23 ms·

qBittorrent ( http://www.qbittorrent.org/ http://www.qbittorrent.org/ ) is another popular free one available on most platforms.

by vitobcn 12y ago

bgaluszka 12y ago
I've been using it for few years now. It has 'Download in sequential order' which basically allows you to start watching video just after starting download.
- broodbucket 12y ago
  This breaks the torrent model...but it's so damn convenient. There's quite a few torrent clients who refuse to implement this.
  - andrepd 12y ago
    Why does it break the torrent model? Does it rely on having a "randomized" block download order?
    - icebraining 12y ago
      https://wiki.vuze.com/w/Sequential_downloading_is_bad https://wiki.vuze.com/w/Sequential_downloading_is_bad
    - freehunter 12y ago
      The idea of a torrent is that if you're only missing the last 5mb of a 1GB file, that's all that gets downloaded. If you're downloading in sequential order, the last parts of the file are going to be less well-represented than the first parts. Not much of a problem if it's well-seeded, but they're not always well-seeded. Oh how many times have I tried to download a file where the most complete seeder only has 95% of the download because all the people who had finished dropped off.
    - jpgvm 12y ago
      To be fair I think this could be made better by integrating the media player buffer with the torrent client. While ever it's able to keep the media client fed it should also try either download random blocks or maybe more intelligently fetch the blocks with the least availability.
    - swinglock 12y ago
      For high efficiency the rarest piece that you are missing should be prioritized. Of course it only matters for torrents that doesn't have many seeders. As long as only a minority of peers are streaming the swarm should be able to bear it.
  - jmilloy 12y ago
    Couldn't there be an in-between? Does anyone around know enough about the implementations of sequential download? I only need the sequential download to proceed a little bit faster than playback. After that, bandwidth should be used to re-assert the (future) health of the torrent, so that segments at the end continue to have enough seeders.
    - orasis 12y ago
      Yes. I'm the original inventor of "swarmstreaming". If done correctly there is actually an increase in efficiency, especially if some of the users aren't watching the whole stream.

qBittorrent ( http://www.qbittorrent.org/ http://www.qbittorrent.org/ ) is another popular free one available on most platforms.

by vitobcn 12y ago

qBittorrent ( http://www.qbittorrent.org/ http://www.qbittorrent.org/ ) is another popular free one available on most platforms.

bgaluszka 12y ago

I've been using it for few years now. It has 'Download in sequential order' which basically allows you to start watching video just after starting download.

broodbucket 12y ago
This breaks the torrent model...but it's so damn convenient. There's quite a few torrent clients who refuse to implement this.
- andrepd 12y ago
  Why does it break the torrent model? Does it rely on having a "randomized" block download order?
  - icebraining 12y ago
    https://wiki.vuze.com/w/Sequential_downloading_is_bad https://wiki.vuze.com/w/Sequential_downloading_is_bad
  - freehunter 12y ago
    The idea of a torrent is that if you're only missing the last 5mb of a 1GB file, that's all that gets downloaded. If you're downloading in sequential order, the last parts of the file are going to be less well-represented than the first parts. Not much of a problem if it's well-seeded, but they're not always well-seeded. Oh how many times have I tried to download a file where the most complete seeder only has 95% of the download because all the people who had finished dropped off.
  - jpgvm 12y ago
    To be fair I think this could be made better by integrating the media player buffer with the torrent client. While ever it's able to keep the media client fed it should also try either download random blocks or maybe more intelligently fetch the blocks with the least availability.
  - swinglock 12y ago
    For high efficiency the rarest piece that you are missing should be prioritized. Of course it only matters for torrents that doesn't have many seeders. As long as only a minority of peers are streaming the swarm should be able to bear it.
- jmilloy 12y ago
  Couldn't there be an in-between? Does anyone around know enough about the implementations of sequential download? I only need the sequential download to proceed a little bit faster than playback. After that, bandwidth should be used to re-assert the (future) health of the torrent, so that segments at the end continue to have enough seeders.
  - orasis 12y ago
    Yes. I'm the original inventor of "swarmstreaming". If done correctly there is actually an increase in efficiency, especially if some of the users aren't watching the whole stream.