Overview of Torrent Clients

[Midas]

[Moderator note: this has been split from Portable Torrent Client with uTorrent to avoid a thread hijack]

---

Something I found laying around (sorry, I only have it in graphic format):

[joby_toss]

Still happy with my uTorrent v2.2.1.25302.

[webfork]

Something I found laying around

Not really sure what to do with someone that uses the phrases "WinFags", "gay hipsters," and "abortion of a client". Points for colorful descriptors? Also, the vaguely anti-Semitic BitTorrent/uTorrent icon? I guess that comes from the fact that one of the company's owners has a Jewish name and they're trying to make money. Never mind that Mr. Cohen (very common Jewish name) invented the protocol.

Still, there is one important point here I was not aware of: as we host BitComet, I was concerned about some of the criticism there, though not for the FileHippo thing. They quit hosting for reasons other than bad code decisions (see FileHippo page). However, it appears there are very legitimate reasons not to use it (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/BitComet# ... _criticism). Think I'll post that to the entry.

Personally, I found other reasons to not use BitComet: mostly that it was confusing to use and FDM / qBitTorrent worked far better.

[Midas]

As the graphic comes from some *chan.org place, the colorful language and the racial slur isn't at all surprising, and the remaining discourse is more structured and consistent than usual in such places... I also think the top five products are a good sample of wholesome software choices for the end in view.

Regarding BitComet, I fail to read any stringent motive as deterrent for its use in that Wikipedia article; even if it might not be the best torrent client (if nothing else, just for the staggering amount of bad press it has been getting for years) I actually think it is a decent file downloader, especially because it has a native 64 bits version. I just wish it had a more readily portable version.

Lastly, my intention with that posting was more or less a way of gathering the web underground appraisal, as they tend to be the real heavy users of such programs.

P.S.: rtorrent is at http://github.com/rakshasa/rtorrent; rutorrent is at http://code.google.com/p/rutorrent/...

[Userfriendly]

98% of private trackers out there ban BitComet. That's my reason to not use it. As for my client of choice, I've stuck with utorrent since it was first released back like 2005/2006. Almost nearly a decade and had little problems with it besides digging around in the advanced options to turn off some ads. The great thing about utorrent is that its still really tiny so I keep multiple versions of it (v1.7.7, v2.2.1, v3.3.2, v3.4.x) depending on which private trackers prefer.

Most of the top clients are portable so I keep copies of qbittorent, deluge, and halite as backup if I ever decide to switch. Honestly, with the way utorrents recent development is going, its just a hot mess right now. If they keep up with this piss pour attempt at monetizing with ugly ads that you can't disable. I might just have to.

[webfork]

This is very definitely falling into thread hijack territory ... Edit: I gave this it's own thread.

As the graphic comes from some *chan.org place, the colorful language and the racial slur isn't at all surprising, and the remaining discourse is more structured and consistent than usual in such places... I also think the top five products are a good sample of wholesome software choices for the end in view.

Yeah, credit where credit is due: it's a good overview.

I fail to read any stringent motive as deterrent for its use in that Wikipedia article

Really? Reporting back to the devs what you're downloading? I thought that was pretty damning. Do you think I should take the disclaimer off the entry?

[joby_toss]

Don't take the disclaimer off, please!

[Midas]

I fail to read any stringent motive as deterrent for its use in that Wikipedia article

Really? Reporting back to the devs what you're downloading? I thought that was pretty damning. Do you think I should take the disclaimer off the entry?

• I take it you're referring to the following passage of Wikipedia's article:

  Since version 0.86 BitComet includes discussion and stat-tracking features which send information about torrents to the Bitcomet.com servers, including the torrent hash.[11][verification needed]

  That is an allegation I'm really unable to test by myself, so I'll just add a few comments.
  
  If you check it, that passage is entirely based on a forum post made in 2008 that isn't even available anymore. I found a more recent one I deemed similar (at http://www.cometforums.com/topic/127990 ... mous-data/); to me, it looks like something a lot of Internet connected software is doing nowadays, but you might still find that unacceptable. Alongside (and from the same age), there's another reference I find rather more noteworthy: Jared Moya's article "Examining the Myths and Facts Concerning BitComet Behavior" (http://www.zeropaid.com/news/8945/study ... _behavior/).
  
  Incidentally, googling for "does BitComet phone home?" failed to find any significant hits. The issue isn't mentioned in the community managed BitComet FAQs (http://wiki.bitcomet.com/Frequently_Asked_Questions), as I expected it would if it had been brought up before.
  
  Moreover, BitComet is supposedly OSS (although I couldn't find the source repo, it's listed at http://www.fosshub.com/BitComet.html), and I doubt such a breach of confidence would go unnoticed for long. Even the advice passed at Softpedia (http://www.softpedia.com/get/Internet/F ... omet.shtml) is not that uncommon in comparison with adware installers of the ilk.
  
  To me, it all looks like a case of beating the proverbial dead horse. Once upon a time BitComet devs made some poor choices, and they've been paying the price ever since. We may agree that BitComet sure isn't the number one choice for a torrent client, but that doesn't mean it should just be smothered and buried, IMHO.

[SYSTEM]

Moreover, BitComet is supposedly OSS (although I couldn't find the source repo, it's listed at http://www.fosshub.com/BitComet.html)

No, BitComet is closed source. Regardless of its name, FossHub allows freeware:

4. How can I add a software?
First of all, you can "suggest" a freeware or open source software that you want to be added to our list. We do not accept shareware software or those infected with malware. If you're a developer of a certain app you will have to answer us a few questions. There's no guarantee that your program will be added on our list.

Even the advice passed at Softpedia (http://www.softpedia.com/get/Internet/F ... omet.shtml) is not that uncommon in comparison with adware installers of the ilk.

I disagree. This is not normal:

At program startup/shutdown, opens web pages featuring advertising or similar income generating content

[Midas]

Moreover, BitComet is supposedly OSS (although I couldn't find the source repo, it's listed at http://www.fosshub.com/BitComet.html)

• No, BitComet is closed source. Regardless of its name, FossHub allows freeware:
  

  4. How can I add a software?
  First of all, you can "suggest" a freeware or open source software that you want to be added to our list. We do not accept shareware software or those infected with malware. If you're a developer of a certain app you will have to answer us a few questions. There's no guarantee that your program will be added on our list.

• Then BitComet isn't OSS. Thanks for correcting me.

I disagree. This is not normal:

At program startup/shutdown, opens web pages featuring advertising or similar income generating content

• And I agree with you on this one, should it be true -- but in my recent stint with BitComet (v1.35 to 1.37; now replaced with Eagleget) I have never ever witnessed such behavior...

[Enternal]

My favorite versions of uTorrent thus far was the old 2.2.1 and 3.2.3. I like that last version of 3.2.3 because it fixes some of the magnet link issues I had and also all the ads were still easy to disable compared to any of the newer verion 3.3 or 3.4.

I just tried qBitorrent and honestly, I just don't really like it that much since it still does not feel as polish as some of the other offerings. Deluge however was very good. Unfortunately it does not have RSS support yet and I rely on that quite heavily. rTorrent & ruTorrent are very very good and I agree as well. They feel very polished and also very light weight. It also has a lot of options if you like tweaking things. I always have it installed on any linux boxes I have including my VPS. BitComet is kind of annoying and really annoying to load torrents made by it since they still ad all these padding files.

[TP109]

Was researching torrent clients and came upon this. Wow, they really slam the bottom-rated clients unmercifully. Aren't Tixati and BitComent hosted here? Maybe they should be removed now that we've been informed. Kidding aside, I not sure Tixati is THAT bad. I do agree that Deluge and Qbittorrent are very good and switch between them as my default torrent clients.

[bzl333]

good review and sounds like they know the subject.

[smaragdus]

Has anyone ever tested/used baretorrent?

http://postimg.org/image/oxztw539l/
http://postimg.org/image/kq51ne1u1/
http://postimg.org/image/k1w74g349/
http://postimg.org/image/6nj48ewg9/

baretorrent's website is no longer available:
http://www.baretorrent.org/

but it can be seen at Archive.org:
http://web.archive.org/web/201502150101 ... rrent.org/

All baretorrent versions can still be downloaded from Launchpad:
https://launchpad.net/baretorrent/

baretorrent is available at Softpedia as well:
http://www.softpedia.com/get/Internet/F ... rent.shtml

Although not portable (or at least I was unable to make it portable), baretorrent is open-source, multi-platform and has a nice and clean GUI.

By the way I have tested all the torrent clients mentioned above with the exception of rtorrent and I don't agree that Tixati is that bad- I like it better than Vuze (for me Azureus was OK but Vuze is not).

An ancient version of uTorrent (1.7.7) is still my favourite- it is light as a feather and has no problems with thousands of torrents (which is not the case with qBittorrent, which I use for magnet links).

[Andrew Lee]

An ancient version of uTorrent (1.7.7) is still my favourite- it is light as a feather and has no problems with thousands of torrents (which is not the case with qBittorrent, which I use for magnet links).

I'm still using uTorrent V2.0.3 on a daily basis with no problems at all.