Talk:BT clients: Difference between revisions
No edit summary |
No edit summary |
||
| Line 12: | Line 12: | ||
I was under the impression that Bitspirit was very similar to Bitcomet. There doesn't seem to be much discussion about it, so I won't be moving it to "Bad". | I was under the impression that Bitspirit was very similar to Bitcomet. There doesn't seem to be much discussion about it, so I won't be moving it to "Bad". | ||
[[User:Kanzar|Kanzar]] 10:30, 26 August 2008 (UTC) | [[User:Kanzar|Kanzar]] 10:30, 26 August 2008 (UTC) | ||
Someone moved BitSpirit back... Anyway, it's not well documentation on it so there's no real reason to move it to "Bad" unless we hear complains from the users. | |||
Revision as of 15:40, 27 August 2008
Page Arrangement
Could use more descriptive editing and formatting. --Tsikura 08:28, 24 August 2008 (UTC)
Still needs a lot of information. I like how its organized now. i wish i could say the same about the Windows playback page, but thats under hot debate right now. --MarchHare 08:53, 24 August 2008 (UTC)
Wouldn't it be better to order it from Good -> Bad instead of Bad/Good/Acceptable as it's now? And maybe undercategories within each section by OS...? --Deimon 11:02, 24 August 2008 (UTC)
- I've changed it, looks better now. --Deimon 12:27, 24 August 2008 (UTC)
Moved Vuze (Azureus) from Acceptable to Good, since it's one of the two only recommended clients. Also corrected it's title and added a short desc. about it's community part. --Deimon 14:34, 24 August 2008 (UTC)
I was under the impression that Bitspirit was very similar to Bitcomet. There doesn't seem to be much discussion about it, so I won't be moving it to "Bad". Kanzar 10:30, 26 August 2008 (UTC)
Someone moved BitSpirit back... Anyway, it's not well documentation on it so there's no real reason to move it to "Bad" unless we hear complains from the users.
Why is Shareza not suggested? I know that there is a false Shareza V4 which is bundled with adware but the real V2 doesn't have that. --Deimon 12:27, 24 August 2008 (UTC)
I would like to notify all people concerned with Shareaza that they're making a new client, It's very much and alpha and crashes alot, but the team is taking shareazaV2's code and re-formulating it from the ground up. It doesn't need to be included yet, but watched at the very least. http://www.pantheraproject.com/ Reference -> http://torrentfreak.com/shareaza-team-fight-back-with-panthera-project-080818/ --Aranjedeath
Shareaza is a bad client because the upload is very low ;) (i am not 100% sure if this is for V2 too, but i thought so)
New Client Suggestions
There's a new client called Halite that looks to be 'the next uTorrent'. Also worth keeping an eye on. Kanzar 10:29, 26 August 2008 (UTC)
Read about it in TorrentFreak a while back... Tested it but it's not as small as they said (RAM usage, less than uTorrent), and the scan for how much percent completed you have of one torrent takes a long time.