35 ms·

how does it compare to uTorrent 2.2?

• nickpsecurity 11y ago
  Something like 10-11x bigger installer lol. It's really tiny. Don't have a Windows box so I can't say how similar .EXE's, RAM, and CPU usage are.
  • viktorelofsson 11y ago
    The PicoTorrent executable is somewhere around 5-6MB. RAM and CPU usage should be low to tiny if I haven't made a mistake and leak memory all over the place :) The reason our executable is so much bigger is that we have a few indirect dependencies on Boost and OpenSSL (via libtorrent). I'm open for suggestions on how to reduce size.
    • nickpsecurity 11y ago
      I was just picking at you as the uTorrent author and his work were among best at low-fat, GUI apps. Steve Gibson at GRC comes to mind, too. 5-6MB is better than many. Anyway, I'm not sure what can be done with Boost: just too complicated. Maybe replacing what you use in it with lightweight alternative. However, you could see if you can replace OpenSSL with LibreSSL. OpenBSD team trimmed out hundreds of KB of fat and problematic code out of OpenSSL when building it. You get better security, too. :) http://www.libressl.org/ http://www.libressl.org/ Note: Mac OS X already uses it. So, it must work decent by now.
• romanovcode 11y ago
  + Open source + Not spyware + No ads
  • wnevets 11y ago
    utorrent 2.2 doesn't have ads or spyware.