uTorrent Still on Top, BitComet’s Market Share Plummets
Written by Ernesto on August 14, 2009An objective sample of more than 165,000 unique IPs shows that uTorrent remains the client of choice for more than half of all BitTorrent users. Vuze is in second place with its market share growing to 18%. BitComet on the other hand is losing ground as the client’s market share has dropped 38% in two months.
BitTorrent has been the leading file-sharing technology for several years already, and we at TorrentFreak decided that it would be a good idea to track the changes in popularity of the various clients. Every two months we therefore publish an updated overview of the market share of BitTorrent clients.
Today we present our second report based on data from over 165,000 unique users in more than 400 public BitTorrent swarms. The data for this BitTorrent client comparison is collected by a researcher known as ‘xXx’ of the Tribler P2P research team at Delft University of Technology.
The results in the table below show the market share for each individual client. In common with the June report, only 5 clients reached the 1% threshold, the remaining 20 that were encountered are grouped in the ‘other’ category. Some clients were not identified by libTorrent (rakshasa) and those ended up the the unknown ‘category’.
The changes in market share compared to our June report are also included, and these show some interesting trends. First of all, uTorrent kept its dominant lead and even extended its market share to 56.81 percent. BitComet – ranked fourth again – is this month’s loser with a drop of 38 percent, falling from 6.50 to 4.71 percent market share.
On the winning side we see gains for Transmission and Vuze. Transmission’s market share increased to 44 percent and may move up a few spots if it maintains this growth rate. More on this in our October report.
| Ranking | Client | Market Share % | Change % | Platform |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| torrentfreak.com | ||||
| 1 | uTorrent | 56.81% | +1.74% | Windows, Mac |
| 2 | Vuze | 18.13% | +7.60% | Windows, Mac, Linux |
| 3 | BitTorrent Mainline | 11.79% | -1.83% | Windows, Mac, Linux |
| 4 | BitComet | 4.71% | -38.00% | Windows |
| 5 | Unknown | 4.21% | +4.51% | na. |
| 6 | Transmission | 2.95% | +44.07% | Mac, Linux |
| 7 | Other | 1.40% | -126.42% | na. |
Previously: Court Orders Expert Opinion in P2P Leecher Mod Case
Next: Entropia Universe Will Disappear and Come Back With BitTorrent
83 Responses
rtorrent?
BitComet is… awful…
“Transmission’s market share increased to 44 percent and may move…”
Increase /by/ 44 percent.
should be noted that transmission is bundled with fedora. it works, so i haven’t bothered replacing it with ktorrent, which has a better “feel”.
i used to like bitcomet but then i got banned from a torrent site for using it because apparently it dosen’t like to seed much or something so now i use the best client i have ever tried Utorrent.
This fits, I really do see quite a bit of Transmission clients in my peer list.
It’s rtorrent for me though… A simple ncurses based interface, very low on resources. And yet, together with rssdler, provides all the functionality I want and need.
bitcomet is terrible. it won’t be missed.
Vuze is garbage, who do people use it?
I use Bittornado, no one else seems to. it’s insanely simple and does the job, why does no one use it?!
@vuzesucks
“Vuze is garbage, who do people use it?”
You mean “Why?” eh. Maybe people use it because they don’t think it sucks. You should find the guy who convinced you your opinion was worth something and beat him around the head for lying to you.
#10 nailed it!
“vuze” with its hip new name is and overbloated memory chomper. sacrifices efficiency to look pretty. i couldnt believe the instantaneous start up of utorrent when i first got it cause i was used to the azureus load screen for 30 seconds each time i wanted to start a torrent.
it has all the necessary features + a ton of pretty interface crap that i guess does make torrents more appealing to your average lazy retard, but increases the program size and system resource usage. ITS SO SHIT!
I’m not surprised that uTorrent is at the top, it’s just brilliant.
Also, before the tin foil hat brigade get here, uTorrent DOES NOT phone home, this has been tested by thousands of people.
Vuze is a shit. I don’t understand people. Hurrr.
BitComet = big pile of shiet
Glad that java-crap one isn’t on the list. lol
I use a client called MyAnalTorrent..
Bitcomet has the best logo of all the torrent prog’s, but it’s just crapware. Same as Vuze, which I think was called Azereus before, if so it requires Java, which equals GARBAGE.
I am surprised rtorrent is not there. It’s market share is quite large I have found from my searches of swarms.
Public=fail. Glad good sites ban users for using shit programs out of ignorance.
@16
“Glad that java-crap one isn’t on the list. lol”
It is. It’s called Vuze, formerly Azereus. Java filled bloatware that for some reason still has a fanboi or two desperately struggling to hold on to their last shred of dignity in the face of the overwhelming awesomeness that is uTorrent.
But resistance is futile. You WILL be assimilated.
BitComet before v6 (cross-platform and written in Python) has nothing to do with the current client, which is a uTorrent clone. It would seem sensible to give these each different categories.
People are wondering about BitComet… how about BitLord? That hasn’t been updated in nearly 5 years and it’s still fairly common.
@21: Some people like open-source programs. (Yeah, apparently uTorrent isn’t open-source. Most people don’t give much of a shit, but I like open-source programs.) I doubt 18% of the BitTorrent-using population is “a fanboy or two desperately struggling to hold on to their last shred of dignity”.
Anyway, I use Azureus (I refuse to call it Vuze, I never use the “Vuze” portion anyway) on Windows because it downloads quickly.
W00t for Transmission!
\ /| |———/ ——
\ / | | / |
\ / | | / |——
\/ \___/ /____ |____ ______
——— | | /———- | / |
| | | | | / |
|____ | | | |/ |______
| | | | |\ |
——– \___/ \_______| \ ______|
Azureus/Vuze has many more features than uTorrent, and I like the UI more, but the fact that it’s written in Java and is a huge resource hog doesn’t make up for that, in my opinion. I’ll stick with uTorrent.
uTorrent for my Windows machines, but rtorrent for my seedboxes. :)
I use to avoid using Vuze and stuck with Azeaurus 2.5 for a long time. Yeah it leaked memory like all hell but with 6gigs of RAM what the hell. Anyway, tried Utorrent but it would freeze up every now and then right in the middle of a torrent. Couldn’t figure it out. Went back to memory hog Azeaurus because at least the torrent would finish. Now I’m using Vuze with Windows 7 Ultimate 64. Works fine, still has some quirks to iron out but could see it grabbing more market share due to its flexibility and slickness.
Interesting. I use uTorrent for windohz box and Transmission on Linux
Client shouldnt matter.Allmost all of the platform independent clients use either libtorrent or libtorrent(rakahasa).They should be bundled under their respective backend.And not on a per client name basis.Its using the same under laying core.Its just a gui on top of it.
Besides the license and the free software/open source status of Vuze is totally messed up. It used to be the GNU GPL, now they appended an EULA which forbids reverse engineering etc, and the status of Vuze, the desktop client, is unclear. Two contradictory licenses. Nice job!
I am surprised (un-)Reasoned Mind posted. For someone who hates P2P so much, he/she/it sure does love it.
By the way, utorrent is the best. I have never had problems with it and have tried most of the listed torrent programs listed. It is to bad they do not make utorrent for linux.
I am surprised (un-)Reasoned Mind posted. For someone who hates P2P so much, he/she/it sure does love it.
By the way, utorrent is the best. I have never had problems with it and have tried most of the listed torrent programs. It is to bad they do not make utorrent for linux.
This, except “It is too bad uTorrent is not free software.”
If it were, a port to Linux could and probably would be made by someone.
uTorrent is alright for prop. software. I run Deluge because it’s similar enough to uTorrent and is free software.
Bittorrent is the best and always will be
The platform info for uTorrent is a little misleading. It works fine in Linux under WINE, and I think I read somewhere it’s actually (one of) the most popular Linux BT clients.
I’ve tried Deluge, since it’s similar and supports a daemon-style interface, but uTorrent seems to get the best speeds and has far more polish.
@ngabb123: FYI, bittorent is a rebranded utorrent. that is, when they “release” a new version, they take the latest version of utorrent, change the names in menus, and that’s all.
A lot of linux users do use uTorrent in WINE, and uT has full WINE support.
Right, but “Linux version” means a version of uTorrent that runs by itself in Linux, not needing an emulation program like Wine.
I’ve used uTorrent in Wine, and thought it was okay, but again, the non-free-software thing is enough reason for me to use something else.
“First of all, uTorrent kept its dominant lead and even extended its market share to 65.81 percent.”
You mean 56.81.
couldn’t be anything to do with bitcomet being banned from a lot of sites, then? i used it for a long while, (and probably would still be doing so), without any problems and only switched because forced to do so. not saying that it is/was better or worse than any other client, but was used to it.
Why do people use Transmission on Linux when there are better alternatives like Deluge ??
@ceyron
because its interface is more simplistic I think.
Personally I use vuze 4.2.0.5 Linux, and java or not, it has the features and options that I need and use. Not only that, but under Ubuntu it runs very efficiently with the sun java engine.
Oh, and transmission is also bundled with Ubuntu, and is a nice lightweight client.
BitComet… what can I say?
- The worst client ever made?
- Destroy SuperSeed?
- Make you download alot crap?
- Full of Adaware?
Please let the BitComet client die!
same opinion here,Bitcomet sucks!
It is bizare to quote the change as a percentage of last month’s value. Why not just put the difference between last month and this one? It’s easier to understand and less misleading. See:
(hopefully the table will be readable)
Ranking Client Market Share % Change Platform
1 uTorrent 56.81% 1.0% Windows, Mac
2 Vuze 18.13% 1.4% Windows, Mac, Linux
3 BitTorrent Mainline 11.79% -0.2% Windows, Mac, Linux
4 BitComet 4.71% -1.8% Windows
5 Unknown 4.21% 0.2% na.
6 Transmission 2.95% 1.3% Mac, Linux
7 Other 1.40% -1.8% na.
deluge is the best
Piracy is bad, piracy is- Oh screw it, okay we admit, we were the ones who programmed uTorrent. We also invented the BitTorrent protocol.
First off, it’s called “Azureus”, not “Azereus”.
Second, I use Azureus (And I will always call it that, whatever version I’m on) because of the sheer amount of features it has – Also, I’m on Linux, and java isn’t crap on here. I’d still never touch Azureus on Windows.
One of the reasons people still use Transmission is because it has an extremely simple terminal interface. While rtorrent and Deluge do as well, they’re nowhere near as easy to use.
Love Azureus- on the classic interface- will never use it with its default interface, way too bloated.
I’m finding some private trackers are now banning uTorrent 1.8.2 and above. There asking the members to downgrade to 1.7.x. I use version 1.8.2 and I won’t downgrade to make these pricks happy. Hope the new uTorrent 2. makes these Jack@$$e$ happy, once it’s released.
WINE = Wine is not an emulator.
Vuze sucks, period. uTorrent or other clients can do more with less. Infact, I think just about any client can do better than Vuze. Open source or not, once they changed to Vuze it sucked.
@51 Aug 15, 2009 at 18:19 by Vuzesucks:
I think you are confused, Wine is an emulator or also called virtual solution, it emulates the Win API calls.
@49 Aug 15, 2009 at 17:09 by Izkata:
I use linux to and I tell ya, JAVA also sucks in linux.
BitComet is… awful…
http://www.carforall.net
Bitcomet is probably the worst client ever, it seems to only want to share with other bitcomet clients.
It’s so horrible that I used to speed up my downloads (a lot) by simply kicking off all the useless bitcomet peers.
Vuze probrably runs decently in Linux…as I’ve seen alot of Java based applications run decently in Linux…but under Windows it sucks.
I use Transmission because it has been getting alot more featureful without feature creep. I have no problem with it. There are still some more features that are missing before I would be satisfied with it like better labeling, sorting, and more tracker info. Also, minimal view is too minimal. Basically I would like to be able to change the view and layout of info.
I use uTorrent on Windows, I dont use it in Wine because I’m too lazy to install wine, and I figure why use it in Wine when I’m in Linux and already have many suitable clients in Linux.
I havent used rTorrent in while but is ok.
I’ve used bitcomet for years so what’s better about utorrent? None of you properly compared features or gave a good argument to make me want to change client. Bitcomet updates a lot , it’s pretty simple to use apart from saying your listening ports not optimised so I found out about pf config software but don’t know how to port forward… So how does utorrent compare to bitcomet ?
Why did Bitcoment plumment?! Anything I missed?
BitComet sucks. Polluted torrents with those disgusting padding files. I pray hard that BitComet dies off.
Deluge! :)
8 Aug 14, 2009 at 23:58 by vuzesucks
Vuze is garbage, who do people use it?
It is the only open source choice for Windows.
Sites banning BitComet just because it’s a Chinese made program. I will laugh the day all these uTorrent users gets tracked and sued. I don’t understand why someone would use a client that’s known to phone home.
uTorrent runs fine on Wine, too, but I prefer Transmission usually.
uhh….why is bitcomet rubbish? can someone please explain.
I use uTorrent because its the only client in which the Scheduler makes any sense.
AFAIK Azureus has the widest BT implementation and it can’t be faked by BitComet or other clients that can fake… unlike uTorrent which can be faked easily.
This doesn’t mean I don’t use anything else… on private trackes, especially those for HD content which require a seed a quota per month and don’t allow parking, I use Azureus… it let’s me manage seeds properly and it’s more assuring it won’t corrupt uploads, getting blocked (banned) by other peers.
For TV shows, a quick leech, I use uTorent… it loads fast, lets me work on other things without disrupting my system performance, unlike Az.
So I guess it’s a trade of… quality seeding vs resource usage.
@53
Look at the name. Wine.
Wine is not an emulator.
See this.
Why hate on bitcomet? I understand the padding file things it adds to torrents it creates are annoying. But the developers do not recommend it for initial seeding of torrents. To the guy who says he gets faster downloads by kicking bitcomet leachers. It may be true, but only because he probably has a limited amount of open connections. Bitcomet doesn’t cheat. It does however choose to share with several peers at once. Instead of the 3 that defaults in utorrent.
utorrent most def kicks ass =], cant wait till they make utorrent 2 more stable n all, everytime i have a friend that wants ta learn how ta do torrents i tell them utorrent, best thing man has ever invented
I use bittyrant :-)
I love uTorrent, and used it for a long time, but I quite recently fell in love with Transmission. Now, comparing these two clients, is like comparing two statues made of solid gold. No matter how different they are, they are both still incredible. Anyway, that’s just my take on my favorite clients.
BitComet sucks ass! Why the hell did the developers pad the torrent files? For the purpose of keeping torrent files unpadded, please use a respectable client such as uTorrent, Transmission ect..
I guess you didn’t get the data from China, because BitComet is big over there. They push it pretty hard. It allow user start watching the video while its being downloading.
My opinion is that I don’t freaking care about free or not free software. I trust in utorrent so does plenty of people. I’m not a programmer and I like the program as it is now. Not free software, but we don’t have to pay for it so did you lose anything?
rtorrent + rtGui web interface = awesome!
http://rtgui.googlecode.com/
BitSpirit.
Still.
I use Bitspirit it is ok :)
@ceyron: probably because it crashes like hell
BitSpirit still..
http://www.slyck.com/forums/viewtopic.php?f=67&t=48557&p=530159#p530159
Bitcomet updated july 31, 2009 above along with Guide to using bitcomet on slyck
BitComet is very good for me because of the LT seeds principle that I just don’t find anywhere else. I’ve even googled it to take me to a uTorrent page where they say they won’t implement this because they don’t want torrents outlive their original over9000 seeders life, which is crap.
LT seeds usually let me download ever if there are no available seeds, through their “LT seeds”, which is basically leeching unaware ppl that may not even have their torrents on and didn’t set an LT seed limit. Sucks for them, but getting >500 kilobytes on a dead torrent with a dead tracker is just awesome any way you put it.
I ? deluge
Id like a bit more information as well on why bitcomet is bad – when i started using BT clients, it worked the best with my then crappy dsl service, and ive just kept updating it. Now that i have fainally got Cable in my area, i am very much interested in learning the why’s and wherefore’s before changing clients – saying it sucks just doesnt give enough information. Yes, i know that it has a ton of (unused by me) bloat.. er “extra features” that i dont use, but still not a reason to change if i now am able to max out my DL speed on the new ISP.
4 references to this post
Responses are closed
All remaining responses will continue to be archived. Use the TorrentFreak forums if you want to discuss something.