backtop


Print 22 comment(s) - last by Wwhat.. on Dec 10 at 2:33 AM


uTorrent UI
Another BT client bites the dust

It looks as though BitTorrent is looking to further spread its wings now that it has received an infusion of cash from investors. In May of this year, BitTorrent first went legitimate by scoring a movie distribution deal with Warner Brothers. Later in July, the company landed another distribution deal with independent movie distributor Image Entertainment.

BitTorrent is now using part of its $20 million USD in financing to purchase the popular uTorrent BitTorrent application. uTorrent has been praised for its lightweight profile (170 kB application) and memory footprint (around 4 MB during typical usage). Bram Cohen and Ludvig Strigeus, the writers of the uTorrent application, had this to say about the acquisition:

What does this mean for the µTorrent community? Not much, at least not at first. The intention is to maintain the website as it is, and keep the forums and community active. Moving forward behind the scenes, we will continue to develop µTorrent and will be using the codebase in other applications, especially ones where a fast, lightweight implementation is more suitable, such as embedded systems on TVs, cell phones, and other non-PC platforms.

There was mixed reaction on the uTorrent forums with regards to the uTorrent-BitTorrent deal. "Absolute disgrace...Bit Torrent are now affiliated with the big players Warner Brothers for example, and they have signed an agreement to distribute digital content through the Bit Torrent client, what does this mean? basically that uTorrent will be that distribution client at some point in the future, and how long before we see adverts for movies within uTorrent," said antk1 on the uTorrent forums. Another user, doink-chan, was more gracious with regards to the announcement "As long as µTorrent keeps being a good program and doesn't become doinky, I have no problem with it."

For those that of you that are uTorrent fans, you might want to go ahead and grab the latest stable copy of the application before it is rolled up into BitTorrent's official client. You can also catch the FAQ regarding the acquisition here.



Comments     Threshold


This article is over a month old, voting and posting comments is disabled

Not so good...
By Aikouka on 12/7/2006 10:02:14 PM , Rating: 1
I dread parts of the BT client being imported into muTorrent. I switched from Azureus to muTorrent, mainly because Azureus caused issues with my router (and it seems to affect Linksys in particular and there's no newer firmware available). So, I switched to muTorrent and the plethora of features for such a small client is great.

What I fear is the fact that the official BT client... well, it's not so great. I used to use the official client and it's always been "in the stone ages" compared to other clients. It was buggy, not very fast and lacked features that everyone else had. Of course, some of this has changed, but the fact that the creator of the idea of the BitTorrent network and the BitTorrent protocol can't even develop decent software for it...

We're mixing crap with gold... and all you end up with is stinky money.




RE: Not so good...
By Xavian on 12/7/2006 10:15:36 PM , Rating: 2
TBH, the creators of the torrent applications have done far far more to improve the protocol then the creator of the protocol himself.

The creators and developers of Azureus have done probably the most to advance the protocol further and not let it stagnate and die. uTorrent was great because it was lightweight and non-java based, it'll be a shame to see it go (even if it was closed source).


RE: Not so good...
By Wwhat on 12/10/2006 2:24:53 AM , Rating: 2
I don't like some of the stuff azureus added to the protocol myself, they did not just not keep conform to the standard but added stuff that break it, they are unpleasant people in my eyes.


RE: Not so good...
By mxzrider2 on 12/7/2006 11:33:32 PM , Rating: 2
dude learn to read the documentation that comes with router on how to set the ports.at a friend of mines house and azureus wouldnt even work at his house. he set the ports and works at it full potential. i cant recall the ports needed to be set and look up how to set them on ur router then it will work perfect


RE: Not so good...
By Aikouka on 12/8/2006 7:11:00 AM , Rating: 1
...I don't think you understand what I mean... Azureus worked just fine other than the issue that I had. I downloaded fine, I uploaded fine, I found peers and seeds fine. The problem is a WELL KNOWN ISSUE WITH AZUREUS AND LINKSYS ROUTERS ; however, my router actually wasn't listed in the routers affected, but it is definitely showing the same symptoms.

What happens is Azureus creates the uPNP connections with the router and either it doesn't release them or it does and the router doesn't remove them from its table. I don't know the specifics about it, but the uPNP routing table gets so full that the router forces a reset and it effectively disconnects me from the Internet. This happened about once every 2-4 hours to me. Once I switched from Azureus to uTorrent, I never disconnected. Then it started happening again, I asked my brother, "Are you using Azureus" ... guess what the answer was. I simply told him to stop using it as it causes issues with the router.

At the point where I switched clients, I did try looking for a new firmware to find no updates.


RE: Not so good...
By stmok on 12/8/2006 11:42:44 AM , Rating: 2
It doesn't help when you don't tell us what particular Linksys router you have. WRT54G-series? RV0x series? The old cheapo ones? What?

I use Azureus and Linksys WRT54G as well as ASUS WL500g routers with third-party firmware (DD-WRT). I don't use UPnP. (As if its that hard to open a few ports for P2P clients!)

They have been up for months, 24/7 operation. (The Linksys ones have been on for over a year now, 14 months to be exact! And I've been punishing them with both Emule and Azureus simultaneously)


As for uTorrent...That's life. Programmers want to make money. Even if it means doing deals with certain parties that no one likes.


RE: Not so good...
By Aikouka on 12/8/2006 12:57:15 PM , Rating: 1
I cannot specify exactly which router I'm using at the moment as I'm not physically near it and don't remember it off the top of my head. Although, I believe it is one of the WRT54G series, but I can't speak for certain.

Also, I paid for a router with UPnP and I'm going to use it. I'd rather not waste my time setting up ports for every application that needs it... God knows I have enough PF settings for my server to manage (almost all that Linksys allows actually). Nothing else has a problem with it and I'll just stop using an application if it causes too many issues and I can find a viable alternative (similar to my switch from GAIM to Trillian).

Also, who in their right mind modded my post down? This boggles my mind how clueless people can be when the poster I was replying to didn't even read my comment and just assumed that my installation of Azureus didn't function at all, which was far from the truth as I see similar if not the same speeds between both programs. Now I see why I prefer posting on the Anandtech forums.... Kris, you need to remove this lame moderation as it seems these children cannot handle any sort of power bestowed upon them. The only thing it seems they're capable of is modding down people who simply post "FIRST!"


RE: Not so good...
By Etsp on 12/8/2006 10:28:02 PM , Rating: 2
All I can say is that Azureus caused a great deal of lag even when upload bandwidth was down to 5kb/s (my max is around 45...) No matter what I tried, latency in games like CS always went through the roof. I switched to uTorrent, and had my upload set to about 30, and latency (on average) is lower the the best latency I had with azureus. I dont even understand why it does it, I have an older netgear router.


RE: Not so good...
By Wwhat on 12/10/2006 2:33:55 AM , Rating: 2
I agree that about the voting down of your post being ridiculous, and they even voted up a guy who said 'just turn off UPNP.
That kind of statement is on the level of saying 'turn on DMZ' when people have a router issue, quite ludicrous.

I think there's a group of warped people visiting dailytech who get off on voting down posts btw and that's the only reason they visit.


RE: Not so good...
By Wwhat on 12/10/2006 2:28:04 AM , Rating: 2
Yes the µtorrent coders were in it for the money, they never made that much op a secret, but you can't make blanket statements all coders are in it for the money, that would obviously not be true or else there would not be just as many open source coders as payed ones and linux would not exist.


RE: Not so good...
By Slaimus on 12/8/2006 1:23:23 PM , Rating: 3
Turn off UPNP and the router issues usually go away.


:(
By Lazarus Dark on 12/7/2006 8:33:30 PM , Rating: 5
I love utorrent. but what i liked most was that it does one thing:dl torrents with low usage. I consider this a bad thing as surely they will add "features" now. No company pays for something without expecting a return. Kinda sad, utorrent was one of those very useful programs that was free with no strings attached and worked better than the rest. But hey, I don't blame the guy for taking the money, I would too. screw helping mankind, what we really all want are cool cars and big tv's.




BT
By ksherman on 12/7/2006 7:19:11 PM , Rating: 1
on my cell phone?! I cant WAIT!!




RE: BT
By KaiserCSS on 12/7/2006 8:37:51 PM , Rating: 1
Pardon my ignorance, but what exactly are you talking about?


RE: BT
By killerroach on 12/7/2006 9:26:17 PM , Rating: 2
Read the article... they talk about the acquisition of uTorrent as being good for bringing BT to embedded systems, and then went on to specifically name cell phones. I think it's more than a bit of a jump to go from point A to point B yet, but, in a sense, it's right.


download the latest version now...
By Xavian on 12/7/2006 8:44:25 PM , Rating: 2
Download the latest version now! quick! before it becomes laden with MPAA spyware and DRM.

If uTorrent does change (and I'm sure it will), i guess ill have to go back to azureus, at least the MPAA can't buy out an open source application.




By stmok on 12/8/2006 11:51:18 AM , Rating: 2
You clearly have not heard about Azureus 3.0

Essentially, both uTorrent and Azureus are "going commercial", so to speak.

The Azureus team are basically gonna let 2.5.0 die out (reduce support over time), and this will "encourage" existing users to the newer ver 3.0 (which won't be open-source...So grab the source code while you can!)

But don't worry, a simple search shows there's quiet a number of torrent clients out there. (Supporting Windows, Linux, OSX, etc)...The hard part will be finding the right one for your needs!

Hell, I'm thinking of writing my own one in Python. (Resource-wise, it won't be as "loaded" as Azureus, or light as uTorrent...Somewhere in between. But it will be under GPL).


faq and drm
By Gooberslot on 12/8/2006 4:33:34 AM , Rating: 2
Maybe I'm just being overly paranoid again but does it seem to anyone else like they're kinda dancing around this particular Q&A from the FAQ:

"Q: Will any DRM related technology be implemented in the uTorrent or mainline BitTorrent clients?

A: DRM is function by content and media players, and doesn't involve content distribution tools directly."




RE: faq and drm
By Spivonious on 12/8/2006 10:10:40 AM , Rating: 2
All the FAQ says is that DRM is embedded in the media files. You don't need a license to copy the file, but you do need one to play it.


By BitJunkie on 12/8/2006 9:43:22 AM , Rating: 2
Is how great it performs when a tracker goes down and it falls back on to DHT. The official torrent client just grinds to a halt.




Don't worry about it
By archcommus on 12/8/2006 1:43:28 PM , Rating: 2
v1.6 does everything we need and it will be floating around the internet for a long time to come. And another application will surely emerge.




Utorrent is closed source
By xNIBx on 12/9/2006 1:06:03 PM , Rating: 2
Utorrent is closed source, meaning that users dont have access to its source code, meaning that they can change whatever they like and it will be pretty hard for the users to find out about it.

Azureus on the other hand is open source. Yes, it is going commercial with "feature" heavy version 3 but i hope that there will always be a "lighter", open source version of azureus which we can all use(at least those of us who dont care about memory consumption).

But even if azureus stops supporting the open source version, we will find a new proper client to use.




"The whole principle [of censorship] is wrong. It's like demanding that grown men live on skim milk because the baby can't have steak." -- Robert Heinlein














botimage
Copyright 2014 DailyTech LLC. - RSS Feed | Advertise | About Us | Ethics | FAQ | Terms, Conditions & Privacy Information | Kristopher Kubicki