Did You Know There's An OpenSource Alternative Client?

[DasFox]

I've searched high and low and like most in the beginning before this search began I was one of the many sheep that just followed uTorrent.

The thing is uTorrent is proprietary and I wonder if many people using this piece of software or any other proprietary software program really know what that means?

The truth is with any piece of proprietary software, especially something like this, you don't really know how secure you are, after all you'll never see the source code and you have to TRUST the company, or developer making it telling you that you are safe.

Now honestly people, given that most of you are downloading illegal software and copyrighted music and movies off of Bittorrent are you really going to put your trust in someone's hands in a situation like this? :wacko:

Funny thing is most people are, because they do it because they didn't realize there were any other choices, or at least choices they like. Also they use the program thinking everyone else is and if it's a problem they think they're going to hear some public out cry about it, well guess again, things happen all the time quietly behind the scene no one ever hears about.

Well now you have a few choices if you didn't realize you did that is OpenSource, meaning the CODE is open and free for anyone to look at and develop themselves.

Proprietary, are you really going to take a chance and trust yourself with it for P2P? I don't know about you but I'm not.

Check them out you'll be happy you did, I am! :D

Now if you think this all sounds wacked out then stroll over to the Free Software Foundation and see what they have to say about Proprietary and safety!

http://www.fsf.org/

Here's one example of Skype and this issue of Proprietary software.

http://www.fsf.org/campaigns/priority-projects/index_html/#skypereplacement

This post is strictly about Open-Source Bittorrent ONLY clients and that is why Vuze is not listed. This is about REAL clients that don't support the corporate pigs Apple & M$ to name a few that Vuze do!

Here's a list of open-source clients: (qBittorrent looks the most impressive)

http://qbittorrent.sourceforge.net/
http://deluge-torrent.org/
http://www.binarynotions.com/halite-bittorrent-client

Someone is building Transmission for Windows:
https://forum.transmissionbt.com/viewtopic.php?f=1&t=7612&start=15#p37848

PEACE

P.S. PLEASE KEEP THIS BUMPED TO EDUCATE OTHERS!

[anon]

What about Halite? It's also open source, and C++ based, instead of Deluge's GTK.

[Polarbear]

Azureus is open source as well.

[DasFox]

What about Halite? It's also open source, and C++ based, instead of Deluge's GTK.

Thanks missed that one, I put it on a list. :)



Azureus is open source as well.

Vuze (formerly Azureus) is not complete 100% open-source it is only partial.

[GCI]

I would think that we'd know if a piece of proprietary torrent software was causing trouble for illeagle activities. I mean, considering the masses that use uTorrent, I'm sure any wrong step will explode with complaints on the internet.

[DasFox]

I would think that we'd know if a piece of proprietary torrent software was causing trouble for illeagle activities. I mean, considering the masses that use uTorrent, I'm sure any wrong step will explode with complaints on the internet.

Don't be so sure, people could be quietly getting busted and you'll never know.

Like I said, the TRUTH is, when it's proprietary you don't know what's going on behind your back and that's a FACT!

[GCI]

Heh, noticed your edit :P

Anyhow, that is true, I guess you'll never know. So what is the best open source torrent client, that doesn't require any extra gui libraries like GTK?

[DasFox]

Heh, noticed your edit :P

Anyhow, that is true, I guess you'll never know. So what is the best open source torrent client, that doesn't require any extra gui libraries like GTK?


I just found this qBittorrent that I'm going to give a look at, looks interesting.

http://qbittorrent.sourceforge.net/

[GCI]

I just found this qBittorrent that I'm going to give a look at, looks interesting.

http://qbittorrent.sourceforge.net/

That doesn't look to bad, I'm also glad to see that the most recent update was less than a month ago. (I'm concerned about any open source BT project falling off the radar.) Next time I've got something to download, qBt will be on my list.

[DasFox]

I just found this qBittorrent that I'm going to give a look at, looks interesting.

http://qbittorrent.sourceforge.net/

That doesn't look to bad, I'm also glad to see that the most recent update was less than a month ago. (I'm concerned about any open source BT project falling off the radar.) Next time I've got something to download, qBt will be on my list.

Yes a recent update, I just installed it, this is quite impressive looking! ;)

Yes sucks to see projects come and go, hopefully this will be around...

[Polarbear]

Vuze (formerly Azureus) is not complete 100% open-source it is only partial.

The client software is open source. The Vuze platform crap can be simply turned off. If you use Vuze in classic mode you have a 100% open source software.

[ca_aok]

To be fair, they tell you they turn everything off. As it's partially closed source, it's up to you to believe it.

Personally, I prefer rtorrent, which is one of the options you seemed to miss (though I have heard good things about Deluge).

[Polarbear]

To be fair, they tell you they turn everything off.

Oh dear, do you think sourceforge lists software that only pretends to be open source? You can download the source code there. Azureus is licenced under GPL - period.

The Vuze platform hence the webpage has nothing to do with the Azureus client.

[Detale]

Honestly though, I think this is a bit much. I get it, the big bad companies are out to get us. The truth of it all is simple, if "they" want to get, you they WILL get you. All the security in the world really doesn't help much if you pop up on the radar. We play the odds really. odds are they won't get us. I read somewhere that the odds of getting caught downloading illegal stuff is about half of that when getting struck by lightning. So the odds are in our favor but hey any one of us could get caught.

Sure open source is great, I'm all for it. But for the average user who knows fuck all about code (including myself) how the hell should we know what we are looking at and if it's secure or not? As I said nothing is 100% secure I mean look at that russian kid who broke cell phone encryption in like 15 min. You want to know what is 100% secure.... Don't download illegal content, thats safe :)

[GCI]

Sure open source is great, I'm all for it. But for the average user who knows fuck all about code (including myself) how the hell should we know what we are looking at and if it's secure or not? As I said nothing is 100% secure I mean look at that russian kid who broke cell phone encryption in like 15 min. You want to know what is 100% secure.... Don't download illegal content, thats safe :)

I was about to make that point :P Some of us don't know jack about source code, or how to interpret it. That would then mean we'd have to rely on the "word" of others, which would pretty much defeat the purpose of going OS in the first place.

And why would the big bad companies use so many resources to get the peers? They should be (and are) going after the people who release the stuff, if they want to spend their resources appropriately. But as the saying goes, fly under the radar.

And security? The safest computer is one that doesn't work :P

[ca_aok]

The general idea behind open source in these matters is that if someone puts harmful code in the program, a user that actually has the talent will make it known.

Personally I think it's a load of bollocks and a bit counter-intuitive to the business model of each respective company to start prosecuting their customers, but hey... common sense has never been the strong suit of many in the bt world.

[GCI]

Personally I think it's a load of bollocks and a bit counter-intuitive to the business model of each respective company to start prosecuting their customers, but hey... common sense has never been the strong suit of many in the bt world.

Has there actually been a case like that? I've heard rumors. But only rumors.

[DasFox]

Vuze (formerly Azureus) is not complete 100% open-source it is only partial.

The client software is open source. The Vuze platform crap can be simply turned off. If you use Vuze in classic mode you have a 100% open source software.


My understanding is the core is GPL and the platform is proprietary.

It's my further understanding that to install Vuze you have to install the core and platform, but as you mention you can turn the platform off. Well just because you turn something off doesn't mean that license changes, you're still installing proprietary software in your system.

Now can you install Vuze without the platform, if you can, then we're now talking about something. ;)

What I'm talking about is 100% open-source, not a combination of with proprietary crap.

By the way you keep going on about Azureus, it's no longer Azureus, it's called ---> VUZE. :)

Look at their website:

-----> Azureus - now called Vuze - Bittorrent Client :whistling




To be fair, they tell you they turn everything off. As it's partially closed source, it's up to you to believe it.

Personally, I prefer rtorrent, which is one of the options you seemed to miss (though I have heard good things about Deluge).


Well I didn't come out and say it, I just made it a Windows post for Windows GUI clients mainly, even though I use Linux, LOL...

In the Windows world you aren't going to find to many users, using a text based client, it's typically GUI in the Windows world, that's why I didn't mention rtorrent. If we were talking Linux that would be one to add.

Heck I'm even a Slack user, running only OpenBox, but I'll take a nice small GUI app over text for torrents. ;)



Honestly though, I think this is a bit much. I get it, the big bad companies are out to get us. The truth of it all is simple, if "they" want to get, you they WILL get you. All the security in the world really doesn't help much if you pop up on the radar. We play the odds really. odds are they won't get us. I read somewhere that the odds of getting caught downloading illegal stuff is about half of that when getting struck by lightning. So the odds are in our favor but hey any one of us could get caught.

Sure open source is great, I'm all for it. But for the average user who knows fuck all about code (including myself) how the hell should we know what we are looking at and if it's secure or not? As I said nothing is 100% secure I mean look at that russian kid who broke cell phone encryption in like 15 min. You want to know what is 100% secure.... Don't download illegal content, thats safe :)


You're missing the point! ---> DON'T STAND OUT IN THE OPEN SO MUCH! :)

Don't be such sheep running out in the open using everything that everyone typically uses thinking you are safe.

You don't need to know what the heck open-source is and the code, because typically in most open-source projects there are going to be a lot of people who know the code. Now you could argue, well that gets down to who I trust, so what I'll say is don't be ridiculous and I don't mean to be rude, but no one in their right mind is going to put an exploit in open-source software and peddle it.





Sure open source is great, I'm all for it. But for the average user who knows fuck all about code (including myself) how the hell should we know what we are looking at and if it's secure or not? As I said nothing is 100% secure I mean look at that russian kid who broke cell phone encryption in like 15 min. You want to know what is 100% secure.... Don't download illegal content, thats safe :)

I was about to make that point :P Some of us don't know jack about source code, or how to interpret it. That would then mean we'd have to rely on the "word" of others, which would pretty much defeat the purpose of going OS in the first place.

And why would the big bad companies use so many resources to get the peers? They should be (and are) going after the people who release the stuff, if they want to spend their resources appropriately. But as the saying goes, fly under the radar.

And security? The safest computer is one that doesn't work :P


Read what I said above to Detale, it's foolish to think someone is going to release open code to a community and have a security breach in it that affects your safety, it's never going to happen and if it does the open-source community will find it in a FLASH!

[GCI]

...but I'll take a nice small GUI app over text for torrents. ;)


Here here :cheers:

[DasFox]

...but I'll take a nice small GUI app over text for torrents. ;)


Here here :cheers:

Ahhh BEER! CHEERS ;)

Now for Linux Transmission seems pretty popular and light weight and with a CLI too...

http://www.transmissionbt.com/

[t00z]

The worst thing about 90% (if not more) of Windows FOSS is that GTK and Java suck shit on Windows machines.

[anon]

To be fair, they tell you they turn everything off. As it's partially closed source, it's up to you to believe it.

You can get the source code and compile the thing without any Vuze code by yourself, they even tell you how to do it.

[GCI]

The worst thing about 90% (if not more) of Windows FOSS is that GTK and Java suck shit on Windows machines.

I agree, so I'm only going to stick to one that uses WinForms, or somehow has a smaller library compiled within.

[ca_aok]

You can get the source code and compile the thing without any Vuze code by yourself, they even tell you how to do it.
Because I'm sure the average windows/mac user is compiling Az from source :rolleyes:

[anon]

And I'm one of those average users. :lol:

[Polarbear]

You can get the source code and compile the thing without any Vuze code by yourself, they even tell you how to do it.
Because I'm sure the average windows/mac user is compiling Az from source :rolleyes:

The average user doesn't have to compile anything. As I mentioned before the Vuze crap can be simply turned off which leaves you with the same result. None of the Vuze interface code will be loaded at all.

I'm sick and tired of people complaining about Vuze when the existing Azureus core doesn't have any dependencies on the Vuze UI at all.

Don't like the changes from Azureus to Vuze? Easy solution: Do not use it! Choose the classic UI. It's optional.

It's ironic that the fact that Vuze is open source is also the reason that it's banned on some trackers. It makes it easier for cheaters to develop modified versions.

[ca_aok]

I wasn't complaining at all, I'm saying the company tells you that the toggle switch removes every bit of their proprietary code, when there's not really any proof of such since that part of the code is closed-source, no? And if even a bit of it is closed source, the whole "open source means they won't be logging my info" is invalid.

There are plenty of other reasons to be using Azureus/Vuze, I just find it ironic that people are using this argument of "BitTorrent Inc is stealing your personal info" when the Vuze corporation could easily be doing the same thing.

[GCI]

Lets make a BT client in Assembly :pimp:

[Polarbear]

For the last time: The Vuze/Azureus code is completely open source. The whole client software is open source. The installer version of Azureus comes with the Vuze Terms of service, which refers to the use of Vuze Content platform/website, i.e. www.vuze.com. Basically it says you have to be over 18 to use the site. The client software itself is still governed by the GPL. There's no proprietary code!

Sourceforge is meant for open source projects - which Azureus is (and always has been). Same with the Vuze code.

If you say the company is lying, download the source code and see for yourself.

[Tv Controls you]

I think utorrent is one of the last things we have to worry about when it comes to piracy.

Utorrent has been known to work with trackers on multiple occasions.
Bittorrent is an evolving form of sharing that utorrent has always been on top of.

The last thing utorrent would ever want to do is piss off pirates.. Because we make up a large majority of their users.
In the end... I don't really qualify utorrent as a risk factor while downloading torrents.

Isp and anti-p2p groups is my main worry.

[DasFox]

Azureus is open source as well.

Vuze might be open-soruce but one thing it does it intermingle with other proprietary applications which try to control and strip away people's computer rights! :angry:

Vuze is also not just a bittorrent client but more akin to a one size fits all multimedia and file sharing application.

This post is strictly about Open-Source Bittorrent ONLY clients and Vuze falls short in that category as a Bittorrent ONLY client.

[Polarbear]

Azureus is open source as well.

Vuze might be open-soruce but one thing it does it intermingle with other proprietary applications which try to control and strip away people's computer rights! :angry:

Vuze is also not just a bittorrent client but more akin to a one size fits all multimedia and file sharing application.

This post is strictly about Open-Source Bittorrent ONLY clients and Vuze falls short in that category as a Bittorrent ONLY client.

Vuze actually has hidden code in it that sends all your data to BREIN. That's how they managed to take down 384 torrent trackers in the last six month. Vuze is dangerous and you're right not to take it on your list.

[GCI]

Vuze might be open-soruce but one thing it does it intermingle with other proprietary applications which try to control and strip away people's computer rights! :angry:

Vuze is also not just a bittorrent client but more akin to a one size fits all multimedia and file sharing application.

This post is strictly about Open-Source Bittorrent ONLY clients and Vuze falls short in that category as a Bittorrent ONLY client.

Vuze actually has hidden code in it that sends all your data to BREIN. That's how they managed to take down 384 torrent trackers in the last six month. Vuze is dangerous and you're right not to take it on your list.

Seriously?

Got link?

[anon]

Seriously?

No - I think it's rather Polarbear's way of being tired of repeating the same.

But he's right - switch to the classic UI and Vuze is a very good BitTorrent client and nothing else. Meaning no search/entertainment crap.

[DasFox]

Seriously?

No - I think it's rather Polarbear's way of being tired of repeating the same.

But he's right - switch to the classic UI and Vuze is a very good BitTorrent client and nothing else. Meaning no search/entertainment crap.

Regardless of switching to the classic UI, you still have to download all the crap. If they gave users two different clients, one complete Vuze and the Classic UI, then I'd put up the Classic is all and then maybe not considering really what's at stake here!

It's not about installing Vuze then shutting off what you don't need it, it's about not even going there in the first place and just having a bittorrent ONLY client and ones that don't support the corporate pigs too!

And like I said, regardless Vuze is still sleeping with the enemy by having all these options linked into proprietary crap, regardless of turning everything off and using just the classic UI, you're still supporting them, which to me is bad! EVIL! :angry:

The dumbest thing about Vuze is on one side, go out and download your illegal torrents, then on the other side, play with all your illegal warez on the proprietary side. OH what a total crock of crap. If Vuze want's to say hey this is our way of slapping them in the face, well fine, I personally think it's also called sleeping with them when you invite them into your bed, meaning the application. To me that's total BS SOFTWARE for doing that! See because in the software world you don't do something like this in the open-source scene, hack scene, pirate scene or any other type of scene that's about freedom and sharing.

THINK about it for one SEC ok! So you're going to be a warez pirate make your own program, are you really going to have M$ in it and support them? HELL NO! You'll use a Windows box to do your hacking from but you're aren't going to support them in your pirated software! Do you get it now? ;)

Vuze it's crap plain and simple for what they're supporting and any filesharing pirate worth anything knows it too and doesn't even play with something like this!

HERE READ THIS: (Here is a a bit of what I'm going on about!)
http://www.vuze.com/features/device

Drag and Drop to -----> iPAD

Now go READ this: (Also dig around defectivebydesign.org and check out more).
http://www.defectivebydesign.org/ipad

So here's our great software pirates Vuze supporting crap like Apple as an example, not to mention M$!

See regardless of what the intentions are, if you are really into this for filesharing and what it's really about then you don't even mention something like the iPad on your website and show any support for it and any other proprietary crap that tries to take away your rights or freedoms.

Proprietary is fine so long as you aren't trying to take control and take away and that is what companies like Apple and M$ do with a lot of their proprietary crap! This is the PROBLEM and why Vuze get's BIG THUMBS down for me.

Vuze are just wannabe pirates supporting the corporate pigs also attacking and stealing from you and throwing you in jail, oh GEE this isn't also related to the RIAA and MPAA? LMAO, what BS! And you telling me you can't see this? WOW talk about being blind to support something like VUZE!

By the way Polarbear, I'm not just posting this directly at you, or attacking you, this is just a general post for everyone, so don't take it personal! :)

THANKS

[Polarbear]

You're right about the Apple part. Apple tracks all filesharing traffic on their computers. Every movie on a Mac or an iPad not bought in the iTunes store will automatically be reported. It sends all information directly to Apple.

I once used Vuze on a Mac to download some porn. Apple reported the illegal downloads to my local authorities. They busted my house and took away my Mac. Apple's anti piracy hunters cost me 10,000€ which the porn company claimed.

Now I use Windows and uTorrent like everyone else. I have a Levono or something now. I feel much safer. And it looks much better than the Apple anti-piratebooks.

I totally agree with you. True pirates don't use Macs or buy iPads.

I hope Steve Jobs dies pretty soon. He's evil and could take down all trackers at once. He's also related to a chief forensic expert at BREIN who took down 193 of the 384 trackers in the last six months. I heard it's his cousin.

In a few hours Jobs is giving a press conference. He'll announce that Apple will work together with the CIA in the near future to enforce a stricter DRM system on Apple hardware.

[DasFox]

You're right about the Apple part. Apple tracks all filesharing traffic on their computers. Every movie on a Mac or an iPad not bought in the iTunes store will automatically be reported. It sends all information directly to Apple.

I once used Vuze on a Mac to download some porn. Apple reported the illegal downloads to my local authorities. They busted my house and took away my Mac. Apple's anti piracy hunters cost me 10,000€ which the porn company claimed.

Now I use Windows and uTorrent like everyone else. I have a Levono or something now. I feel much safer. And it looks much better than the Apple anti-piratebooks.

I totally agree with you. True pirates don't use Macs or buy iPads.

I hope Steve Jobs dies pretty soon. He's evil and could take down all trackers at once. He's also related to a chief forensic expert at BREIN who took down 193 of the 384 trackers in the last six months. I heard it's his cousin.

In a few hours Jobs is giving a press conference. He'll announce that Apple will work together with the CIA in the near future to enforce a stricter DRM system on Apple hardware.


No need for all the sarcasm, especially someone on a filesharing forum who I would of thought knew better and then someone from Europe too on top of it.

With sarcasm like this, you really show that you don't know what the proprietary world of computing has done.

Since you don't seem to understand anything going on here, can you in terms of ---> ADOBE FLASH?

Adobe flash another great in the world of proprietary that has monopolized the world of flash, maybe you don't realize either the downside here to FLASH too, it's basically the same as what I've been going on about.

[Cabalo]

Well, Vuze is open source. And the best, most complete and with the most features and plugins bittorrent client by a mile.
It fucking rocks. Is it noob friendly? I suppose not. All the possible tweaking and infinite options may scare some people away.
Not trying to look leet here, but Vuze is the client of choice for seasoned torrenters. Once you try it, you're not going back.

Takes a toll on the system? Bullshit. It takes up around 100-120mb RAM and nearly the same processing power as any other client around.

It is simultaneously the best existing client for Windows, Linux and Mac OS.

Just my 2 cents, I've used nearly all mainstream bt clients, and I can't live without Vuze.

[GCI]

Well, Vuze is open source. And the best, most complete and with the most features and plugins bittorrent client by a mile.
It fucking rocks. Is it noob friendly? I suppose not. All the possible tweaking and infinite options may scare some people away.
Not trying to look leet here, but Vuze is the client of choice for seasoned torrenters. Once you try it, you're not going back.

Takes a toll on the system? Bullshit. It takes up around 100-120mb RAM and nearly the same processing power as any other client around.

It is simultaneously the best existing client for Windows, Linux and Mac OS.

Just my 2 cents, I've used nearly all mainstream bt clients, and I can't live without Vuze.

I did get scared, although I remember liking its 3D representation of a peer-seed cloud :D (I think that was a plugin.) It even showed the data moving back and forth as little blocks :wacko:

[anon]

Regardless of switching to the classic UI, you still have to download all the crap. If they gave users two different clients, one complete Vuze and the Classic UI, then I'd put up the Classic is all and then maybe not considering really what's at stake here!

The Vuze code in the JAR weights ~4MB, and doesn't even get loaded when you choose the classic UI. I don't see the problem.

It does take the developer team extra work to maintain two code branches (one with Vuze crap and another without it), though, and in the end it isn't even worth it.

[Detale]

Honestly though, I think this is a bit much. I get it, the big bad companies are out to get us. The truth of it all is simple, if "they" want to get, you they WILL get you. All the security in the world really doesn't help much if you pop up on the radar. We play the odds really. odds are they won't get us. I read somewhere that the odds of getting caught downloading illegal stuff is about half of that when getting struck by lightning. So the odds are in our favor but hey any one of us could get caught.

Sure open source is great, I'm all for it. But for the average user who knows fuck all about code (including myself) how the hell should we know what we are looking at and if it's secure or not? As I said nothing is 100% secure I mean look at that russian kid who broke cell phone encryption in like 15 min. You want to know what is 100% secure.... Don't download illegal content, thats safe :)


You're missing the point! ---> DON'T STAND OUT IN THE OPEN SO MUCH! :)

Don't be such sheep running out in the open using everything that everyone typically uses thinking you are safe.

You don't need to know what the heck open-source is and the code, because typically in most open-source projects there are going to be a lot of people who know the code. Now you could argue, well that gets down to who I trust, so what I'll say is don't be ridiculous and I don't mean to be rude, but no one in their right mind is going to put an exploit in open-source software and peddle it.

:lol: Paranoid much? Dude I get that this is your own personal view but to me it sounds like you are kind of pushing your overly paranoid position down our throats a bit. You still haven't shown why we should trust the Sourceforge boys more than the utorrent gang.

Sheep you say. Now that's more than just a little insulting. I mean are you some super security guru in your spare time? I find a product, it's good, I use it. Thats it. I am happy with my current BT software and trust in the security of it, that makes me a sheep?? As I said, if "they" want to get you, you will get GOT! You need to lighten up a bit and maybe get outside for a while pal. Good luck with that.

[Polarbear]

One final post about Azureus/Vuze that should answer all questions:


For the "I don't like Vuze" crowd

A mini FAQ for those of you who keep sending the same messages in our forums repeatedly.

Do I have to use the Vuze interface?

NO. It's optional. You can get Azureus to start up with the "classic UI", and none of the Vuze interface code will be loaded at all. Just to repeat ourselves again - YOU DO NOT HAVE TO USE THE VUZE INTERFACE. Read about the UI Switcher

I don't like the Vuze interface!

Then don't use it. Remember, it's optional!

You shouldn't force people to use Vuze

I agree. Which is why we don't, it's optional.

Can't you distribute a version of Azureus without Vuze?

Technically, yes we can. Will we? No. There's no reason to. Like we've said before - you can use Azureus, without any Vuze code loaded at all if you don't want it.
Do you use the LAN peer finder? Inbuilt tracker? The "download basket"? Download bars? Statistics generation?
If you don't, then you can disable it and it doesn't get used. Like the Vuze interface. We wouldn't release different versions of Azureus with these things included or excluded. We're not going to do it with the Vuze interface either.
We've made it so you don't have to use Vuze, since we realize not everyone wants to use it. So given that you aren't forced to use Vuze in any way... why should we create another version with it included or not? That's just more work for us with no benefit.

Yeah yeah yeah, but couldn't you just distribute a version anyway?

Yes we could, but we aren't going to, because then people will think there really is a reason to have two different versions even though we've said that there isn't, which then cause even more confusion. Whereas if people were to just read this FAQ, and understand they don't have to use Vuze at all, then that would be more straight-forward.

So you're not going to do separate versions for commercial reasons?

No - we're not going to release separate versions because there's absolutely no advantage for us or for users. Users can avoid using the Vuze UI if they want to.

What harm would it do to have separate versions to make everyone happy?

If we have to distribute separate versions, then we've have to build separate installs. And then we have two upgrade mechanisms that we have to handle.
And then our work wouldn't end there. There would be two separate code versions. And then people would say "Why does Vuze identify itself as Azureus". And so then we would have to change that code so that identifies itself differently, which may mean actually forking the code. And then people will say "Why do the Azureus devs say that Vuze uses the same core as Azureus if they release it differently and it identifies itself differently"?
So, no. It means more work for us, has no advantage for users, and has no advantage for us. All we would do is cater for the misinformed user, and then it creates even more misunderstanding as well as more work for us in future. Instead of doing all that, we'll just point those users to this FAQ. Especially to the first point made here.
If you can point out a valid reason why there should be separate versions, rather than just getting the user to change their interface (and living happily ever after), then maybe we'll do it (we'll certainly discuss it). We've yet to hear one.

Can't you just put all the Vuze UI code into a separate file?

Technically, yes. However, that means that whenever we want to send out updates, you have the potential for breaking the interface. The Vuze UI needs to be kept in sync with the Azureus core code itself - and if they get out of sync, you'll end up with a broken interface (which you might not be able to resolve without installing). That's the same reason why we don't (and wouldn't) distribute the classic user interface separately.

This goes against the FOSS and Sourceforge philosophy!

No it doesn't. Sourceforge is meant for open source projects - which Azureus is (and always has been). Same with the Vuze code.
The 'F' in FOSS stands for "Free". Which, again, Azureus is - you're free to modify it. It's also "free as in beer", so you don't have to pay for it.

blah blah corporate blah

Whatever. If there's some supposed ethical or political reason why you don't want to use Vuze, fine - don't. You're not forced to.

You just don't understand the P2P community and you don't listen to users

We understand that a lot of you won't want to use something like Vuze. Hence, we're not forcing you to use it, nor are we dropping support for the Azureus 2 interface.
If we really wanted to force the Vuze interface on everyone, then we could have done. Removed the original interface or refused to continue development on it. We've done neither.

Vuze developers should leave Azureus alone!

The people working on Vuze are the same people working on Azureus. We've got no interest in removing all the work that we had put in for the classic UI and main Azureus core (which we've worked on for several years in our own free time without being paid for it).
So now some of those developers (who do have families to look after, thanks) get paid for their work, while being able to spend more time working on Azureus (as well as Vuze). Is that a bad thing?
Oh, and some of us still volunteer our time to Azureus for free.

Doesn't matter, I've got a modified version which doesn't include the Vuze code!

Which would work exactly the same as if you used if you had used our normal version. Oh well.
The reason why it is relatively straight forward to take out the Vuze code is because we deliberately coded that way - the existing core doesn't have any dependencies on the Vuze UI at all. You don't even have to modify the code. We've even pointed out how you can do it if you really want. But it isn't something we are going to do, for various reasons explained above.
Oh, and I do hope your modified version is running the source code you think it is, rather than including some malicious code...

Doesn't including the Vuze UI even if I don't want it make Azureus more bloated?

Does it use up more CPU? No. Does it use up more memory? No.
The only difference there is that the JAR file containing all the class files is bigger - probably in the region of 3 or 4 MB (at most).

Bloat bloat bloat bloat...

We've heard the argument that all these changes make things more bloated. To quote this forum post:
I've noticed for a long time that there are always some users who love to scream until their vocal cords bleed about "bloat". Typically, they define "bloat" as "Features I don't use". These same users are always in forums requesting tweaks and new features to their pet software. Their sense of entitlement is greatly stroked when such tweaks and features are added.
But when features are added that they DIDN'T ask for, well that's "bloat". The reasons for the changes don't matter. The other users don't matter. The overall health of the project doesn't matter. And it doesn't matter if the screamers can simply ignore the new features and use the software the way they always have, unimpeded. There is no appeasement other than a total acquiescence to the demands of the screamers. "REMOVE IT!" "MAKE A SPECIAL BUILD FOR ME!" "STOP SELLING OUT TO THE MAN!" "LISTEN TO YOUR USERS! (i.e. 'me').
The point that we can't make enough... if you don't like the new interface or the new features - you don't have to use it. Just because you may not choose to use something, it doesn't mean that other users won't. And if new features don't get in your way, then how does it really cause a problem?

[GCI]

Hmm, I feel kind of sorry for Vuze/Azures developers. This kind of reminds how only European countries complain about Microsoft including Internet Explorer. But whatever.

[DasFox]

You're missing the point! ---> DON'T STAND OUT IN THE OPEN SO MUCH! :)

Don't be such sheep running out in the open using everything that everyone typically uses thinking you are safe.

You don't need to know what the heck open-source is and the code, because typically in most open-source projects there are going to be a lot of people who know the code. Now you could argue, well that gets down to who I trust, so what I'll say is don't be ridiculous and I don't mean to be rude, but no one in their right mind is going to put an exploit in open-source software and peddle it.

:lol: Paranoid much? Dude I get that this is your own personal view but to me it sounds like you are kind of pushing your overly paranoid position down our throats a bit. You still haven't shown why we should trust the Sourceforge boys more than the utorrent gang.

Sheep you say. Now that's more than just a little insulting. I mean are you some super security guru in your spare time? I find a product, it's good, I use it. Thats it. I am happy with my current BT software and trust in the security of it, that makes me a sheep?? As I said, if "they" want to get you, you will get GOT! You need to lighten up a bit and maybe get outside for a while pal. Good luck with that.


Most people in the computer world are just sheep following the crowd and for most things too, so don't get bent out of shape, I'm perfectly fine, you're the one taking things the wrong way.

Q.
Perfect example what MP3 Player do most people use?

A. iPod

Q.
What bittorrent client do most people use?

A. uTorrent

The POINT is most people don't know any better and just follow the crowd and most people all typically use the same things...

No one is paranoid about anything, what I'm stating here are facts.

None of this has anything to do with my personal ideas, it's simply a fact that with proprietary software you do not know what is going on with the software, were as with open-source you do, that's a FACT and that's all there is to it, it's as simple as that and that is no one's opinion.

Me lighten up, LOL, why don't you lighten up, you're the one taking this personal not me.

Trusting in the security doesn't make you a sheep, using the same things that pretty much everyone else does because you don't that there is something better makes you one, so don't be insulted, be educated! ;)




Well, Vuze is open source. And the best, most complete and with the most features and plugins bittorrent client by a mile.
It fucking rocks. Is it noob friendly? I suppose not. All the possible tweaking and infinite options may scare some people away.
Not trying to look leet here, but Vuze is the client of choice for seasoned torrenters. Once you try it, you're not going back.

Takes a toll on the system? Bullshit. It takes up around 100-120mb RAM and nearly the same processing power as any other client around.

It is simultaneously the best existing client for Windows, Linux and Mac OS.

Just my 2 cents, I've used nearly all mainstream bt clients, and I can't live without Vuze.


I didn't list Vuze because it is not just a P2P client, it's an all in one media application.

A little side note here is that Vuze is not the client of choice it happens to be uTorrent.

Also for Polarbear:

Anyhow Vuze is a melded all in one app now, this post was made strictly for Bittorrent ONLY clients and Vuze is not that, regardless of being able to use the classic or not, you still have to install everything which doesn't qualify as a only bittorrent client and again that was what this post is about.

Enough about Vuze, let's move on now THANKS!



Hmm, I feel kind of sorry for Vuze/Azures developers. This kind of reminds how only European countries complain about Microsoft including Internet Explorer. But whatever.


It's called a MONOPOLY and some countries and people don't like it. ;)

[Asterix]

interesting

[mysoogals]

i just sent request for torrent streaming for qBittorrent, i hope they add such support so i can leave utorrent forever.

[anon]

qBt? If you use private trackers, I don't think they're going to like its built-in client spoofing.

[DasFox]

qBt? If you use private trackers, I don't think they're going to like its built-in client spoofing.

According to the developer it's a White Listing option, not spoofing, saying some clients are white listed, some are black listed...

The option is being removed:

http://qbforums.shiki.hu/viewtopic.php?f=5&t=30

I don't see any reason why a decent client shouldn't be allowed on a tracker.

I used this on Demonoid without any problems.

[anon]

According to the developer it's a White Listing option, not spoofing, saying some clients are white listed, some are black listed...

This is from Wikipedia:

µTorrent spoofing to bypass private trackers white-listing

I never tried the client myself, I just know it can do that because a friend who uses Linux installed it and told me. Pretending to be another client is already spoofing anyway, despite whatever excuse the author may give :P


I used this on Demonoid without any problems...

But then again, Demonoid can't really be considered a private tracker.

[DasFox]

This is from Wikipedia:

µTorrent spoofing to bypass private trackers white-listingI never tried the client myself, I just know it can do that because a friend who uses Linux installed it and told me. Pretending to be another client is already spoofing anyway, despite whatever excuse the author may give :P


I used this on Demonoid without any problems...But then again, Demonoid can't really be considered a private tracker.




I said the option is being removed. :)

http://qbforums.shiki.hu/viewtopic.php?f=5&t=30#p141

[anon]

I said the option is being removed. :)

Either I failed to spot that or didn't notice your edit! :happy:

[chiefosceola]

Am I the only one that see's the irony here? You are worried about the security of your bt client but are downloading from a public tracker. That's like buying a condom but forgetting to put it on

[GCI]

Here's (http://forums.phoenixlabs.org/showthread.php?t=11341) an interesting news post on the PeerGuardian forums I just noticed today.

TBH, I thought the whole PeerGuardian thing was dead as a doornail, but I guess they're still alive. I haven't seen a new non-beta release for years. (Same story with PeerBlock, which, coincidentally, is a branch from PeerGuardian.)

[anon]

TBH, I thought the whole PeerGuardian thing was dead as a doornail, but I guess they're still alive. I haven't seen a new non-beta release for years. (Same story with PeerBlock, which, coincidentally, is a branch from PeerGuardian.)

You can always have your torrent client do the IP filtering via ipfilter.dat. Windows XP and below users are also fortunate enough to be able to run P2PFire, which is much better than PG/PB, in my opinion.

[GCI]

Using ipfilter.dat would require something to update it right? And speaking of which, P2PFire seems to be at the bottom of the list there. Doesn't seem to have been touched in years.

[anon]

Using ipfilter.dat would require something to update it right?

Reliable and light ipfilter for uTorrent:
http://sourceforge.net/projects/ed2k-ipfilterx/files/

You have to update it, yes. Doing it once a week should suffice. There's even an app that will do it with just a couple of clicks.


And speaking of which, P2PFire seems to be at the bottom of the list there. Doesn't seem to have been touched in years.

It indeed hasn't been updated for ages, but it outranks PeerGuardian code if your OS can run it. Unlike PG, P2PF blocks connections, and not traffic. Meaning your connection won't be slowed down if you haven't applied the max. half-open TCPIP.SYS patch. Furthermore, it's been coded to use an extremely low amount of resources.

[GCI]

Do I have to download those files everytime I want to update, or what's this program that does it in a couple of clicks?

And are the lists for P2PF updated frequently?

[anon]

Do I have to download those files everytime I want to update, or what's this program that does it in a couple of clicks?

Look for "ipfilter updater" :)


And are the lists for P2PF updated frequently?

P2PFire doesn't have a built-in list updater, but it accepts multiple formats, including guarding.p2p and ipfilter.dat. If you want to have just a single program blocking IPs, you can copy the ipfilter.dat file downloaded via the updater in its folder and run it.

[GCI]

Hrmm. I guess all of this sounds like too much trouble for me.

Although P2PFire sounds better, I just wish someone would start developing it some more :(

I don't touch high risk torrents, (only aging software), so I think I'll be ok for now. But thank you for the ideas :)

[pone44]

Edit: I extracted the file wrong.

[anon]

How do you open this file or with what app?

You mean the ipfilter.dat file? It's a renamed plain text document. :)