Azureus or uTorrent?

I switched from Azureus to uTorrent some months ago, myself. What's not to like? Anything that does its job well, is that small, and doesn't require any registry changes to install is in my book.

 

I switched perhaps 6-9 months ago. I can't believe how few resources it uses while offering me all the functionality and more than what I could ever want to use. I too was tired of the bloat that Azureus is. Even during heavy usage, uTorrent has yet to go above 30 Meg. Now when its running a couple large torrents, its sitting at 24 Meg. When the torrents are finished, it cleans up and drops back down to under 5 Meg. Under the same circumstances, Azureus would sit at 150-160Meg and wouldn't drop down when finished.

Now if only uTorrent made a uNNTP / uUsenet program so I could replace NewsBin Pro or not have to keep restarting it once a day.

 

Dealing with Usenet is a different kettle of fish. Storage requirements can be massive, usually involving databases. Filtering and data manipulation tools need to be an order of magnitude more complex. Automation is usually a lot more necessary too. There's just a whole lot more functionality required to deal with all the data sensibly.

I don't think you're ever going to get something as small and focussed as uTorrent for dealing with Usenet.

 

I couldn't believe that you can just download the uTorrent binary, run it from anywhere and it just works like in the old days. Doesn't even need installation! Is that even allowed in Windows?

 

are you kidding? most games allow that..........

 

What games are playing? Last I checked I had to install all of my games. STALKER, WoW, Infernal, Rainbow Six: Vegas, CS:S, etc.

 

WoW works if you installed it and then wiped Windows and reinstalled Windows. Assuming that you installed WoW to a separate drive or copied there before wiping Windows.

 

I think you might be right. It wouldnt be so bad if NewsBin Pro didnt start off so small at 12.5 Meg only to grow to well over 170 Meg after pulling down a couple hd-tv shows. It wouldn't be bad if it freed up the resources when it was finished. Unfortunately it just keeps bloating and bloating. I dont even pull down headers anymore or keep a group list. From the providers search tool, globalsearch.usenetserver.com, I create the .NZB to pull down the posts of interests. I could just imagine how bloated it would get if I used the other features of it.

Now if only uTorrent did uOS...

 

I've used bitcomet in the past, it was good in that I could limit my upload to 5kb a sec without effecting my download speeds, don't know if any of the newer software have this capability, but it came in handy if I had to upload anything from my server.

I didn't like Azureus it was a pretty big resource hog.

Just tried Utorrent seems alot better!

 

Leech!

 

LOL, IMHO its same as "what do you prefer CCC or something else"

CCC == Azureus

 

Iv been using BitTornato. Its very lite on the system resources. Its very simple program compared to the others out there.

 

I dropped Azureus for uTorrent after trying it. It does everything (almost) that azureus does but is so light on resources. Too bad is not opensource, as that might impulse the plug-in possibilities.

 

Erm.. You imagine what would hppen to a torrent if all users did that. Yup that's right download speed would crash and burn.

Leeching with P2P is selfish and short-sighted. I don't see why you have to limit to such a degree anyway. Any broadband worth its salt got to offer several hundred kilobit/s upstream so you should have lots of headroom there. 5kB is an insult..

Peace.

 

I use Azureus because of the fake upload feature available. The tracker thinks I am uploading at 50-70kb/s and it doesn't affect my download, and not a single byte gets out of my computer.

uTorrent doesn't have this feature, and thus I use Azureus.

It is very useful keeping your ratio up on private trackers. Of course you need to know how to enable the feature. It is only possible because Azureus is open source.

I know it is not the right way to behave on torrent networks, but it is safer and easier.

 

Mmmm, here in Spain we get broadband with 4Mbit download rate for low cost, but it's almost impossible to get anything higher than 256kbit of upstream

 

So many broadband offerings are asymmetric, so there is nearly always more download required than there is upload to fill it. It's done that way for several reasons. Sometimes the technology is just better suited to download such as cable. It was designed mainly as a delivery system. There was less thought to an upload requirement, and even less idea that years later people would actually want large amounts of upload bandwidth.

Then there's also the fact that companies want to limit user's expectations. They saw some of the things that happened in the early US market, and didn't want to go down the road of giving people unlimited bandwidth when their segment was empty, and then having to take it away when it got full. They also didn't want customers running heavy servers, or sending loads of expensive external bandwidth to screw up their peering agreements.

In fact, the only reason my ISP has raised upload bandwidth in recent years is they've had to just to be able to provide higher speed downloads. As download speed increases, in order to compete in the market, ISPs have had to raise upload just so you can provide the upload ACKs needed to utilize that download bandwidth.

 

If you don't limit your upload to at most half the rated capacity, your download starts to slow down and your whole PC starts to get unresponsive. And forget about browsing. 5kB is a good limit for a line with an 128kb upload limit.


That's one of the reasons why I almost never use Bittorrent: I use eMule for convenience, and NewsBin Pro (after downloading the .NBZ files manually) when I want it fast.

 

It's not so much half the capacity, you just need to reserve enough upload bandwidth to send enough ACK(nowledgement) packets so as not to choke your downstream. How much that is completely depends on what your downstream is and how many peers you are trying to deal with. You only need about 6kb reserved on the upload to keep every 1 mbit downloading at full stream, unless you are trying to download from an insane number of peers all at once.

Where most people make a mistake is they have no limits at all on their upload, so it becomes saturated with data, and download ACKs then have to fight for bandwidth. The other peers end up waiting for your slow ACKs, and your download gets choked.