Bitcomet vs utorrent vs azures
-
i have been using bitcomet for a few years now tried most of the others ie utorrent azures (vuze)
but i keep coming back to bitcomet i just like it the best i find it simple to use & with each new ver i just seems to get better & better like a reseed when when i redownload a torrent file & i still have the full film it just says this file has already been downloaded click yes to hash check or no to redownload whats your fav & why? -
Well… I've only used uTorrent. Never used another one. What I like about it is that no configuration is needed and the information tabs that quickly tells me why the things are fast or slow.
I think the real "problem" with this kind of software is to learn what a Torrent is and how it works.
-
I've used a few clients over the years and I find uTorrent to be the best.
Azureus is a major resource hog {at least it was}.
BitTornado was just odd and lacked features.
BitComet never felt right either.
-
Hi,
I'm a relative newbie to torrents but one thing I have noticed with Utorrent is that it is a big hog on resources.
I use plain vanilla BitTorrent, its the one I started out with - and its probably lacking some features but I don't feel like I'm missing out.
BitTorrent does it's job - lightweight and robust.It's a bit like buying a new piece of HiFi kit. go for one with most buttons and dazzling displays, or go for the one most rated on giving top performance. Thats a no brainer to me.
So here's what I find.
Since joining and wanting to get my ratio up BitTorrent is always on. I use that client exclusively for Gaytorrent.ru and keep my download speed set to just below my upload speed. Sure I can't eat up all those juicy porn flicks as fast as my connection will allow, but I'm sharing like the rules say. I've grown to respect the sites tough line. This is long-haul.
eMule is on pretty much most of the time too. It's good and dependable. With those two I can still surf in comfort.
Whenever Utorrent is on with BitTorrent my surfing grinds to a halt. It had the same connection settings as BitTorrent, but with it on I get address not found or connection interuppted error messages from the web pages I'm trying to access.
I hope sharing this with other newbies puts another point of reference on their map.
I'll go and have a look at Bitcomet to see what it's like - cheers
-
You should never run 2 BT clients at the same time as they are competing for you connection slots.
uTorrent and BitTorrent are in fact the same client.
-
Whenever Utorrent is on with BitTorrent my surfing grinds to a halt.
Do you mean you run both µTorrent and BitTorrent client together? In this case the Upload/download limit of both added must match your internet access.
Else, it looks you did not set the global Upload/download rates in µTorrent to your internet access capability. Advised is to set Upload 80% ou of your internet access measured upload rate. Measured without any internet activity and assuming not to use other sharing at high rates (e.g. eMule)
BTW: I have installed the latest BitTorrent client and found that it is a copy of µTorrent with some "DNA" add ons. These add-ons are not liked by my Internet Security Suite (detected as Trojan and the Firefox plug-in of it does not uninstall…)
Azureus (Vuze) was my first, but finally feel not well with it's polished black added on interface on newer versions.
-
hello all, a few technical precisings:
@ contra966: you should never have "[desc=RHP]resources hogging problems[/desc]" with uTorrent/BitTorrent 6.0.x+ versions running along. as already raphjd mentioned, both are the same core. in addition, both have the ability to run in multiple instances (for special purposes) and i'm not encountering any RHP (run on XP SP3 with no protecting software). if you do have some, it's for sure related to the combination of various services running concurrently, perhaps also with Vista compatibility problems (there are still some issues not fixed yet). in addition, you should never run so many sharing programs concurrently unless you have a really fast uplink
@ raphjd: when running more instances concurrently, there is no "slot competition" problem because both programs (or the same one running multiple times) uses their own dedicated RAM blocks so that they behave as standalone applications and if properly set, they even don't interfere with each other's listening ports. (if not properly set, only one of them can use the dedicated port range and the other one(s) turn(s) to the "not connectable" state, thus their transfer speeds may suffer)
@ Uwe: no need to worry about the "DNA add-on", this is the official BT plugin, no crap. it has its planned purpose (widely explained on BT site pages) but currently not widely implemented. if you find it disturbing, it's easily removable (Uninstall XP section) or you can configure it to be stopped until manually started, since it behaves as an XP service and has its graphical user interface under "Control Panels"
