4 ms·

I feel that they might be a little bit late. Since the Linux community's "Aha!" moment regarding the usability of Desktop apps, Transmission has really taken of

by dimarco 16y ago

I feel that they might be a little bit late. Since the Linux community's "Aha!" moment regarding the usability of Desktop apps, Transmission has really taken off. Even uTorrent's web interface is old news compared to Transmission's web interface. Although - competition is always good.

pilif 16y ago
There are still private trackers around disallowing transmission (heck - every client but uTorrent), so this might be a valid reason to go with a future utorrent for Linux release. OTOH, these same trackers are insisting on utorrent for windows anyways and are also disallowing utorrent for the Mac, so my point might be moot
- loup-vaillant 16y ago
  That's odd. Why would a tracker ever want to disallow any torrent client? Are they silly, or paid by BitTorrent Inc?
  - frou_dh 16y ago
    Because the specific client might put unnecessary load on the tracker, or might falsify upload/download ratio to get site karma. That or the admins like making arbitrary decisions.
  - masklinn 16y ago
    Apparently, Transmission used to have issues (may still have them, don't know) and misbehave, leading to its banning from several trackers.
robgough 16y ago
Because it really is worth repeating - the Transmission web interface is pretty awesome. Still, I think this is good news. There was a time I would have jumped at a uTorrent Linux client - and I know I'd still try it out. Transmission has been pretty good to me though.
masklinn 16y ago
In my experience, uTorrent/mac tends to have better performances than Transmission/mac. Still looks and feels pretty not nice (though it has much improved since the early days), so I'm staying with Transmission for now. Also, uTorrent is much lighter on disk (uTorrent.app 4MB, Transmission.app 22.3MB) and a bit lighter on memory (private/real/virtual 7.9/24.5/50.9 vs 14.4/25.9/61.1 unloaded in both cases)

by dimarco 16y ago

pilif 16y ago

There are still private trackers around disallowing transmission (heck - every client but uTorrent), so this might be a valid reason to go with a future utorrent for Linux release. OTOH, these same trackers are insisting on utorrent for windows anyways and are also disallowing utorrent for the Mac, so my point might be moot

loup-vaillant 16y ago
That's odd. Why would a tracker ever want to disallow any torrent client? Are they silly, or paid by BitTorrent Inc?
- frou_dh 16y ago
  Because the specific client might put unnecessary load on the tracker, or might falsify upload/download ratio to get site karma. That or the admins like making arbitrary decisions.
- masklinn 16y ago
  Apparently, Transmission used to have issues (may still have them, don't know) and misbehave, leading to its banning from several trackers.

robgough 16y ago

Because it really is worth repeating - the Transmission web interface is pretty awesome. Still, I think this is good news. There was a time I would have jumped at a uTorrent Linux client - and I know I'd still try it out. Transmission has been pretty good to me though.

masklinn 16y ago

In my experience, uTorrent/mac tends to have better performances than Transmission/mac. Still looks and feels pretty not nice (though it has much improved since the early days), so I'm staying with Transmission for now. Also, uTorrent is much lighter on disk (uTorrent.app 4MB, Transmission.app 22.3MB) and a bit lighter on memory (private/real/virtual 7.9/24.5/50.9 vs 14.4/25.9/61.1 unloaded in both cases)