Beta
×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

Long-Awaited BitTorrent 4.0 Released

timothy posted more than 9 years ago | from the quite-a-thing dept.

The Internet 521

wintermute1974 writes "After sitting at a stable release of 3.4.2 since last spring, Bram Cohen's official BitTorrent client has been upgraded to version 4. In addition to its existing, rock-steady functionality, BitTorrent now sports a new queue-based UI. The revision details are on the BitTorrent site. Packets are now marked as bulk data too, which is significant considering that about a third of all Internet traffic is currently torrent data."

cancel ×

521 comments

Sorry! There are no comments related to the filter you selected.

Good to see progress... (5, Insightful)

ratsnapple tea (686697) | more than 9 years ago | (#11885397)

The OS X client is still at 3.4.2. Is anyone working on an update? (I'd offer to help, but I don't program :p)

yep (-1, Flamebait)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#11885439)

Nice to see some people still think of Mac users as second-rate users.

Firefox is another great example of this.

Re:yep (0, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#11885456)

Mac users are second-rate. There's maybe 1 of them for every, say, 20 Windows users.

Why should Mac users be at the front of the line? Because they paid more?

nobody should be at the front of the line (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#11885480)

We're not a small enough part of the market to always be last in consideration, though.

Don't Mac desktops outnumber Linux desktops nowadays?

Re:nobody should be at the front of the line (0)

Nermal6693 (622898) | more than 9 years ago | (#11885503)

Don't Mac desktops outnumber Linux desktops nowadays?

Yes.

Re:nobody should be at the front of the line (2, Informative)

thank-u-for-sharing (843287) | more than 9 years ago | (#11885621)

Not here at slashdot according to this [osnews.com] .

Re:yep (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#11885501)

I think the attitude is, why bother with Firefox when we've got Safari? Can't say I disagree, either.

Re:yep (5, Funny)

commodoresloat (172735) | more than 9 years ago | (#11885597)

why bother with Firefox when we've got Safari?

You misspelled "Camino".

Re:yep (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#11885595)

You should just change the name of your OS to "Photoshop" and shut the fuck up already.

Re:yep (-1, Flamebait)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#11885635)

Nice to see some people still think of Mac users as second-rate users.

It isn't that you're second-reate users, it's just that you're all retarded. Before you immediately mod me down to -1 flamebait, think about it - for YEARS you get second-rate, late, half-baked software (with one or two obvious exceptions), yet you STILL continue to use that platform! I don't think it's a question of marketplace or percentage of installed users or any of that nonsense - it's the fact that we can keep shitting on your plate and you keep eating it. I mean c'mon, it's fun to watch becasue you 'tards are so stubborn and obstinate. Hell, your Macs could explode and leak radioactive sludge onto your crotch and burn your nuts off, and you'd still continue to use your precious Macs and line up to suck Steve Job's dick.

So yeah, it isn't the developer's fault for not developing for the back, it's just you being stupid by clinging - not to a sinking ship, but rather a ship that rapes you in the ass. Whatever. Sympathy level = nill. It may be a cliche, but buy a real computer and quit crying all the time.


MOD PARENT UP! (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#11885677)


Maybe not the most eloquent post ever made, but it is based on a foundation of truth.

Re:Good to see progress... (2, Informative)

great throwdini (118430) | more than 9 years ago | (#11885441)

The OS X client is still at 3.4.2. Is anyone working on an update?

Better yet, now that BT 4.0.0 uses GTK instead of wxWidgets (as per the release notes), will this hamper the OS X frontend?

The only other OS X native BT frontend I know is Tomato Torrent [sarwat.net] ... but that's just a tweaked 3.4.2 build. CLI / X Windows here I come...

Re:Good to see progress... (2, Interesting)

Wesley Felter (138342) | more than 9 years ago | (#11885477)

The OS X frontend is separate and uses Cocoa AFAIK.

Re:Good to see progress... (1)

Joe Tie. (567096) | more than 9 years ago | (#11885658)

Interesting that they switched to gtk from wxWidgets. Given the fairly minimal gui on the official client anyway, it seems a bit odd that they'd go to the trouble. I wonder what the motivation was.

Re:Good to see progress... (5, Insightful)

Coryoth (254751) | more than 9 years ago | (#11885507)

The OS X client is still at 3.4.2. Is anyone working on an update? (I'd offer to help, but I don't program :p)

It's in python so you should be able to just grab the source and use btdownloadcurses.py in Terminal.app (or whatever it is). Do you need a pretty GUI, or do you just want the new functionality etc.?

Jedidiah.

Re:Good to see progress... (5, Insightful)

rsmith-mac (639075) | more than 9 years ago | (#11885619)

Do you need a pretty GUI, or do you just want the new functionality etc.?

In all seriousness, it's a Mac. The userbase is not going to accept an application that doesn't have a "pretty GUI" because the GUI is much of what the platform is about. Just see OpenOffice for an example of software that's underutilized for its lack of an effective Mac GUI.

Re:Good to see progress... (2, Interesting)

Coryoth (254751) | more than 9 years ago | (#11885641)

I'm sure a Mac GUI is coming, my point was that if you want the new functionality now it is still entirely usable. The curses interface is actually quite nice, and was all I used for quite some time.

Jedidiah.

Re:Good to see progress... (4, Insightful)

BrookHarty (9119) | more than 9 years ago | (#11885689)

I use the command line under screen on my mac, in fact, I ssh into my mac more than sit at the desktop. My wife will be playing World of warcraft on it, and I'll just ssh for irssi/bt underscreen.

There are alot of new users that see what OSX is, a kick ass unix box with a great multi user desktop.

Re:Good to see progress... (1, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#11885561)

Might want to try Bits on wheels [bitsonwheels.com]

Re:Good to see progress... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#11885575)

Hahaha, that's awesome. Best BitTorrent client ever.

meh (0)

Shining Celebi (853093) | more than 9 years ago | (#11885398)

Of course, now we have to wait for all our favorite BT clients tp be updated.

Re:meh (2, Informative)

Wesley Felter (138342) | more than 9 years ago | (#11885427)

No you don't, because the protocol has not changed.

1/3rd of all traffic? (4, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#11885399)

stop all the downloadin.

Re:1/3rd of all traffic? (4, Funny)

ZackSchil (560462) | more than 9 years ago | (#11885425)

Help Computer.

Re:1/3rd of all traffic? (3, Funny)

wheany (460585) | more than 9 years ago | (#11885445)

I don't know much about computers.

Re:1/3rd of all traffic? (1, Funny)

Segway Ninja (777415) | more than 9 years ago | (#11885494)

Other than the one one I got at my house, my mom put a couple of games on there and I play it...

aww hell no (0, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#11885461)

whassup dog?

Holy shit! (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#11885672)

Get the fuck out of here!! Holy shit!! Come on you stupid idiots get the FUCK out of here!!! We're all going to die!!!!!

Re:1/3rd of all traffic? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#11885645)

I'M A COMPUTAH

But... (3, Funny)

TheKidWho (705796) | more than 9 years ago | (#11885400)

Does it have an FM tuner?

Re:But... (1)

carpe_noctem (457178) | more than 9 years ago | (#11885693)

No, because then it would be a "kazaa-killer".

The 'bulk data' tag (5, Informative)

Raindance (680694) | more than 9 years ago | (#11885402)

Since it's a decentralized standard, we'll need other clients to mark packets as 'bulk data' as well to get full benefits in routing from this. Since companies are starting to use BT commonly to distribute files in-game (or will, shortly), their code will need to be updated too. So, no magic bullet but a step in the direction of creating a heirarchy of data packets.

I'm interested to see where this'll go-- will ISPs absolutely choke 'bulk data' packets and drive folks into using older or fringe BT clients to get faster downloads? Will this help solve VoIP realtime bandwidth issues? Will the 'good net citizen' vibe surrounding writing the 'bulk data' flag into ones code overshadow potentially making ones users into second-class net citizens?

Or will this not be a big deal at all?

Probably some of everything, I suppose.

Link and Changelog (4, Informative)

perlionex (703104) | more than 9 years ago | (#11885404)

The actual link is to the download is here [bittorrent.com] .

The changelog:

# 2005-03-07: 4.0.0 is now available.

Changes since the last stable release:

All new queue-based user interface
Many options are now modifiable from the interface, including upload rate
Lots of other interface improvements
Extra stats are visible, for those who like it
Remembers what it was doing across restarts
New .torrent maker "btmaketorrentgui" replaces "btcompletedir"
Better performance, as always
License has changed to the BitTorrent Open Source License
Torrent fields are correctly created and interpreted as utf8
Too many little things to list

A few technical notes, for those interested:

Single port: launchmany can seed and client can download many files from a single port and thread
Interface now uses GTK instead of wxWidgets
BitTorrent packets are marked as bulk data to make traffic shaping easier

Re:Link and Changelog (1)

reynaert (264437) | more than 9 years ago | (#11885687)

  • License has changed to the BitTorrent Open Source License

I hate people who invent their own licenses. And this one [bittorrent.com] is completely unintelligible, even the preamble is written in lawyerspeak.

This pretty much guarantees I won't ever touch the code: I don't have a clue what I'm allowed, not allowed, and required to do. The GPL and BSD-like licenses are at least understandable for a non-lawyer.

Azureus rocks... (4, Interesting)

patniemeyer (444913) | more than 9 years ago | (#11885409)

It's Java based and seems to have every useful feature you can imagine:

http://azureus.sourceforge.net/

I haven't checked out the new official client yet, but Azureus has always been way ahead of the pack and I assume it still is. (Things like fast restart, nice visualizations of clients and file pieces, etc.)

Pat

Re:Azureus rocks... (4, Interesting)

slavemowgli (585321) | more than 9 years ago | (#11885504)

BitTornado [bittornado.com] is another nice client, with the added benefit that it's not written in Java. Not that I've got much against Java personally, of course, but it's quite a resource hog that I'd rather avoid when possible.

Re:Azureus rocks... (2, Interesting)

nzkbuk (773506) | more than 9 years ago | (#11885517)

While it's a very nice client I've always found it to be slower (in terms of network throughput) than other clients.

Re:Azureus rocks... (4, Informative)

MicroBerto (91055) | more than 9 years ago | (#11885558)

Yes, Azureus does rock. It seems that the development has slowed down a bit recently, since the 2.2 series release.

This makes sense though, because it simply works incredibly, and they're probably working on some bigger things now for a new version. It's stabilized quite nicely, better than any closed-source software out there lately!

excellent (0, Flamebait)

codergeek42 (792304) | more than 9 years ago | (#11885415)

Does this ean I can download pr0n faster? =P

Trying to get more users? (4, Interesting)

ProdigySim (817093) | more than 9 years ago | (#11885416)

It looks to me like this new client is adding alot of the features other clients added in themselves. The main part being the configurations from a GUI. Perhaps he's trying to get everyone using HIS client, so there's more control over the populus of BT users?

Re:Trying to get more users? (2, Insightful)

Deliveranc3 (629997) | more than 9 years ago | (#11885453)

Most people started switching away with the intrusive pop-ups.

Sites like IsoHunt have some features that are supported in some clients and not in others like multiple trackers with backups so if the main tracker goes down it will switch over.

He's not trying to implement any sort of eXeem crapfest at least.

I'm a bit confused about the bulk packets thing.

Yea there are people who will want to use over their neighbors wifi and will need some stronger restrictions (when it spikes to 300 down neighbors internet goes kablooie) but I'm not sure that making it mandatory is the best solution.

Re:Trying to get more users? (1)

Breakfast Pants (323698) | more than 9 years ago | (#11885528)

yes, interesting when you consider it along with the license change he made.. surpised it didn't get mentioned in the article blurb.

Control? (4, Informative)

Chuck Chunder (21021) | more than 9 years ago | (#11885574)

Look at the licence, it seems to me that's the "control" is something he certainly isn't overly interested in.

He probably just wants to offer a product he can be proud of, maybe so people will appreciate his work and choose to support him.

Irony. (5, Funny)

DarkHelmet (120004) | more than 9 years ago | (#11885417)

http://www.bittorrent.com/index.html [bittorrent.com]

Is it just me... but does anyone else find it ironic that there isn't a torrent available for downloading Bittorrent?

Re:Irony. (1)

jyxent (803012) | more than 9 years ago | (#11885442)

Not too ironic. It would be hard to get the client if you didn't already have an older version ;)

Re:Irony. (1)

perlionex (703104) | more than 9 years ago | (#11885443)

I think they figure: if you need to download BitTorrent, you probably don't already have it.

Plus, the download is so small (the RPM's 256k), and the number of people downloading using BitTorrent's probably relatively few, so the gains from using BT might not be that great.

Re:Irony. (1)

ZackSchil (560462) | more than 9 years ago | (#11885450)

What's with the "News" navigation link being replaced with a garbage "search" link that just spews ads everywhere?

Re:Irony. (1)

mtrisk (770081) | more than 9 years ago | (#11885460)

http://bash.org/?332053 [bash.org]

Not irony, but avoiding user confusion...

Re:Irony. (5, Funny)

cdsr (791348) | more than 9 years ago | (#11885478)

would you like to download winzip.zip too?

Re:Irony. (2, Funny)

Nermal6693 (622898) | more than 9 years ago | (#11885519)

StuffIt (essentially WinZip for Mac) was once distributed as a .sit file. :)

Re:Irony. (1)

Rie Beam (632299) | more than 9 years ago | (#11885509)

"Is it just me... but does anyone else find it ironic that there isn't a torrent available for downloading Bittorrent?"

Not really. Either A) You don't have a copy, in which case the link is useless, or B) You're upgrading, in which case it's probably a wise idea to get a fresh copy, just in case there's a slight "bug" in the last version (it's a contrived example, but I'm using it).

Re:Irony. (1)

strider44 (650833) | more than 9 years ago | (#11885533)

That's like having an ISP say "go to our website for more info on this wonderful deal". Always made me giggle.

If you don't have bittorrent, how will you download it?

Re:Irony. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#11885663)

Same reason WinRAR doesn't come in a RAR file, I assume.

Great! I Love BitTorrent. (5, Funny)

Murdock037 (469526) | more than 9 years ago | (#11885418)

Because I hate going to the theater to see... uh, Linux binaries.

Re:Great! I Love BitTorrent. (1)

Visceral Monkey (583103) | more than 9 years ago | (#11885434)

Heh. I laughed.

Begs the question . . . (1)

weighn (578357) | more than 9 years ago | (#11885577)

Because I hate going to the theater to see... uh, Linux binaries

So, now that [ insert favorite DMCA/RIAA/MPAA C & D closed .torrent site here ] is closed, where do I get these Linux binaries that you speak of?

Re:Begs the question . . . (1)

yuriismaster (776296) | more than 9 years ago | (#11885649)

I believe Google comes to the rescue [google.com]

bulk data (5, Funny)

vespazzari (141683) | more than 9 years ago | (#11885421)

is bulk data what fat chick pr0n is being referred to nowdays?

ABC (5, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#11885422)

has had [sourceforge.net] a far better interface and featureset for years.

Indeed... (2, Funny)

inertia@yahoo.com (156602) | more than 9 years ago | (#11885428)

...which is significant considering that about a third of all Internet traffic is currently torrent data.

Too bad it's all broken copies of LG3D.

Different License (4, Informative)

Raindance (680694) | more than 9 years ago | (#11885429)

Also of note is that BT 4.0 is using a modified version of the Jabber Open Source License.

It's complient with the Open Source Definition. Not huge shaking news it seems like.

Bulk data? (5, Interesting)

IntellectualCritic (858955) | more than 9 years ago | (#11885431)

Packets are now marked as bulk data too

Can somebody explain what that means?

I'm assuming that's not like bulk mail over the internet. I'd hate to accidently download viagra when I just when a torrent file.

Re:Bulk data? (2, Informative)

PxM (855264) | more than 9 years ago | (#11885565)

It's a flag at the IP level which routers use to handle different traffic classes (realtime, low-bandwith/low-lag, etc. In particular, bulk data is high-bandwith and lag tolerant so that someone using a high lag system like a sat. connection can route the packets in a manner that improves overall performance. This normally involves allowing for bigger chunks of data at a time with less feedback (the ACKs) for each chunk.

--
Free iPod? Try a free Mac Mini [freeminimacs.com]
Or a free Nintendo DS, GC, PS2, Xbox [freegamingsystems.com]
Wired article as proof [wired.com]

Re:Bulk data? (5, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#11885571)

Let's look at a few options vis-a-vis protocols that make use of TCP-IP. You have, for example Voice over IP (VoIP); Hypertext Transfer Protocol (HTTP); File Transfer Protocol (FTP); Network News Transfer Protocol (NNTP); Simple Mail Transfer Protocol (SMTP); Internet Relay Chat (IRC); and Secure Shell (SSH). (This list is not complete, but it's for illustrating the point, not to list every damn protocol on the whole Internet.)

Now, taking these one at a time. VoIP has certain needs: it needs a certain amount of bandwidth, and its data must be transferred within a short period of time, or it becomes unusable. A VoIP connection is generally held for of the order of minutes, so quick setup of a connection is not a high priority. HTTP needs quick setup/teardown, because you have one connection for each file (typically kilobytes in size; yes, I know that later versions of HTTP can transfer multiple files within one connection), but latency is not a huge concern; bandwidth might be, depending on the data. FTP is an interesting beast: low latency and low bandwidth for commands, but high bandwidth and don't-care latency for data. Setup/teardown times not a major issue. NNTP needs high bandwidth, but latency is not a concern at all. SMTP usually needs low bandwidth, and latency isn't a major issue, as long as the message gets through. SSH needs low latency, but bandwidth needs are generally low.

You have a relatively small pipe to the rest of the Internet. There are high demands on this pipe. How do you decide what gets pushed through, and what gets dropped, or delayed until later?

BitTorrent marking its packets as bulk means that quality of service systems can say "These packets aren't of major importance; they can be deferred until later". So the short-term throughput of BT is reduced, for the benefit of others who need the pipe for applications like VoIP (for example). When those other applications reduce their demands, BT is able to transfer its data.

The understanding is simple: the urgency in the transfer of data via bittorrent is low, so if bandwidth is at a premium, the routers can drop, or throttle, the bittorrent data to make room for high priority data. It's the same principle as FedEx uses: if you have stuff that needs to be moved FAST, you pay a price premium, and it gets moved on the next plane, bumping off some low-urgency, low-price cargo to the plane afterwards. If there's a lot of high priority and low priority traffic, such that the low priority traffic is building up faster than it can be moved, it's time for FedEx to buy more planes, or start not accepting low priority traffic -- or, in the ISP business, to buy a fatter pipe.

Hope this helps.

Re:Bulk data? (1)

advancedhair (859221) | more than 9 years ago | (#11885636)

My understanding is that the bulk data attribute denotes a packet of being a lower urgency than other packets. Whether or not routers implement rules to prioritise on this indicator is another matter.

I think the rationale is to make a bittorrent a bit more traffic shapeable (eg let VOIP packets through before BT packets). IMO it's definitely a good idea.

Re:Bulk data? (2, Informative)

ikkonoishi (674762) | more than 9 years ago | (#11885660)

The protocol section in the packet header is marked 30. As such it should follow the rfc969 [faqs.org] guidelines.

Where is the OS X version? (1, Informative)

Y-Crate (540566) | more than 9 years ago | (#11885444)

I tried the official website and it seems that their News area is non-functional at the time of this posting and Google just brings up tons of people asking the same question.

I haven't heard so much as a peep regarding the new Mac version during the dev of the latest Windows client. Can anyone give us an ETA on 4.0 for OS X?

BitTorrent Open Source License (4, Interesting)

IvyMike (178408) | more than 9 years ago | (#11885448)

Dear Lazyweb:

This version of bittorrent is licensed under the BitTorrent Open Source License [bittorrent.com] . Could you please compare and contrast this with other open source licenses for me?

Thank you, Lazyweb.

Re:BitTorrent Open Source License (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#11885521)

Why do you care? The purpose of bit torrent is to distribute illegal copies of movies. If you don't care about whether the movie is somebody else's property, why should you care about whether the software is?

Re:BitTorrent Open Source License (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#11885655)

yes you are correct.

the thousand or so hours of live performances i have on dvd are all illegal.
and stealing from the bands...

oh wait, they allow that.

just cause you steal/pirate/whatever term you want doesnt mean everyone does

Favourite torrent sites? (1, Interesting)

Indy Media Watch (823624) | more than 9 years ago | (#11885469)

With the recent tragic death of everyone's favourite torrent site, what are people using these days for sourcing movies?

Re:Favourite torrent sites? (1)

bstadil (7110) | more than 9 years ago | (#11885526)

PirateBay [thepiratebay.org]

Re:Favourite torrent sites? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#11885554)


Answer this question correctly, and insure the loss of your favorite site. Three can keep a secret when two are dead.

Re:Favourite torrent sites? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#11885563)

Re: The loss of supr? (1)

MachDelta (704883) | more than 9 years ago | (#11885627)

"But i'm not dead yet!" [mininova.org] ;)

That and a few others.. Pirate Bay, Demonoid, Torrent Reactor, etc.

Great news... (4, Funny)

jedimark (794802) | more than 9 years ago | (#11885470)

Now if only I could convince my stinking ISP that downloading linux ISO's is not illegal :-)

Looks Slick (2, Informative)

yuriismaster (776296) | more than 9 years ago | (#11885473)

NOTE: This is the windows version

Tried it out throwing down some linux torrent simultaneously.

Downloads save to the desktop by default (although editable) and look like Firefox's Download Manager with details, progress bars, etc. Really nice because opening up 5 torrents used to mean 5 seperate windows. Client worked fine on most of the trackers given by A Quick Google Search [google.com] .

Download it quick! I'm sure someone will torrent the executable...

Re:Looks Slick (1)

Nermal6693 (622898) | more than 9 years ago | (#11885532)

3.4.2 (the Mac version at least) would queue up multiple downloads in one window. Is that new for the Windows version?

Marking Packets Correctly (5, Funny)

Red Pointy Tail (127601) | more than 9 years ago | (#11885508)

I hope packets are also marked with the evil bit too, which is significant considering that most of all Torrent traffic is currently evil data.

Lack of per file settings. (2, Interesting)

PxM (855264) | more than 9 years ago | (#11885514)

My main gripe with the default BT client is the lack of per file settings. BitTornado [bittornado.com] (site's down at the moment) allows the user to download specific files in the torrent. This is useful since people can post aggregated torrents and the user can just select the files that he wants.

--
Free iPod? Try a free Mac Mini [freeminimacs.com]
Or a free Nintendo DS, GC, PS2, Xbox [freegamingsystems.com]
Wired article as proof [wired.com]

BitSpirit... (1)

Skates1616 (667152) | more than 9 years ago | (#11885516)

After trying out all the clients I have come to love BitSpirit [bytelinker.com] . It's coded in C++, which in my opinion runs with less of a memory footprint then most of the Java clients, it also includes every feature imaginable!

Check it out, its definitely a client worth looking at.

Idea: Streaming Torrent (2, Interesting)

CedgeS (159076) | more than 9 years ago | (#11885529)

Don't know if this is new or not, but a streaming peer-to-peer protocol like bittorrent would be pretty cool. It could be used to inexpensively broadcast audio or video almost live, potentially making news reporting available to a wider selection of journalists. Checksums on data would obviously be a problem here and malicious nodes in the network would have an easier time of disrupting communications. This mechanism needs to be independent of media type, and rely on being used in combination with file formats that can be picked up and played from any small chunk. The client could decide which portions of the stream it would rather get, sacrificing liveness to get as much as possible, trying to pick up the nearest blocks in the future first to stay as smooth as possible, or minimizing buffer size and going after the most recent blocks to stay as live as possible.

Re:Idea: Streaming Torrent (1)

wse7k (863345) | more than 9 years ago | (#11885676)

Your protocol (sp2pp) would have to work differently than BT, because BT sends chunks from arbitrary places in the file. Streaming needs the chunks to be ordered. sp2pp would need to work different. Ill bet you there is 'yet another abandoned p2p project' that 'does' that on sf.net.

Inverted (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#11885536)

For absolutely no good reason, the curses-based client now inverts the terminal window when it runs.

I can't figure out how to turn this off. Any advice?

./ organization (1)

kernel_dan (850552) | more than 9 years ago | (#11885553)

Shouldn't this story be under the Games section [slashdot.org] ?

Hmm (2, Interesting)

pHatidic (163975) | more than 9 years ago | (#11885559)

What ever happened to that new and decentralized torrent program?

Re:Hmm (1)

yuriismaster (776296) | more than 9 years ago | (#11885599)

You mean eXeem [exeem.com] ?

Spyware is what happened to it. I couldn't find anything of use on it, but YMMV.

Besides that, I really don't know too much. Apparently they released a new beta candidate.

Linux needs a gui alt to azureus (3, Insightful)

Sark666 (756464) | more than 9 years ago | (#11885578)

I've tried to like azureus, and I actually still use it as there is pretty much no alternative gui wise in linux, but I really wish there was.

Basically it brings my system to a crawl. Java vm (and yes i'm on 1.5) feels like a pig imo. We need a native gtk/qt gui that's in c/c++.

And please don't be a smartass and point out there is the basic gui that the official comes with. It's way too lacking. AFAIK, the only way to throttle is by using the ncurses one. Never mind that you can't set ratio's (I set all of mine to 1:1.), or bind all torrents to one port instead of needing all open. Pretty much all of the other clients do that now, except the official so someone please correct me if I'm wrong.

So as you see, there are quite a few things lacking in the official client. I've checked freshmeat periodically but couldn't find anything for linux. I know there is bitorrando and some others but they require access to a mysql server wtf?

My windows friends used to use azureus and didn't fair much better performance wise but now they pretty much all use bitcomet.

I don't mean to knock the azureus team, cause as it is they've made a pretty good functional gui, but java just brings the performance down too much.

Bittornado == no SQL (1, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#11885644)

I don't know where you got the idea of bittornado requiring mysql. It most certainly does not.

Re:Bittornado == no SQL (1)

Sark666 (756464) | more than 9 years ago | (#11885695)

Yep sorry I'm wrong on the bitornado thing requiring mysql. Can't recall which one I was thinking of there. But the above post telling me all the features I named are already in the new official. Hmmm, I'll have to have a look but I don't think that's the case.

Re:Linux needs a gui alt to azureus (1)

saleenS281 (859657) | more than 9 years ago | (#11885654)

Did you happen to read the changelog AT ALL? Granted it hasn't been ported to linux at all but you know it will be sooner or later... And it has every feature you listed...

Re:Linux needs a gui alt to azureus (1)

pyros (61399) | more than 9 years ago | (#11885685)

try bittornado

This just in: (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#11885594)

Too many stories about things in Washington causes cancer.

Why is this news? (1)

rm999 (775449) | more than 9 years ago | (#11885609)

no one uses the official bit torrent client. The most popular clients the last time I checked are Azureus and ABC, both fine programs.

Re:Why is this news? (1)

mark-t (151149) | more than 9 years ago | (#11885682)

Actually, I've _always_ used the official bittorrent client.

Initial impressions... (5, Interesting)

Rexz (724700) | more than 9 years ago | (#11885614)

Installer doesn't give any indication it's installing until you get a "Finished!" box. No choosing paths, no status indicator, nuffin.

Two donation nag screens.

Steals .torrent file associations.

No scraping the server for total seeder/peer numbers.

No moving completed downloads. No advanced seeding rules. No selecting of individual within a torrent. No download speed capping.

25mb memory usage running just one torrent.

Nothing excites me about this client. I look forward to its apparent efficiency increases being incorporated into Azureus et al, though.

Bram Cohen's dad... (0, Offtopic)

Mach5 (3371) | more than 9 years ago | (#11885623)

... taught my CIS-435 class. Data structures and algorithms. Its true! [njit.edu] He was a good teacher too.

Re: Long-Awaited BitTorrent 4.0 Released (3, Funny)

yrogerg (858571) | more than 9 years ago | (#11885642)

To be honest, I haven't been waiting at all.

Who cares? (5, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#11885657)

The official client has been miles behind most of the unofficial ones, and as far as I know nobody with any sense uses it anymore. And as far as I can see, this new version only makes it slightly less inferior. So why does it matter that it's been released? For that matter, why was it even made?

I don't see the point in reinventing the wheel as far as clients go when there are far better alternatives already out there. Let other people write the clients, and concentrate on improving the protocol.

In related news... (1, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#11885675)

...new versions of eDonkey and the NMDC client have been released. I can't wait!
Load More Comments
Slashdot Login

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?