.
I think there are several other issues to be aware of here, which the article hinted to and I will spell out.
Any self respecting pirate is going to be afraid to use utorrent for the plain fact that it is closed source and affiliated with or owned by the MAFIAA.
Any self respecting pirate is NOT going to agree to an online spyware scan.
This equates to utorrent users are mainly newbies.
Azureus installed on a three year old AMD Sempron running full blast is currently using <5% CPU and <200MB RAM. That is NOT A RESOURCE HOG!!! Where these people come up with it being a resource hog is totally beyond me. Azureus has cutting edge configurations that should be embraced by all torrenters. VUZE interface sucks.
[quote comment="242239"]
As for Vuze, welcome to the future of bittorrent. 2p2 is the new content delivery system of choice and Vuze is the benchmark that will be used when the utorrent devs pull their finger out and start offering premium content via their own client. Why should it matter to thieves that you can get free or pay to own media via you’re bittorrent client, or any other mediam for that matter. Has downloading warez screwed your head up that bad that you simply refuse to pay for anything anymore? Still, no one is forcing anyone to buy anything. You dont want it, dont buy it. But on the same hand, dont fkin complain because the bittorrent protocol is actualy starting to be used in the manner that it was designed for. If you dont like it, piss off back to gnutella.[/quote]
Man, you’re a full-of-shit, clueless, Vuze-slurping twat.
Don’t tell me: the internet was originally designed to sell banner-ad space too…
ZOMFG!!1 IT’S TRUE I TELLS YA!!2
How nice of PC Pitstop to gather all of this data.
As other posters have mentioned, those who are clued up would use other anti-virus scanners.
Please take heed!
[quote comment="242284"][quote comment="240817"]
It’s multi-platform and it’s open source.
I don’t use the piece of filth that is Windows so I don’t use uTorrent. I’d also rather the source code be known to the world.
[/quote]
You know you can be open source and multiplatform in C++?[/quote]
He didn’t say it was impossible - he just said that uTorrent wasn’t either of those things (which it isn’t).
If it was as straightforward to code a multiplatform application in C++, then you’d probably see uTorrent for the Mac and Linux. But we don’t (yet).
[quote comment="242284"]If they wrote azureus in wxWidgets instead of the shit that’s Java[/quote]
The GUI is written using the Swing libraries, so it allows the application to look like other programs running on the OS. So what difference does it make that it uses that and not wxWidgets?
[quote comment="242304"]On hash checking, az took twice as long as the python clients[/quote]
Hash checking was improved a while back.
I use Azureus (running under OSX), and while it is certainly a resource hog, there’s no denying it’s an outstanding program. When it comes down to it, Torrent performance is what matters (to me), and it’s in that area that Azureus beats out all of its competitors. I don’t have an IT networking background, but I took the time to read over the Azureus wiki and figure out what everything does, and I get much faster speeds as a result of it.
My only gripes are Vuze, and the fact that Azureus is coded in Java. I understand why they used Java, but it’d be nice if the team had the manpower to rewrite it in Cocoa.
fuck utorrent, it’s proprietary and u never know what they gonna put into it,
uTorrent 1.7 (218 KB)
uTorrent 1.6 (574 KB)
uTorrent 1.5 (154 KB)
what did they put into the 1.6 that made it almost 400% increase in size from previous version?
if you use utorrent, use pre v1.6, i prefer old versions of bitcomet or the latest azureus.
it’s funny how people complain about the “high” ram usage of azureus, it’s there to be used you geniuses, otherwise it sits there doing nothing, being wasted,
azureus is to fancy.
transmission all the way!!!
[quote comment="242400"]
[...]it’s funny how people complain about the “high” ram usage of azureus, it’s there to be used you geniuses, otherwise it sits there doing nothing, being wasted,[/quote]
Ever hear of multitasking, braniac?
(Christ on a bike…!)
[quote comment="242394"]I use Azureus (running under OSX), and while it is certainly a resource hog, there’s no denying it’s an outstanding program. When it comes down to it, Torrent performance is what matters (to me), and it’s in that area that Azureus beats out all of its competitors.[/quote]
You’re running OS X? How the hell do you come to the absurd/mistaken conclusion that “it’s in that area that Azureus beats out all of its competitors.” when you can’t even execute the majority of them?
Talk fucking sense, son. (& get a _real_ computer - not that toy you laughingly call one.)
kthxbi
First, in response to the Azureus / Vuze controversy - good idea, however the problem here is that it would appear to be a blatant violation of the GPL.
Now, on to the actual question at hand - the distribution of torrent clients by popularity. The method used here to gauge popularity is hilariously inaccurate - in fact, there is really no truly accurate way to measure this. The *most* accurate method, however, would obviously be to gather client versions from people connecting to popular trackers - such as the TPB trackers, Sumotracker, Slad’s trackers etc. I would be interested in actually getting numbers like this.. I could talk to Slad, see if he could get something like that done on his trackers (they are used by EZTV) :)
[quote comment="242400"]
uTorrent 1.7 (218 KB)
uTorrent 1.6 (574 KB)
uTorrent 1.5 (154 KB)
what did they put into the 1.6 that made it almost 400% increase in size from previous version?
[/quote]
I think they added on the html service capability, or they bundled in a dll file. It’s all fuzzy now, but I am sure it is in the changelog somewhere.
[quote comment="242453"] I would be interested in actually getting numbers like this.. I could talk to Slad, see if he could get something like that done on his trackers (they are used by EZTV) :)[/quote]
Next it will be IPs. Thanks, but no thanks.
i just realized that bitcomet is closed source too, but hell,i think some Chinese dudes code it so i’m not too concerned about it being closed source.
yeah i know about multitasking genius, how u gonna multitask on your 128mb of ram? why don’t you upgrade your piece of shit computer, you can get 2gigs of ddr2 for under $40 FFS.
[quote comment="242453"]
Now, on to the actual question at hand - the distribution of torrent clients by popularity. The method used here to gauge popularity is hilariously inaccurate - in fact, there is really no truly accurate way to measure this. The *most* accurate method, however, would obviously be to gather client versions from people connecting to popular trackers - such as the TPB trackers, Sumotracker, Slad’s trackers etc. I would be interested in actually getting numbers like this.. I could talk to Slad, see if he could get something like that done on his trackers (they are used by EZTV) :)[/quote]
Alternatively, each one of us (TINU) could upload the stats reported by our (TINO) respective client. This data could be collated & analyzed by the bean-counters anongst us (TINU) with conclusions drawn - & ultimately, posted for debate/discussion.
Personally speaking, by far the most utilised client I see on _my_ peer-list - irrespective of category of data (i.e. Game, App., Movie) is…
wait for it…
uTorrent (HUZZAH!),
…closely followed by that vile, non-compliant monstrosity, Bitcomet (YECCCH!). Used, AFAIK, exclusively by hit’n'runners, ratio-cheats & other varieties of ‘Net-Scum’.
[quote comment="242322"][quote comment="242239"]
As for Vuze, welcome to the future of bittorrent. 2p2 is the new content delivery system of choice and Vuze is the benchmark that will be used when the utorrent devs pull their finger out and start offering premium content via their own client. Why should it matter to thieves that you can get free or pay to own media via you’re bittorrent client, or any other mediam for that matter. Has downloading warez screwed your head up that bad that you simply refuse to pay for anything anymore? Still, no one is forcing anyone to buy anything. You dont want it, dont buy it. But on the same hand, dont fkin complain because the bittorrent protocol is actualy starting to be used in the manner that it was designed for. If you dont like it, piss off back to gnutella.[/quote]
Man, you’re a full-of-shit, clueless, Vuze-slurping twat.
Don’t tell me: the internet was originally designed to sell banner-ad space too…
ZOMFG!!1 IT’S TRUE I TELLS YA!!2[/quote]
You’re an idiot, that much is obvious. Anyone with the slightest knowlege of bitorrent knows that its primary function was to offload the load placed on central servers by distributing the bandwidth amongst peers. It was not designed for you and your friends to share you’re collection of pirated gay porn.
I can’t really argue with the conclusion that uTorrent has taken over from Azureus (It did for me), I will question the importance of this data. It’s based on a population that runs computer scans at the ‘Pc PitStop’ but who does that? I know I’m not about to submit myself, my computer and my data to an ‘investigation’ by some unknown entity, and I imagine most torrent-freak readers wouldn’t either. So, is the sample population representative of a less security conscience group that overlaps the ignorance of the main-stream and the generally more internet-savvy bit-torrenter? If so, what does it really mean here, that less savvy users have moved to uTorrent (saying nothing about others)?
[quote comment="242536"][quote comment="242322"][quote comment="242239"]
As for Vuze, welcome to the future of bittorrent. 2p2 is the new content delivery system of choice and Vuze is the benchmark that will be used when the utorrent devs pull their finger out and start offering premium content via their own client. Why should it matter to thieves that you can get free or pay to own media via you’re bittorrent client, or any other mediam for that matter. Has downloading warez screwed your head up that bad that you simply refuse to pay for anything anymore? Still, no one is forcing anyone to buy anything. You dont want it, dont buy it. But on the same hand, dont fkin complain because the bittorrent protocol is actualy starting to be used in the manner that it was designed for. If you dont like it, piss off back to gnutella.[/quote]
Man, you’re a full-of-shit, clueless, Vuze-slurping twat.
Don’t tell me: the internet was originally designed to sell banner-ad space too…
ZOMFG!!1 IT’S TRUE I TELLS YA!!2[/quote]
You’re an idiot, that much is obvious. Anyone with the slightest knowlege of bitorrent knows that its primary function was to offload the load placed on central servers by distributing the bandwidth amongst peers. It was not designed for you and your friends to share you’re collection of pirated gay porn.[/quote]
You seem to think that the BitTorrent protocol was designed to make money: “[...] when the utorrent devs pull their finger out and start offering premium content [...]“.
YOU ARE WRONG. End of story.
Go IRC with Ludvig - or better yet, Bram. Ask a few pertinent questions (Hint: MojoNation). You might even garner yourself a clue or two - enjoy! Pretty much _all_ the clients out there are freeware, & pretty much _all_ of them were designed (as was the original) to break up & transmit LARGE ENCRYPTED FILES (Hint: Movies). Bram was discouraged by the then-current crop of P2P clients, which took too long to transmit the large single-file ‘chunks’ as they generally came from one peer at a time. This is where the BT clients enter the story; These soon took up the slack caused by the eventual demise of Napster, Scour, WinMX, et al., with Kazaa, Gnutella, etc. no doubt soon to follow.
Yes, yes, blah, blah, blah - we all know that P2p file-sharing communication protocols CAN be used for transmission of open-source data, or as an internal content-delivery system, but if you think that anything BUT the VAST majority (and I mean the high-90’s % mark) of BT traffic is NOT pirated media, then you are indeed the fuckhead I’ve had you pegged for.
P.S. “you’re” means “you are”, not “your”, you dolt! And why the fuck are you hanging out in pirate-friendly conversations if you’re (<=== see that? That’s the CORRECT usage…) so fucking anti-P2P?
Anyhoo, seeing as you’re so keen, go suck on (your hero) Dan Glickman’s black-worm jism - & come back when you have an inkling of what most of us pirates have known for years:
That P2P technology in all it’s shapes & forms was (& continues to be) designed BY US & FOR US - to circumvent copyright restrictions.
Mkay? MKAY!
HTH
HAND
Etc.
[quote comment="242100"][quote comment="241990"]But Azureus is now owned by whoever does Vuze[/quote]
That would be the same bunch of developers who wrote Azureus in the first place.
[quote comment="241990"]azureus has fallen to major corporate interests.
At the same time, uTorrent is owned by BitTorrent Incorporated, which has also fallen to major corporate interests.[/quote]
So… what? How does this affect either client? Just because there’s a “coro
[quote comment="241990"]My conclusion, switch to open-source clients![/quote]
And what do you recommend?
[quote comment="241990"]Check out BitComet[/quote]
A closed source client.[/quote]
That was a very good deconstruction of my arguments! I’ll respond though.
Azureus is owned by the same people who do Vuze, true. However, it is open source, making it a lot easier for the BT community to keep tabs on what exactly is being done to the client, on a regular basis. This is in contrast to Vuze.
The issue with corporate ownership is that corporations are much more legally responsible for their product (”software”) than coding enthusiasts are. This makes them more restricted by regulations, and more susceptible to abuse of such regulations (by, for example, the mafIAA).
I technically recommend BitComet because I have seen such a huge performance increase (under duress of my school’s routing) over Azureus.
I philosophically recommend open source, because I agree with the philosophy. (I just haven’t had the time/inclination to do a full comparison of open- vs. closed-source clients).
Peace out.
[quote comment="242952"]Azureus is owned by the same people who do Vuze, true. However, it is open source, making it a lot easier for the BT community to keep tabs on what exactly is being done to the client, on a regular basis. This is in contrast to Vuze.[/quote]
All the code which makes up the Vuze client is open source too (it has to be, since it needs to use the Azureus core, which is GPL’d). I can point you to it if you wish.
[quote comment="242952"]The issue with corporate ownership is that corporations are much more legally responsible for their product (”software”) than coding enthusiasts are. This makes them more restricted by regulations, and more susceptible to abuse of such regulations (by, for example, the mafIAA).[/quote]
Perhaps - but by the same token, it also gives them more power to defend themselves from legal action.
[quote comment="242952"]I technically recommend BitComet because I have seen such a huge performance increase (under duress of my school’s routing) over Azureus.[/quote]
Fair enough.
i am using both azureus and utorrent,it is much more easier to configure and use than utorrent and also it has no annoying vuze or something to slowdown the system and net connection
sorry typing mistake i was suposed to say utorrent better than azureus
Peace
[quote comment="242467"][quote comment="242453"] I would be interested in actually getting numbers like this.. I could talk to Slad, see if he could get something like that done on his trackers (they are used by EZTV) :)[/quote]
Next it will be IPs. Thanks, but no thanks.[/quote]
Eh, no. The only difference between this tracking and a regular hit counter is that client tracking increments based on what type of hit is made. Incrementing a counter is WAY different than logging IPs - the latter takes a serious toll on busy trackers, and is also not something that a serious BT tracker would ever engage in. Honestly, by now I’d think you people know us better than that.
rimson wrote:
“The issue with corporate ownership is that corporations are much more legally responsible for their product (”software”) than coding enthusiasts are. This makes them more restricted by regulations, and more susceptible to abuse of such regulations (by, for example, the mafIAA).”
amc1 wrote:
“Perhaps - but by the same token, it also gives them more power to defend themselves from legal action.”
wait - so if the mafIAA were to bring to bear the full brunt of their financial / legal powers, who would be hardest to take down: an open source community, or a mid-size business?
There’s gotta be business cases for this somewhere.
And everybody, just because uTorrent is owned by a company that made major contributions to the existence of Torrents, doesn’t mean they are going to turn their back on that community and screw them over; they’re just kind of a legal interface between users and content owners.
I haven’t had problems running azeurus headlessly using the web interface on a 300MHz celeron with 256MB RAM.
Although java takes a while to load up (since it has to load the jvm) it’s hardly the resource hog people claim it to be.
[quote comment="243855"]wait - so if the mafIAA were to bring to bear the full brunt of their financial / legal powers, who would be hardest to take down: an open source community, or a mid-size business?[/quote]
Well, let’s see. A business which has a lot of investment in it would have a decent chance of defending itself rather than caving in.
And in the case that something would happen - the client is open source and could be carried on by others.
You could take the example of Vuze actively complaining about the actions of Comcast as something which benefits from a company being involved.
[quote comment="244586"]filesharer are not thieves
we’re mini version of robin hood that helps the poor
what’s bad for the rich = illegal
what’s good for the poor= illegal
what’s good for the rich=legal
whats bad for poor=legal
one man’s treasure is another man’s trash
don’t be an idiot, share whatever you like..
if you enjoy being a slave then enjoy buying these useless garbage that cost next to nothing to reproduce.[/quote]
Are you intent on posting duplicates of this to _all_ of the current threads on TF?
(c.f. (& see my original response at) http://torrentfreak.com/torrentspy-loses-case-against-mpaa-071218/ )
Merry Christmas to all - & to all a Happy New Year!
all *nix seeders will pick rtorrent if they like their resources. Has somebody tried to seed hundreds of torrents on router with 32MB RAM ? I dont think “lightweight” utorrent will do
[quote comment="244659"] I dont think [/quote]
Agreed.
good, utorrent is great and azureus sucks, i dont understand why people use it, it is such a hog, and it’s not even a good client
Can I just say, that this stats are way off. Firstly BitLord does not have 1% of installed desktops. No way, look at its alexa (inaccurate but a good place to start). a reach like that does not equal anything near the others. To say that its 5x smaller than utorrent is absured. its 1000s of times smaller.
Furthermore limewire is NOT declining. For a while it had performance issues, but its total search volume has been growing rapidly, yes. even now in late 2007. So I wish people would get their facts straight…
I have been using Azureus for many years and plan to keep using it. It is an excellent client and will probably lead the future now that Bittorrent/utorrent/mpaa moves away from the open protocol.
As for Vuze, who cares? I have never seen it and no one is forcing you to use it. The classic ui is fine thank you. Azureus might be complex for some people, in that case something like Transmission is enough.
Yeah, java uses around 200m of ram (shares with other java apps) and 4% cpu on a Duron 1.3ghz. Firefox is usually the bloat here. You must use java 1.6, not 1.5 for Azureus 3.0.4. And no, just because you see the ui rea