BT client of your dreams?

[mol3culez]

If you could have all the features you wanted in a BT client what would it have?

Mine:

Would have to have all current Utorrent features.

Would be able to allocate priority by tracker, time added and # of peers.

Would have a feature allowing bandwidth to be distributed among each tracker. That way I could give say (if I had 3 trackers) 40% to TL 20% to IPT and 40% to BMTV.

Would be able to search private sites with a built in browser optimized for trackers + media playback.

Would be highly customizable in appearance.

Would have different profiles available and also a backup restore feature built in.

Would have a chat client built in to communicate with others in the swarm and maybe even allow avatars and nicknames.

Would be free of course and super fast;)

The list goes on. But I really want to know what other people might expect to have in their dream client.:w00t:

I haven't seen much change in torrent clients since azureus first came out. I'd so love to see a client completely built from scratch designed by a large community of daily BT junkies.:mellow:

[Swift]

utorrent !

[ottermanlaw]

utorrent!!!

[KushBlow]

uTorrent already has most features you posted :).

[MaNiJaK]

...

[mooger]

Utorrent

[TranceMaster6003]

Utorrent

[sez]

Mhh..how about a client based on shumod(version undetectable/invisible ) ;)

[Night0wl]

I just want one that will hack itself into my ISP allocating 50ish more lines for me to use.

Until then, I'm sticking with Classic Vuze

[NinjaX]

Mhh..how about a client based on shumod(version undetectable/invisible ) ;)

Die...

[Tokeman]

Utorrent...

[Cabalo]

Vuze. Hasn't any feature i'm missing.

[viru5]

utorrent.

[PACINO]

Vuze

[antelio]

in my opinion utorrent is very good

[wasaby]

some time i tried to change utorrent to vuze because it looks nicer but azureus sucks a lot of source.
i dream a client which has utorrent's and vuze's features together :P

[piratebot]

the bt client of my dreams would be utorrent with the ability to allocate bandwidth based on labels or trackers. e.g. one tracker gets 50% or at least 50% of my bandwidth and other trackers get the rest.

[Taltaltol57]

utorrent
is the best client till now !

[clumsy]

No doubt, uTorrent is the best in my opnion.

[stoi]

Only feature i would like to see, which is impossible with bittorrent, it would need a new protocol is.

it doesnt show you IPs, it shows you members names in the peer list, but if you are anonymous on the tracker, you will be anonymous in the peer list.

but i doubt it will ever happen with bittorrent as it is now, actually like i said pretty sure its impossible or it would have been done by now.

[Funkin']

I wouldn't mind having what stoi said too. I never understood why clients show your ip. But I guess there's a reason that I don't know about...

Anyways, besides the ip thing, KTorrent is my perfect client. It's lightweight, has a bunch of options, great looking interface, and will also play media.

[droste]

I wouldn't mind having what stoi said too. I never understood why clients show your ip. But I guess there's a reason that I don't know about...

Anyways, besides the ip thing, KTorrent is my perfect client. It's lightweight, has a bunch of options, great looking interface, and will also play media.
too bad ips cannot be hidden.... possible 2 see em in a way or another

[Sonnentier]

Well how do you want to transmit data end-to-end without giving out your connection id.

You could try IP spoofing, then the seeder could be anonymous for example.

[from 0.0.0.0 to 92.126.11.15 S7fsd9FS df0aPs6F ...]

Or by plausible deniability, but this isn't appropriate for private trackers.

[stoi]

What i mean is, the staff of the tracker would see your real IP, but the client would not. OK you could do an IP trace from the command line, but then you are just getting all IPs that connect to you, you have no clue what they are actually doing or what torrent they are on, even if they are on a torrent.

So it would be username on that tracker, percentage, speed up or down.

and that is all you would see in your actual client.

you would not be able to see any IPs at all from within the client but you would know that "mark" is giving you 20KBs and "fred" 2mbits type thing.

but like i already said, i dont think its possible, which is a shame.

[droste]

nothing is impossible ;) im sure some good coder can do it

[Funkin']

I have absolutely no idea if it's possible or not since I knowing pratically nothing about coding. But an option in the client, something like, Make IP Addres Not Visible To Others would be mighty fine. ;)

But then again, Stoi may be right. If something like this was possible it would probably have been done already.

[droste]

I have absolutely no idea if it's possible or not since I knowing pratically nothing about coding. But an option in the client, something like, Make IP Addres Not Visible To Others would be mighty fine. ;)

But then again, Stoi may be right. If something like this was possible it would probably have been done already.
or then its just way too tricky

[stoi]

Well the problem is, you have to get the tracker talking to the client, atm all the tracker does is send peer info, and thats it, just numbers of peers, the actual clients speak to each other, the tracker does not.

for it to work, you have have to have tracker and clients talking to each other all the time, which does not happen now (well it does but not in any great detail).

So it will ne be a tracker/client combo sort of thing, so not only a new client but a new tracker announce at least.

it may also be far to much server load as well, all i know one of my coders 4 years ago said it would need a brand new protocol to do it properly, it will never work with bittorrent as we know it now.

[Dolphin]

♥ A private uTorrent

[technodrome]

Mhh..how about a client based on shumod(version undetectable/invisible ) ;)

Die...

+1 :dry:

[danio]

if you dream about a bt client, you've got some serious issues :/

[droste]

if you dream about a bt client, you've got some serious issues :/
cant agree more :)

[maddoxro]

Only feature i would like to see, which is impossible with bittorrent, it would need a new protocol is.

it doesnt show you IPs, it shows you members names in the peer list, but if you are anonymous on the tracker, you will be anonymous in the peer list.

but i doubt it will ever happen with bittorrent as it is now, actually like i said pretty sure its impossible or it would have been done by now.

It is possible, and it has been done :)
For exemple, you the normal user, on the peers list from utorrent , you will not see the IP from the X user, but insted you see something that he choosed to appear , like a name, or anything for that matter :)

So, on the tracker it shows normal on the peers list from the torrent, but from a bt client like utorrent, it doesn`t show the IP like it normaly does.

[aaatoel]

Would be utorrent with the queueing feature of Vuze... It is really helpful for someone like me with tons of music torrents piled ur in there!

[aly13]

utorrent the best...

[Dolphin]

A client that runs on all OS's & is allowed on every tracker... >< Design and "not important" features i dont care about... Just that it's basic and easy to use.

[neve2009]

Utorrent is good, wish it had better upload while dling though...

[Enzo]

utorrent is what we need

[Sonnentier]

if you dream about a bt client, you've got some serious issues :/
Hmm you seem to be aware about things like this. (you should know it was rhetoric)

I miss some statistical tools in microTorrent, in the eMule client you were able to see the activity per
file for the current session, now I only see "uploaded 300 MB" and I don't know what that was.

In the end, BitTorrent clients nowadays are nothing more than a client for "trackers" (community portal + tracker) in which you can see stats, in which you can comment and look for other members; trackers are even responsible for peers finding together or being shut off because they lack "membership".

[danio]

Hmm you seem to be aware about things like this. (you should know it was rhetoric)


yep i understood perfectly well that it was rhetorical :)