Bit torrent clients

PainRack · Post by **PainRack** » 2005-10-16 03:52pm

As everyone knows, there's a delurge of torrent clients out there.

So, I'm sorta interested which client would you recommend? I'm personally using Azereus, although I been experimentating with Bit Comet........

So far, I'm more used to Azereus and I'm find that its easier to look at data like peers, swarm and so on using that client as opposed to Comet, but then, a lot of people I know recommend Comet because it supposedly has a low CPU rate and ignores the problems of java versions.

General Zod · Post by **General Zod** » 2005-10-16 03:57pm

I tend to use BitTornado myself. It has a nice, simple clean interface, consumes relatively low amounts of CPU usage, and does its job fairly well. It's also not java-based, which makes it less buggy.

Ace Pace · Post by **Ace Pace** » 2005-10-16 03:59pm

I like Azureus, dosn't bug out for me, stable, easy to use.

Hamel · Post by **Hamel** » 2005-10-16 04:17pm

I use ABC.

It crashes like a mother, usually when clicking on a torrent link when ABC is already running. The problem always comes from python.dll.

Uraniun235 · Post by **Uraniun235** » 2005-10-16 04:18pm

I too use BitTornado.

YT300000 · Post by **YT300000** » 2005-10-16 04:55pm

TorrentStorm has always worked fine for me. A simple interface, everything in a nice list, nothing wasted. Though, it does slow your Internet connection down noticably.

Lord of the Farce · Post by **Lord of the Farce** » 2005-10-16 07:12pm

Azureus. It might take a fairly big bite out of my RAM (80MB to 170MB), but that isn't really a problem when I have 1.5GB of it to spare (I play Medal of Honor Pacific Assault fine even while it runs in the background), and any CPU usage is virtually non-existant as far as I can tell.

Bertie Wooster · Post by **Bertie Wooster** » 2005-10-16 07:30pm

I use Bittornado too. Although, in a few instances, BitTornado didn't work but I was able to get BitLord to work.

RedWizard · Post by **RedWizard** » 2005-10-16 07:35pm

I also use BitTornado.

Crazy_Vasey · Post by **Crazy_Vasey** » 2005-10-16 07:39pm

I use Azureus. People complain about its resource use but 64 meg or so out of half a gig really isn't a big deal to me.

Durandal · Post by **Durandal** » 2005-10-16 07:43pm

General Zod wrote:I tend to use BitTornado myself. It has a nice, simple clean interface, consumes relatively low amounts of CPU usage, and does its job fairly well. It's also not java-based, which makes it less buggy.

Don't be stupid. Being written in Java doesn't make something more buggy. It makes it slower and uglier.

Sharpshooter · Post by **Sharpshooter** » 2005-10-16 08:52pm

Durandal wrote:Don't be stupid. Being written in Java doesn't make something more buggy. It makes it slower and uglier.

Like Runescape, I keep telling the idiots over at Gaia gaming. But do they listen? NoooOOOooo...

But on-topic, I use BitComet. It seems to work just fine, I've only had one major problem (which was when I was searching a torrent site, to be honest, so it was probably an exterior failure) and it seems simple to use. True, I can't really play an MMO when it's running - but I can just leave it running as I sleep, so it's sort of a moot point.

Really, the only fault I find with it is the universal problem that nobody seeds or shares the downloads I'm looking at...

Pu-239 · Post by **Pu-239** » 2005-10-17 01:35am

Durandal wrote:
General Zod wrote:I tend to use BitTornado myself. It has a nice, simple clean interface, consumes relatively low amounts of CPU usage, and does its job fairly well. It's also not java-based, which makes it less buggy.
Don't be stupid. Being written in Java doesn't make something more buggy. It makes it slower and uglier.

Eh, the SWT widgets that Azureus uses don't look that bad... the default Java Swing ones do... (although you can change it). As for bugs, if anything, garbage collection reduces bugs. Java still sucks though.

Archaic` · Post by **Archaic`** » 2005-10-17 04:23am

Another user of BitTornado here, though I've heard good things about BitComet and Azureus. Those three seem to be the main alternate clients, so I'm sure you'd do fine with one of them.

Embracer Of Darkness · Post by **Embracer Of Darkness** » 2005-10-17 04:45am

Bittornado all the way.

Spanky The Dolphin · Post by **Spanky The Dolphin** » 2005-10-17 05:07am

Originally used the base Bit torrent client, then moved over to BitTornado. After we got our DSL connection and router at home, BitComet was recommended when I didn't want to go through hoops with our router software, instead just using a client that worked with the router. Plus BitComet has some swell user features.

Kazuaki Shimazaki · Post by **Kazuaki Shimazaki** » 2005-10-17 11:17am

PainRack wrote:So far, I'm more used to Azereus and I'm find that its easier to look at data like peers, swarm and so on using that client as opposed to Comet, but then, a lot of people I know recommend Comet because it supposedly has a low CPU rate and ignores the problems of java versions.

I'm playing with BitComet. I only have 192MB of RAM on my laptop, so I have to be careful. Anyway, BitComet is the first client I used where I can actually get some real work done while the Torrents are running. If it continues to behave well for another little while, Azureus goes into the drain.

Andrew J. · Post by **Andrew J.** » 2005-10-17 08:00pm

Judging from similar polls in other forums, I'm apparently the only Shareaza user in the world, or at least the only one who will admit to it.

Ace Pace · Post by **Ace Pace** » 2005-10-18 04:31am

Shareaza was fine, except it was too slow for me.

StarDestroyer.Net BBS

Bit torrent clients

Bit torrent clients

Re: Bit torrent clients