Printable View
Hi i was just wondering , why is the client banned ?
It reports fine and it is the fastest client i 've tried .
I've read somewhere that it uses greedy algorithms to connect to peers but what's the wrong with that?
What's wrong in downloading and uploading with better speeds?
As far as i can remember, it favours other bitcomet users and bullies other clients out of the swarm, just like 1 or 2 version of utorrent did a year or 2 back, difference is, when private tracker admins (i wasnt one of them but just from recolection) told the bitcomet coder about it, he told them tough crap, when they mentioned it to Utorrents devs, they listened.
Not sure if it still does it now, but for most tracker admins, the damage has already been done.
Like i said though thats all from memory from years ago now, so i may be completely off the mark, but thats how i sort of remember it.
i've heard that BitComet fakes the speeds
i read somewhere that BitComet actually took longer to complete a given torrent compared to uTorrent under simulated conditions
can't find the article now, will post the link here when i do :)
With my experience is about 30% faster than utorrent maybe even more
here is the link i found from fileshare freak
**************.com/2008/03/01/which-bittorrent-client-is-the-fastest/
It was formerly banned on most private torrent sites because 9/10 times it reported in-accurate details back to the trackers.
It was reported to the coders and they basically told us they didn't give a F*** about private trackers.
Hence since they did not care to fix the mistakes it was banned from most private sites.
Now 5 years later they fixed the error of their ways and fixed the faulty code they once had... (So they have said.)
But since they didn't listen in the past most sites have decided not to unban the client.
The real reason they finally updated their code was because they saw how popular utorrent got with working with admins and wanted to try and get some of their former userbase back. Alas its probably too late to have any major changes.
Pop Ups ads last time I installed deleted soon after,DHT issue.If they don't want to work with private trackers then I'd say that's the main reason it banned on so many trackers, at least firon does talk even if its like Politician.
anws there is a version with no ads if you know where to look ;)
and utorrent is becoming even worst of bitcomet as time goes by
That it's done at the expense of others.Quote:
Originally Posted by Stabber
I can only second stoi and Melvin on this one, the client is banned because it's known to be abusive towards others. If I remember correctly, older versions of the core won't even send the "stopped" event to the tracker. It's not banned on all private trackers, however - some allow it, and FL.ro even encourages its use by suggesting it as the preferred client.
huh?Quote:
Originally Posted by anon
where is it written?
On the details page for each torrent there's a "you need a BT client to download this, we recommend BitComet which you can get here [link]". At least it was there last time I checked.
I had no idea about that , it is the only tracker that encourages people to use bitcomet
I think I used this client the last time when Suprnova was still alive and kicking...
Back when I was getting started with torrents (circa 2004-2005), 80% of people in my peerlists were BitComets indeed. That was obviously on the pre-uTorrent days. If I recall, either I was an idiot or there weren't many good clients to choose from (Azureus was a letdown because I only had 256MB of RAM, and BitTornado could only do one torrent per instance).Quote:
Originally Posted by Cabalo
I don't understand why bittornado only uses one instance per torrent
ABC is bittornado with queue system , but it is banned in most private trackers , although it is basically bittornado
That may be because bitcomet disconnected all other clients, so all you were connected to was bitcomet.
Bitcomet
Burst (i think it was called, was good because it was multi torrents, but had a min upload speed of 5KBs per torrent, not 1KBs over all your torrents like they have now)
BitTornado (best client by a mile)
Az (was even shite back then imho)
That is all that spring to mind though, then there was that suprnova one they brought out, whatever happened to that anyway. started with an E if i remember correctly.
BitTornado is basically a fork of the (then) official BitTorrent client, which for whatever reason only supported one torrent per instance, and that wasn't changed.Quote:
Originally Posted by Stabber
uTorrent also used to have that. If your global upload speed was less than 6kB/s (individually you could set it to whatever you wanted it without penalties), your download would be limited to UploadSpeed*6. Even though not unbeatable, that was a good anti-leeching measure, so I don't know why they removed it.Quote:
Originally Posted by stoi
Exeem.Quote:
then there was that suprnova one they brought out, whatever happened to that anyway. started with an E if i remember correctly.
It was a good preventative measure anon... I agree they should not have removed it... it could easily be beaten but most of the users wouldn't bother or know how to. They more than likely removed it to give their client superiority... if people knew it worked like that and other clients didn't they would prefer to use a client that gave them max download speed regardless to what they were uploading.