UTorrent For Linux Is Coming, Finally | Hacker News Reader

UTorrent For Linux Is Coming, Finally

torrentfreak.com

15 pointsindia27 comments

I feel that they might be a little bit late. Since the Linux community's "Aha!" moment regarding the usability of Desktop apps, Transmission has really taken off.

Even uTorrent's web interface is old news compared to Transmission's web interface.

Although - competition is always good.

There are still private trackers around disallowing transmission (heck - every client but uTorrent), so this might be a valid reason to go with a future utorrent for Linux release.

OTOH, these same trackers are insisting on utorrent for windows anyways and are also disallowing utorrent for the Mac, so my point might be moot

That's odd. Why would a tracker ever want to disallow any torrent client? Are they silly, or paid by BitTorrent Inc?

Because the specific client might put unnecessary load on the tracker, or might falsify upload/download ratio to get site karma. That or the admins like making arbitrary decisions.

Apparently, Transmission used to have issues (may still have them, don't know) and misbehave, leading to its banning from several trackers.

Because it really is worth repeating - the Transmission web interface is pretty awesome.

Still, I think this is good news. There was a time I would have jumped at a uTorrent Linux client - and I know I'd still try it out. Transmission has been pretty good to me though.

In my experience, uTorrent/mac tends to have better performances than Transmission/mac.

Still looks and feels pretty not nice (though it has much improved since the early days), so I'm staying with Transmission for now.

Also, uTorrent is much lighter on disk (uTorrent.app 4MB, Transmission.app 22.3MB) and a bit lighter on memory (private/real/virtual 7.9/24.5/50.9 vs 14.4/25.9/61.1 unloaded in both cases)

These 3254 people voting for the Linux client might encompass the whole of the future user base of the client.

Linux users traditionally have been more involved in a community, so it's entirely conceivable that next to 100% of potential uTorrent Linux users have taken the opportunity to vote whereas only a fraction of a percent of utorrent's total user base voted for the second highest rated feature.

I would probably not use a poll like this to direct the future planning of my product.

I use Linux as my primary OS, I would use uTorrent if it were available for Linux, and I did not vote in this poll.

That said, though, you're probably right. Internet polls are easily manipulated by e.g. social news sites with dedicated target audiences.

In that case, it is already pretty remarkable that 3254 from a group of people who currently can't even use your product want it to be developed for them. If that happened to a product I were making, I sure as hell would begin targeting that platform.

It's 1300 people, not 3254 people. The way the idea bank works is that when you make a new account you get 10 votes, and can allocate up to three of them per idea, which is what happened here.

I've been using rtorrent on my Linux box and have been reasonably happy with it.

I've just tried Transmission, and it is quite slick, but I'd like to chime in with two of my favorites: the enhanced version of CTorrent (http://www.rahul.net/dholmes/ctorrent/), a handy command-line client, and btpd, the BitTorrent Protocol Daemon (http://www.murmeldjur.se/btpd/), a client designed to run in the background.

I'm also fond of the original, reference versions of BitTorrent written in Python, but they can be a PITA to install from source because of dependencies.

Still not open source? No thanks.

Why does everything have to be open source?

Because competition is.

Being closed source plus the half-hearted job and lip service to support means bad experience for users. And users are not masochists, so they will use whatever works better.

In this case, Transmission.

Also, I prefer to be able to know what the software on my computer is actually doing, especially when it comes to internet communications.

You can vote for them to open-source the code here:

http://utorrentideas.uservoice.com/forums/47263-torrent-for-...

Ever try qBittorrent? its very light(QT + C++) and low on resource use. It was the first linux client to build support for magnet links.

I like it for its excellent torrent search.

It is available in more than 25 languages and is also available as a Mac client.

Oh and its open source.

...and banned on my trackers because of its peer-id spoofing feature.

not sure whether you knew it or not - but peer id spoofing (as uTorrent) was added because it was being banned on several trackers. Take a look at the bug to see a few examples https://bugs.launchpad.net/qbittorrent/+bug/497450

I think most private trackers allow Ktorrent and Transmission as they are considered defacto.

zepolen pointed out that µtorrent still isn't Free Software (or Open Source, if you prefer).

Does anybody knows why? As far as I know, µtorrent is free of charge, so I don't see how locking the sources could be an asset.

The original author was looking forward to selling it. He sold it to BitTorrent. BitTorrent is looking forward to selling uTorrent to media companies for swarm-based content distribution.

It has been always usable through Wine.

indeed, i've always combined wine, utorrent and its webUI. Before that it was rtorrent and another web interface, but utorrent is so much easier.

I'm sure it's microtorrent...

rtorrent for life.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com