Tracker question: BT-client of choice?
#1
Posted 23 January 2005 - 12:58 AM
My question is which client is best for seeding? Shadow's has all those fancy super-seed functions but Azureus has a lot of automated functions. Can anybody experineced tell me the difference between the clients? I think I read that someone recomended ABC but I don't really like that one =|
#2
Posted 23 January 2005 - 01:26 AM
#3
Posted 23 January 2005 - 01:44 AM
Connection speed really depends on your internet connection and how you setup your BT client. Do some experimenting, or even look up google and see how other people seed files.
#4
Posted 23 January 2005 - 05:32 AM
Because it has more features than ABC and does not eat up much system resources...
Like abc and azereus it can put everything in one window...i also have some fun with shadow as well which can get very fast sometimes...
It all pretty much works the same for me i think...so stick with the one with you feel comfortable with
#5
Posted 26 January 2005 - 09:45 AM
I don't have the time or resources to find stuff for initial seeding, but I do want to give back to the community and while it isn't perfect, I think Azureus is closest to a what I want in a client for seeding options after the download completes. ABC and BitComet are much more limited in that respect. With Azureus, I'll have 20 or so completed torrents, but seed 6 at a time. The program automatically figures out which torrents need my bandwidth the most and seeds them based on rules I set up. It's much more flexible than the time and ratio options in ABC, and the ratio option in BitComet. In the one month I've been using Azureus, I've only seen one occasion where nothing was being seeded, but I tweaked the seeding rules a bit more, and I think that won't happen again.
The only question I have is how much of the tracker's resources I'm using with Azureus continuously scraping 20 torrents.
#6
Posted 28 January 2005 - 11:15 PM
It's easy to use and it works fine, btw, could you guys post some screens of those programs that you use?, just want to know if it's like TorrentStorm...
#7
Posted 28 January 2005 - 11:28 PM
yeah u are im use azureusIm I the only one using TorrentStorm? http://www.torrentstorm.com/
It's easy to use and it works fine, btw, could you guys post some screens of those programs that you use?, just want to know if it's like TorrentStorm...
away good /home/johan best
#8
Posted 28 January 2005 - 11:31 PM
But I just stick to the one that hasn't given me any hassle yet.
Here's a screenshot of an older version but it's the same style as the one that I have, but I do get a green light instead of a yellow light.
by courtesy of Lainay.
#9
Posted 29 January 2005 - 12:31 AM
I used to use TorrentStorm for a while, but switched over to Azureus when TorrentStorm stopped updating (they still haven't since June). I'd recommend switching as there's been numberous updates to the bittorrent clients since then.Im I the only one using TorrentStorm? http://www.torrentstorm.com/
It's easy to use and it works fine, btw, could you guys post some screens of those programs that you use?, just want to know if it's like TorrentStorm...
As for screenshots, just go to the websites for Azureus and BitComet (do a web search) for the programs.
#10
Posted 29 January 2005 - 01:00 AM
#11
Posted 29 January 2005 - 01:18 AM
i sue only TorrentStormIm I the only one using TorrentStorm? http://www.torrentstorm.com/
It's easy to use and it works fine, btw, could you guys post some screens of those programs that you use?, just want to know if it's like TorrentStorm...
Its the best
#12
Posted 29 January 2005 - 01:29 AM
*****
edit
*****
torrents i seeding
Over sized picture changed to link.
Edited by turbos86, 29 January 2005 - 08:15 AM.
away good /home/johan best
#13
Posted 29 January 2005 - 02:23 AM
it's the simplest one etc etc so i like it. each torrent hogs a good bit of RAM but it doesnt hurt computer performance too much unless running for days and days, ending and starting torrents constantly.
#14
Posted 29 January 2005 - 03:57 AM
oink!
~人間玩具Chr0n0~
Founder & Scanner, DPG
Translator & Procastrinator, Mangaproject
Timer & Encoder & Tea Server, HPS
#15
Posted 29 January 2005 - 12:08 PM
because i can use gui or only the command line ^^
#16
Posted 29 January 2005 - 07:01 PM
I also use bittornado, but with the gui.bittornado...
because i can use gui or only the command line ^^
I'm curious how do you use it through the command line?
Is there a difference then?
by courtesy of Lainay.
#17
Posted 29 January 2005 - 08:01 PM
#18
Posted 29 January 2005 - 09:24 PM
#19
Posted 29 January 2005 - 09:31 PM
#20
Posted 29 January 2005 - 09:37 PM
I also use bittornado, but with the gui.bittornado...
because i can use gui or only the command line ^^
I'm curious how do you use it through the command line?
Is there a difference then?
don't know if you can do it on windows.... if you have linux, you just type btdownloadheadless --options (max upload, superseed etc) file.torrent
the only difference....is that you can't change the options while downloanding (max upload, max download etc)...
the obvious advantage is that it use less resources (and if you have an old pc like mine, you need it ).... it will show the %, the seeder/leecher, how much you have download and upload like the "normal" bittornado