Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Whats the best fastest torrent software for mac??
- Thread starter XheartcoreboyX
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Anyone using pre-release software should at least have the common sense to realise that it is not stable and thus saying it is not that good is missing the point somewhat. Wait until the final release before passing judgement.
Please tell me how blocking random IP addresses helps anything?
For what it's worth I could be an RIAA spy from home from my own connection...are you interested in banning all IPs on this planet or what? Cause it's either that or not touching bittorrent to be 100% safe.
pg is a waste of resources for bittorrent because you are blocking irrelevant IPs of random organizations and occasionally, whoever the blocklist maintainers have a grudge against. Enough said.
I torrent terabytes of data per month and have been doing this since the beginning of BitTorrent's existence. I'm fairly sure I would know more about this than you. I've seen enough people get burned thinking they were safe with PG, hell ****ing no.
Not passing judgment on utorrent for Mac OS X. I am merely pointing out the existence of beta versions which I would vastly prefer, buggy or not, over the likes of transmission or xtorrent, which might as well be transmission as well.
Again, in your opinion. I never said it was perfect nor advocated that it would actually stop from being caught on a naughty torrent.
I, personally, like the feature. It is one of those things you won't know if it works or not. Given that it takes almost no system resources compared to Azureus as a whole, what's the big deal? Unless you're using a G3 or something lol?
Okay, so if it's not foolproof or stops you from being "caught" on such a torrent, what's the point again? If you don't know if it works, what's the point again? This is for bittorrent, mind you. I think pg has some use with other protocols, but for bittorrent it is ridiculous and useless. It STILL uses resources, there is no such thing as a non-resource-using feature that's being used.
PG would be the same thing as me randomly blocking some IP range I pulled out of thin air, oh, like 215.194.0.0-215.195.255.255, and be like "oh I'm so protected" and hop on an idiotic public torrent thinking I won't be caught. It does SOMETHING, namely a useless addition to Azureus's just fine IP blocking system, so why use it?
Except it's not a downloading tool, it is awful for initial seeding, and "fast" is subjective. What's fast? Almost any bittorrent client worth using is fast on my 100mbit line. At that point it's a matter of resources being used (and Transmission and uTorrent alike aren't the lightweight clients everyone loves bragging about with a lot of active torrents) and how well it does certain things that matters.
"fast" is an observation from the comparison of download speed of all different bt clients (BT, Tomato, bit on the wheel, Azureus, xtorrent beta, bit rocket) in my home network. I think I can read the numbers correctly.
and exactly how do you judge "lightweight" or not? "resource being used"? are you talking about memory? or CPU? AFAIK, there is no system slow of any kind when using transmission.
awful for initial seeding? maybe, Im not making seed myself most of the time, so I can't make judgment there. All I can do is to make sure I get my ratio up.
But there's almost no way whatsoever to compare said clients in the same situation - there are so many variables that are out of your control. For starters, your upload speed generally determines a lot about how fast you download on a torrent with more leechers than seeders, and then the seeds determine who to connect to or what data to upload to which peers giving preference to the faster peers, then the seeds have limited bandwidth so they also have to determine after all that how fast to send to which peer, then there might be p2p throttling issues with your ISP,... Hence, what is fast?
Server load, memory usage, CPU usage...and also depends on what the client is doing - hash checking is going to be a lot more resource-consuming than idling on a torrent. but having half a dozen torrents maxing out on a fast connection both ways to lots of peers can easily make any client use up a lot of resources.
Never mentioned system slowdown anywhere though...
the problem is that (imo) transmission and some other clients are missing a lot of features present in many common bittorrent clients in use today. although the devs are doing a decent job adding new features all the time (selective downloading? jeez, how long did that take...) there's still a bunch out there that Transmission's missing, superseeding/initial seeding being one of them.
In the end though, it doesn't really matter what you use or don't use, it's all down to personal preference. Most of the clients nowadays support the protocol to an extent that it should work fine with most trackers provided it's not banned for some reason or another. And as long as you give back what you take, it's all good
I'll stick to Azureus (but not the vuze/Az3.0 crap) and bittornado and rtorrent and possibly utorrent, you couldn't make me use any other clients, I'd much rather go back to running a dedicated Windows box for utorrent before using Transmission. There are many people who swear by Transmission, and some poor fools who won't use anything else but Xtorrent, and the people in the 15th century using BitsOnWheels (a year and a half since the last update...). They all mostly work. Big deal.
i find azures to be a dog. cant work it at all. bits on wheels for mwah. i know i know its old and still ppc, they stopped working on it. i like the interface tho.
But there's almost no way whatsoever to compare said clients in the same situation - there are so many variables that are out of your control.
Server load, memory usage, CPU usage...and also depends on what the client is doing
Never mentioned system slowdown anywhere though...
the problem is that (imo) transmission and some other clients are missing a lot of features present in many common bittorrent clients in use today. although the devs are doing a decent job adding new features all the time (selective downloading? jeez, how long did that take...) there's still a bunch out there that Transmission's missing, superseeding/initial seeding being one of them.
I'll stick to Azureus (but not the vuze/Az3.0 crap) and bittornado and rtorrent and possibly utorrent,
first, I agree with the part of your post that I didn't quote.
theoretically, yes, there are too many factors that prevent us from making any accurate measurement of the speed of the client. But, i only spoke with my experience.
I understand transmission is not a good role model for many servers. Some of them banned it. But for people who are using it, there is no system slow down, which means no matter how much resource of local machine was consumed by it, it does not really matter for the user.
and No, Transmission is by no means a comprehensive bt client, it does in deed lack of many common features, like making a seed.
and Yes, I will try (switch if it is good) uTorrent in a heat beat once its out.
wow... im glad that i checked in on this topic, learning some stuff, I might have to check out Azureus, janey has a lot of information to bring to the table, being a veteran torrent user. Janey, you mind if i pm you asking some questions about torrents?
yes i do mind
i can pretty much guess the questions that'll be asked, and well, i'm sure all sorts of people have beat the dead horse on most of them. searching around for some sites/tutorials shouldn't be too difficult and should answer all your questions.@defeated - in the end, I have never mentioned system slowdown anywhere (resource hogging isnt the same, necessarily), but we're pretty much agreeing on all other points, so...
Transmission is by far my very most favoritest. I used to like Azureus but then it got this weird update and you had to do all this extra work and it was ANNOYING. So yeah, Transmission has my vote.
