digg

Join DiggAbout

Discover the best of the web!
Learn more about Digg by taking the tour.

BitTorrent merges with uTorrent

forum.utorrent.com — BitTorrent Inc. has just bought (merged with) the popular BitTorrent client, uTorrent for an undisclosed sum. Both CEOs are available for discussion on IRC.

Bury
show profanity settings
expand all
  • wisewaif, on 10/12/2007, -31/+118Hopefully this will enable the Mac version of uTorrent.
    • Napalm05, on 10/12/2007, -21/+149and a native linux version as well :)
    • MasteRR, on 10/12/2007, -14/+50Here here. It's the best client I have found. Native would be so much better than Wine.
    • bias, on 10/12/2007, -102/+70Please stop begging for Windows' apps okay?

      I've heard thousands times that how everything on Apple "Just Works" and how Ubuntu has everything you "Need". Since your OS is so good, so perfect, you definitely doesn't need anything that was created for Crappy Windows.
    • LycoLoco, on 10/12/2007, -2/+240And hopefully it's won't mean the end of what I consider to be the best BitTorrent client out there. Bram is notorious for doing what he wants and not caring about the end product. I'm afraid that this, coupled with the MPAA deal, is not going to end well for the end users.
    • rauz, on 10/12/2007, -12/+98@MasteRR, here here where?
      It's "hear hear"...sorry but it bugs me - and english is not even my first language.
    • Blabster, on 10/12/2007, -1/+54Well I respect Bram for giving us the beautiful bittorrent boom but I seriously think this merger was a BAD move.

      I mean ya the original client was cool for a few months but I see no purpose for this merger...I just hope none of that anti-piracy etc etc thing gets weight now because I really love this client.

      Let's see what happens...
    • LycoLoco, on 10/12/2007, -0/+77From the IRC channel:

      This is Ron, I run CS at BitTorrent. As to changing the client, there is not much point in doing that. BitTorrent wanted uTorrent because it is small, well written, and well liked. It makes no sense to take it on just to change it and lose all it's user base.

      That sounds all well and good, let's see if they can stick to it.
    • gurm, on 10/12/2007, -3/+15@bias
      utorrent works fine on Linux, as long as you run it under wine. There's nothing wrong with asking for a native version of an application to makes things just a little bit simpler. Isn't it nice to just click on that Firefox icon to run the program instead of having to set up a whole other environment (cygwin? or a virtual machine) just to see it run?
    • Hamman, on 10/12/2007, -6/+26+1 for Mac port. uTorrent is so much better than any OSX Torrent client.
      One of the things I miss from Windows.
    • LycoLoco, on 10/12/2007, -0/+28Again, from the channel:

      Bram: The way utorrent and mainline behave in that regard is pretty much the same right now, so no, there will be no phoning home in the client [to BT Inc or the MPAA]
    • modpancake, on 10/12/2007, -2/+20Server: irc.p2p-irc.net
      Channel: #utorrent
    • Gdoubleod, on 10/12/2007, -4/+33if my utorrent gets messed up I'm gonna be sooo mad! >_
    • LycoLoco, on 10/12/2007, -3/+26About the OSX version:

      we plan to produce an up to date osx client, but that's significant porting work
    • littlebear, on 10/12/2007, -40/+4The Linux version of uTorrent is called kTorrent. Check out http://ktorrent.org/
    • psykr, on 10/12/2007, -0/+25kTorrent is not the same thing, or any "version" of uTorrent. It was around first, and the code is not related
    • SleepJunkie, on 10/12/2007, -1/+9I have not been able to find anything to match uTorrent. It's the only thing I miss from the Windows world. Many of the trackers I use block some of the better OS X clients because users can report false statistics easily with them. I'm forced to use the painfully slow Azureus and feature packing Bittorrent. Hopefully they will release uTorrent (probably a lot of work) for OS X.
    • bias, on 10/12/2007, -28/+7my point is you fanboys brag about how you don't need to use windows because of how good your OSs are, how you have everything you need, and bash Windows into a pile of dog crap. On the other hand you use emulation / virtualization to use Windows' applications on your OSs, and begs for ports from Windows Developers. I mean if you want to use those applications, go and pick up a copy of WinXP and use it all you want and shut the hell up.
      If you own a Xbox 360, do you go crying to them ask for a port of Resistance from PS3, Do you go beg them to make Elebits for Xbox 360? NO, you go buy PS3 or Wii if you want to play that game because it was created for PS3/Wii.
    • JohnyD, on 10/12/2007, -1/+76Some answers from #uTorrent-questions:

      -will uTorrent be ported to Linux?
      probably

      -how many lines of code is it comprised of?
      ~50-60K

      -will encryption be removed?
      no (answered by Bram)

      -features most important to you (directed @ Bram)
      low memory footprint, code size, cpu usage

      -is there any thoughts to an osx client?
      (Bram) we plan to produce an up to date osx client, but that's significant porting work

      -are there any features that will be removed from uTorrent?
      (Bram) we're leaving the uTorrent client mostly alone for now, on the grounds that people like it (further defined 'mostly' as in, not much of anything substantive will change)

      -will uTorrent be replacing the original python client?
      (Bram) we aren't announcing integration plan details right now

      -Bram, are you talking with asus and other router makers for putting uTorent in there?
      (Bram) we're talking to lots of people

      -will uTorrent ever be open-sourced?
      (Bram) not in the forseeable future, but we'll continue to maintain an open source reference implementation

      -Bram, you said before that you're not a big fan of protocol header encryption... do you still stand behind this?
      (Bram) it isn't much harder for an isp to recognize encrypted headers than unencrypted headers.

      -will content be monitored?
      (Bram) absolutly not

      -does the uTorrent codebase compile on linux today (in your labs?)
      (ludde) No

      -ludde can't develop anything new for uTorrent?
      (ludde) bittorrent inc will do the majority of the development work

      -what IDE was uTorrent developed on?
      (ludde) Microsoft Visual C++ 6.0 with a few routines written in visual cobol. uTorrent was written in C++ with some tiny chunks of assembly

      -will uTorrent continue to be free?
      (Bram) utorrent will continue to be available and continue to be free (as in, no cost, not open source)

      -Utorrent uses a lot of Windows API's right? Won't that be a problem when porting to *nux/OSX
      (ludde) Yes, the UI is tightly bound to Windows APis, however, the core backend is easier to port.
      (Bram) the utorrent UI is windows native, so porting that part to osx or linux is a significant amount of work (but planned to be done at some point)
    • lumbergh, on 10/12/2007, -15/+1Have you Mac guys checked out XTorrent? http://xtorrentp2p.com/
    • bentrop, on 10/12/2007, -2/+21I like µtorrent, I really do. At least under windows it is the best of its class.
      But to this: WTF!

      The main reason behind this deal seems to be to replace the open source cross-platform reference mainline client with another client that is closed source!
      I think switching from open to closed source to please potential investors and gain more power over the client itself seems to be the main idea behind this deal. DRM and OSS just don't mix well.
      Also, ludde, the developer that made µtorrent the great application it is today will not play a significant role in its future development ... just great. :-(

      * No more real development on the open source mainline client ...
      * Azureus was just turned into a weird YouTube/stage6-Monstrosity with underlying Bittorrent client (Zudeo) ...
      * ludde won't work on µtorrent any more, it will stay closed source ...
    • metafore, on 10/12/2007, -3/+6i hope this holds up in court:
      "Bram: The way utorrent and mainline behave in that regard is pretty much the same right now, so no, there will be no phoning home in the client [to BT Inc or the MPAA]"

      cus i seriously doubt that's going to hold true for more than a month or two.

      /me looks for a new bt client :*(
    • lumbergh, on 10/12/2007, -2/+2Also, I just realized (by trying it) that the Windows µTorrent client seems to run just fine using Crossover Mac (for you folks with Intel Macs)! Or just stick to xtorrentp2p.com as I mentioned in an earlier post.
    • amk29j, on 10/12/2007, -2/+8@bias

      Actually, I would love if Square Enix made games for the Wii. I would NEVER buy a PS3. I'm not exactly complaining, I'm just saying that even console gamers will sometimes want games on their console of choice. Just because a lot of alternative programs are available for OSX or Linux doesn't always mean they are the best. I am anti-MS. But I can admit that Linux is not the answer to all of my problems. I love Linux and it works wonderfully, but there are little things that are just tedious in Linux and easier in Windows (and vice versa of course). (One of these things is seamless iPod integration. Although many programs in Linux support iPods, none support ALL the features like iTunes.)

      My main point is, nothing is perfect and no one will ever be satisfied. uTorrent is a WONDERFUL program that Linux and Mac users would love to see ported to their operating systems.
    • skyshock21, on 10/12/2007, -1/+4@ bias

      And we will keep extolling the virtues of Linux. Bit Tornado is a perfectly great BT client for Linux that I like using. I've never used uTorrent on Windows, and would like to give it a shot on Linux someday. But I'm not going to let something as trivial as a bit torrent client dictate what OS I'm going to use.
    • chicksdigme, on 10/12/2007, -3/+5Now uTorrent is controlled by Warner Bro, I would never ever use it. Who knows what kinda spying will Warner Bro be doing on uTorrent users.
    • szelij, on 10/12/2007, -0/+5The main problem with this is the threat of "bloatware". I for one find utorrent absolutely fantastic but with an acquisition like this, you might not see an ad-free utorrent in the future. That said, i've got nothing against the writer for selling out-he should profit from his innovations-whilst he's still able to do so.

      That said, i do believe that technology's march forwards will produce one day, if utorrent fails to live up to its present reputations-inevitably either a better client or a new network altogether.
    • awg909, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2they answer a lot of question on irc.... but how can we trust them?
    • dmerc, on 10/12/2007, -1/+1Xtorrent is a pretty good app. Try that on a mac. Utorrent won't be the same after this. I don't want it on my mac now.
  • cruzlee, on 10/12/2007, -5/+149Uh oh... This doesn't bode well...

    Remember the news that bittorrent and the movie industry teamed up? I hope this will not result in a crippled DRM supporting version of utorrent.
    • 1021, on 10/12/2007, -1/+31yep, I think it is basically the movie industry trying to buy over all of the different bittorrent utility providers and buy them into a large congolmeration to make $$. Unfortunately, these idiots don't seem to realize that the sharing is not occurring because of the cleints themselves but the actual underlying protocol.
    • NinjaBoy, on 10/12/2007, -0/+28Surely not. They know that they have lots of good competitors out there like azureus and if they make a crappy product people will just switch.
    • dig412, on 10/12/2007, -2/+28Even if you stick to 1.6, uTorrent still phones home for the DHT login, so it could end up disabled for those not using the DRM'ed version.
      Lets hope it never comes to that.
    • jo42, on 10/12/2007, -2/+41Proper title should be "uTorrent sells out to The Man".

      With Azureus doing what they are and now this, it is time for a real, good, open source BT client...
    • JohnyD, on 10/12/2007, -9/+8If it does.... then use another client.

      While I agree with most of the posters here... uTorrent is my torrent client of choice. Small footprint... plenty of power... encryption.... my brother and buddy used to joke with me to switch to Azerus... they'd show me the 3D SWARM!! haha... it did look cool... but even they have switched to uTorrent now. ;)
    • moonoo, on 10/12/2007, -1/+8Yeah, doesn't look good for us users...
    • awhiteflame, on 10/12/2007, -1/+12I'm not sure how DRM *could* be implemented in BitTorrent.
    • Cimlite, on 10/12/2007, -0/+6Does not have to be DRM... could also just be that they add a lot of bloat to the program on the behalf of movie studios.

      Here's hopeing...
    • skyshock21, on 10/12/2007, -1/+3If it does, there's going to be a BIG market gap for Bit Comet and Bit Tornado to fill.

      I wouldn't sweat this. :)
    • spacebar14, on 10/12/2007, -0/+7/me backs up utorrent.exe
    • drizek, on 10/12/2007, -1/+2ktorrent might be the answer. Version 2 will run on windows, linux and osx. I like the interface and it is only slightly less performant than utorrent. I just hope they get rid of bitcomet as the engine and use something else that doesnt hurt the BT network and is also not banned by most trackers.
    • BeefBaron, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1Looks like ill be turning off the "check for updates" function in uTorrent...
    • stoeptegel, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0@drizek
      I don't know where you got this information from, but
      KTorrent never used an engine of any other client out there, and certainly not bitcomet's.
      To be honest, at first many people thought it was a version of libtorrent (including me), but it turned out that they wrote their own engine from scratch from the start of the development. The name of the engine is called libktorrent since, and has nothing todo with the engines of other clients.
  • ohgr, on 10/12/2007, -21/+74Sounds like it's back to Azureus for me.
    • chaimpot0k, on 10/12/2007, -34/+16I never left.
    • raitchison, on 10/12/2007, -10/+34Likewise for me except I'm going back to ABC as I avoid Java like the plague.
    • diligent1, on 10/12/2007, -16/+66java is the plague
    • JohnyD, on 10/12/2007, -4/+21I avoid Azerus like the plague.

      Comon... 3D swarm view? That feature creep'd app is gonna explode like George's wallet on Seinfeld!

      He just wants the codebase. Frankly I don't blame him.... it's the best on the *free* market!
    • br0ck, on 10/12/2007, -0/+19Actually, Azureus is trying to go commercial as well. They just recently raised $12 million in funding in an attempt to become a legit content provider at http://zudeo.com and any time that has been attempted in the past, DRM has quickly shown its ugly face.
    • etempest, on 10/12/2007, -2/+5It's the open / anyone can create plugins, and with my system if work rather well and very nice speeds.
    • RandomEngy, on 10/12/2007, -2/+4Maybe you're being a little quick to judge. I mean the client hasn't even changed yet. And even if it does you can use an old version.
    • Weilawei, on 10/12/2007, -1/+9This is disheartening. I wrote a Python API to the uTorrent WebUI HTTP interface (http://freshmeat.net/projects/utorrentpy ) and here they go getting bought out. Damn. If I wanted to develop off of a codebase thats going to be milked for every possible consumer dollar, I wouldn't develop open source software.
    • mewithoutyou, on 10/12/2007, -6/+7Yeah me too...

      * boots up Azerus for some serious torrent acti..
    • mewithoutyou, on 10/12/2007, -2/+16...back again sorry Java VM crashed my machine.
    • skyshock21, on 10/12/2007, -11/+1Azureus?! Pfft.. who uses that crap? Bit Comet or Bit Tornado for me, thanks.
  • code_of_life, on 10/12/2007, -8/+37Looks like Bram Cohen acknowledges that µTorrent is #1, and wants to make it the official client.
    Once it gets ported for linux and mac, Azureus will lose all popularity.

    I just hope Ludde didnt sell outright, but maintains a share in the joint venture.

    • modsuperstar, on 10/12/2007, -15/+12I totally agree. I've been waiting for the day I can turf Azureus on my Mac.
    • etempest, on 10/12/2007, -0/+7If they add DRM code.. it's going to push people away unless they have an "open" version of separate from the commercial one.

      And are we sure that the partners will want this or create drm scheme for linux support or mac?
    • JohnyD, on 10/12/2007, -0/+5from the questions I and many others asked him... it doesn't appear that Ludde will be leading development. He stated that Bittorrent Inc. will be doing the majority of the development. I posted a slew of the questions answered above in another comment of mine... just scroll up.
    • Ribald_Jester, on 10/12/2007, -0/+5he did sell outright. In fact he doesn't work for bittorrent.inc - he is simply a "technical consultant" now. ie - out of the picture. He'll regret that later - after the glow of the money is gone, when he see's what hollywood did to his creation.
  • ringo380, on 10/12/2007, -0/+10They only mention that the discussion is in #utorrent. Does anyone know what IRC server that is?
  • akarpo, on 10/12/2007, -0/+63If they include some sort of integrated DRM client in uTorrent, there is no way I will ever use it.
    • ikonoclasm, on 10/12/2007, -0/+17You can expect it. BitTorrent Inc. signed a deal with the movie industry last week because the industry wants to stop piracy. Everyone assumed the deal was the movie industry's ignorance at the difference between BitTorrent Inc, the BitTorrent client and the BitTorrent protocol. I guess we got egg on our faces in failing to anticipate that the industry would just buy out the other clients and cripple them with DRM.

      Azureus partnered with Zudeo, now uTorrent bought out by BitTorrent, which sold its soul to the industry... This does not look good.
  • aliengoods, on 10/12/2007, -16/+6Don't care, I use Azureus. And since there doesn't seem to be a single CEO that understands its not the client, but the protocol, I think we'll be just fine.

    As a side note, I don't care about having a windows only client. I use VMware for a number of windows virtual machines on linux and haven't had any troubles.
  • neiltc13, on 10/12/2007, -40/+4I know that people only use Bit Torrent for a few things - porn and illegal file sharing, so why would people NOT use a good Usenet server and client instead?

    Usenet is a CLIENT/SERVER arrangement and results in file downloads only - you don't have to upload anything to get your file.
    • dig412, on 10/12/2007, -3/+23And it also costs money to get a decent server.
      My friend buys a subscription to giganews every month, but i can get everything he can for free using torrents.
    • akarpo, on 10/12/2007, -3/+23Yeah, but for good Usenet access (Giganews unlimited) I pay $25.00 a month. Most people don't like the thought of paying $25/month.
    • vandread, on 10/12/2007, -8/+13yeah because I like slow downloads because 5000 other people are downloading from the same source and I'm sure the people paying for 5000 people to download that file from them would much rather front the whole bandwidth bill instead of being able to offload a lot of that balance off on others...

      I'll stick to bittorent, I don't mind sharing and I make a point to keep my seeds going till I reach at least a 1.0 download->upload ratio. Even if I have to seed some large file for a month to get it there.
    • netcrusher88, on 10/12/2007, -3/+42Not everyone uses BitTorrent for illegal purposes. In fact a high percentage of BitTorrent traffic is legal. Unlicensed anime, public domain works (see Azureus.com), Creative Commons music, Linux ISOs, even Wikipedia database dumps. But the industry wants you to believe that BitTorrent has no legitimate uses - unless, of course, you're paying them to use it.

      Quit playing the industry's lapdog and gtfo my digg.
    • Afreyt, on 10/12/2007, -9/+2Since when did unlicensed anime become exempt from copyright restrictions. There is about 1 legal use for bittorrent, and its to enable people who want to make works public to distribute the cost of bandwidth to the people who want those works.

      But on the whole, linux isos, creative commmons. Just because its copyrighted overseas and doesn't have a U.S. distributor doesn't make it legal.
    • gfnw, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1Unlicensed anime is still illegal, it's just that most don't see it as "bad" as it's not usually marketed at the people who download it anyway. People see it as the companies are not losing money with the downloads as it's not even there for us to buy in the first place.
  • foxhaze, on 10/12/2007, -3/+14I hope this results in an even better client.
  • junkking, on 10/12/2007, -11/+5This isn't bad news. Bram is buying the product for the efficient implementation of the Bittorrent protocol. Watch uTorrent (or how it will likely be called BitTorrent Lite) get ported for cellphones and other embedded devices.

  • saleens281, on 10/12/2007, -12/+39It was good while it lasted. I given Bram's willingness to bend over *for the man* in the name of the almighty dollar, I expect uTorrent to go downhill quickly.
    • mcdvda, on 10/12/2007, -1/+32I don't blame them. If some big business wanted to pay you millions for your program so you can retire right now, wouldn't you? Beats workin everyday for 40 some years
    • bobcrotch, on 10/12/2007, -4/+19Because getting paid for something that you have created makes you stupid?

      Jesus christ.
    • jerbaker, on 10/12/2007, -1/+8It would be even better if he took the money and then implemented their DRM in an easily crackable/bypassable way.
  • JeffH, on 10/12/2007, -0/+31XD. I have to say it's funny as hell that a company merger announcement is coupled with; "Both CEOs are available for comment in IRC". Not that it's a bad thing, I love the fact that they are speaking to the public, but most mergers are witnessed by mobs of press, not IRC lurkers.
    • FreydNot, on 10/12/2007, -0/+4I think it was equally funny that the first comment after the announcement is "this sucks" and they keep on going in that vein.
  • copilot, on 10/12/2007, -1/+15I really liked uTorrent. Awesome to see the creators make some skrilla, sad that it's moving into the pockets of major media cartels.
    • junkking, on 10/12/2007, -1/+13Conspiracy theories would suggest uTorrent might start sending anonymous statistics for any movie downloading to MPAA.
    • rkuchiki, on 10/12/2007, -0/+14But we should be safe if we burn the downloaded movie to CD or DVD and throw it in a VAULT, right?
  • IMA_Sellout, on 10/12/2007, -2/+15I have to agree with all the people who feel that this may not bode well for the pirates of the world. I mean µTorrent is great but it does lack a few features that I loved in Azureus but my problem with Azureus is that it's slow as all hell and eats of the majority of my system's resources. If they can fix the Java slowness issues, I'm jumping ship again.
    • piwy, on 10/12/2007, -1/+21Java is slower than many other languages, but azureus' slowness is a result of inefficient coding.
    • sadler121, on 10/12/2007, -0/+5The language Java is not slower then C, or C++. It is having to run the semi-compiled byte code through a VM that slows down the application. However, Sun has improved the Java VM's JIT compiler and is making even more improvements that are coming with Java 6. If you are experiencing a slow down in the app, it is most likely in the code, just like any C++, or C program can be slowed down by buggy, crappy code.

      That being said, Java is being released under the GPL v.2 so if you think something is slow you can tweak it yourself.

      I would much prefer Java development to .NET, manly cause of the icky feeling I have when I have to deal with Microsoft products (plus Java is a helluva lot more portable the .NET ever could be, even with Novell's mono implementation and with Novell's recent sell out, who would want to touch mono?).
    • Nicolay77, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2Java is a hell of a VM as far as VMs go. It has very advanced optimizations that makes it faster than almost any other interpreted language. However true compiled languages still beat it.

      Java can instantiate objects in the heap 2 times faster than C++ compiled with GCC.

      However, a good C++ program doesn't instantiate objects in the heap all the time. Instead it instantiates objects in the stack (almost) all the time. C++ instantiates objects in the stack 25 times faster than Java can in the heap, even with all optimizations and running the server VM.

      Depending on the program, in the end C++ is much faster than Java, and has a much smaller memory footprint, but you must do things the C++ way, don't expect to instantiate all your objects in the heap and be fast, also using objects in the stack means that you don't need to worry about memory leaks.
  • Captj, on 10/12/2007, -5/+7Eff that noise. I think Bram's working with the movie industry blah blah's.
  • pegboy, on 10/12/2007, -5/+30Back to Azureus for me. I don't need any MPAA ***** DRM impeding my illegal acquisitions.
    • whalesalad, on 10/12/2007, -6/+4Azureus is crap, see comment above about avoiding Java like the plague.

      Aside from uTorrent, the only worthy client I've used is ABC.
    • skyshock21, on 10/12/2007, -4/+1@ uscfan

      Check Bit Comet or Bit Tornado. Bit Comet's my favorite on windows. Very similar to uTorrent.
  • UpTheToon, on 10/12/2007, -3/+3Boooo

    Maybe it will stay clean and bittorrent just wants it to use in other devices... I doubt it though.
  • suntereo, on 10/12/2007, -8/+5Biggest shocker to me regarding this was "Both CEOs are available for discussion on IRC". Common... are they really available online to talk to everybody? That's AMAZING!
  • VG05, on 10/12/2007, -7/+5This is horrible for users of utorrent. utorrent is one of the BEST torrent clients, why? It's lightweight and simple. Go look at the new azerous beta3 and see how horrible it became. I used both utorrent/azerous for different reasons, but once these go commercial with the blog of download this or download that, ill find myself another torrent client.

  • juangt, on 10/12/2007, -23/+2bittorrent sucks... the net will evolve, and so, other delivery methods will be deciphered... for now, eMule plus...
    • Phocion55, on 10/12/2007, -2/+24[/sarcasm]

      ....there, I added it for you.
  • gmurray, on 10/12/2007, -0/+15This sucks. uTorrent is a great client but I don't trust it with the corporate interest BitTorrent, inc. has. How are they going to keep uTorrent so small and precise with BitTorrent pushing features and probably DRM down their throats.
  • Tetravus, on 10/12/2007, -0/+9I don't think that µtorrent will be "ported" to other platforms as it's supposedly composed of hand coded, highly optimized, C code that targets the Windows platform.

    It may be re-implemented on other platforms, but that would require either removing the optimizations or assigning dedicated programmers to keep all versions feature concurrent. Of course, BitTorrent is rolling with a fat wad of cash just now, so who's to say they won't hire the staff to do that...
  • ronaldst, on 10/12/2007, -4/+7I hope that the guy that codes it still does the client. I don't want any of the Python crap to ruin uTorrent. If I want bloated and slow, might as well get that crappy Asureus torrent client.
    • MistressRoninS, on 10/12/2007, -0/+8I cant imagine this is good. I think utorrent is the best out there and they had better not fu#k it up by merging.
  • ismokedope, on 10/12/2007, -9/+7this sucks. Utorrent is going to end up an overbloated, memory hogging POS.
  • BeccaLynn, on 10/12/2007, -4/+5Hrm, I was just recently introduced to utorrent, well, this bites!
  • bhavi, on 10/12/2007, -1/+40nooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo
  • kidtux, on 10/12/2007, -15/+2I hope this means they will finally port it over to OSX

    ---
    http://www.iheartmygeek.com
  • raitchison, on 10/12/2007, -13/+3Interesting, there's nothing on the main uTorrent.com page. I wonder if this is a hoax.
    • dig412, on 10/12/2007, -0/+10It's a sticky on the official forums : |
    • raitchison, on 10/12/2007, -6/+3Yes I understand that though I'd expect something on the main web site, makes me wonder if possibly the forums got hacked or something.

      There's also nothing on the mail bittorrent.com site. So far this seems fairly unconfirmed.
  • wisam, on 10/12/2007, -3/+4The channel is #utorrent on irc.p2p-irc.net.
  • elbxmatatan, on 10/12/2007, -8/+1Doesn't look save, *uninstalling utorrent.
  • mikefitz2, on 10/12/2007, -5/+0even if they do invoke some DRM type of application with utorrent there are still dozens of other clients available for end users; some just as good as utorrent.
  • Nowheredan, on 10/12/2007, -0/+15The version of uTorrent I have now will be fine for the foreseeable future, so I'm not terribly worried about this screwing things up. And if uTorrent does end up sucking, someone else will spring up to fill the void - maybe something open source.
    • Soulhuntre, on 10/12/2007, -2/+7I wonder how much longer people will continue to build great tools for the masses to use once they realise "the masses" will abandon them anytime they try and make any money from their efforts?

    • jerbaker, on 10/12/2007, -1/+7As long as there are people for whom some things are more important than money.
    • MistressRoninS, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2I admit I was surprised that it wasn't open source and for a long time figured it was open source, purely because of the way the program is so easy to run, mod and learn how to use.
      MRS
    • ting, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1[b]Soulhuntre[/b] - till the moment in which these people realize that it's not good to sell your a$$ to the enemies of the masses that promoted you.
      Can someone with clear conscience say that the devs of uTorrent were in blissful ignorance for what their program will be and is used? Or even more - didn't count on this so called "unlawful" activity to gain popularity and tons of users?

      I say that if they knew that it will be used only from a couple of Linux developers to spread distributions in a tiny circle they would never even start the whole story.

      So the little stars will rise and fall again in the mire till the moment someone figure out how to make money and in the same time keep the inspiration and the love of the people.
  • etempest, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2They would be smart to bundle a "commercial download" DRM version (or use it's core as the base of other products) and the free "open" protocol version of what it is now.
  • williamhelmick, on 10/12/2007, -0/+12Hey everybody,

    The upside of this is that if they change it for the worse, we can still use our outdated versions of uTorrent and ignore the newer versions. Good thing torrenting is based around the protocol, and not the client, eh?
    • wisam, on 10/12/2007, -0/+8Well, there's the very unlikely possibility that the protocol itself changes such that old clients/trackers be obsolete.New versions of all the other clients/trackers will coupe with the change but we'll be stuck with an obsolete old version of utorrent.
    • MistressRoninS, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2Unless the older client gets blocked like they do with the older versions of soulseek, forcing you to upgrade.. but maybe there is a mod for that too. Im keeping mine though and using it while I still can. /me cries
      MRS
  • MrSunshine, on 10/12/2007, -8/+3Back to eMule :|
  • z.unit, on 10/12/2007, -0/+16www.oldversion.com ftw if they start messing it up.
    • Jacobi, on 10/12/2007, -1/+8That's what I was thinking. I hope they don't mess it up, but if they do the version I'm running now works more than fine.

      Plus I really really really really don't want to go back to Azureus.
  • digitalrift, on 10/12/2007, -3/+2on a side note, does anyone know where I can download the pirate song they had playing on the pirate bay?

  • next, on 10/12/2007, -10/+8Wow. Are you people really this paranoid? Oh no, BitTorrent Inc. is being paid so the MPAA can sell movies. Drama.

    Are you all OPPOSED to a legal pay-to-download movie service? The MPAA did NOT buy BitTorrent, they're simply using their technology so they can (actually grow up) and offer a service that people want. I mean, it'll probably be bogged down by DRM and stuff, but at least they're making an attempt (like iTunes, which I won't use due to DRM, but is still a good first attempt for the music industry). No one is forcing you to use it, and BitTorrent Inc. has NO REASON to have it phone home about downloads, or include DRM in the official non-MPAA paid for client. It will only serve to ruin their name and drive away users.

    I bet Linux is evil because Microsoft uses it too.
    • Soulhuntre, on 10/12/2007, -9/+2"Are you all OPPOSED to a legal pay-to-download movie service?"

      Yes, many of them are. What is more amusing is watching how many peopel will switch away the moment it looks like they can't use a technology for piracy all the while talkign about how no one uses it for piracy.
    • jerbaker, on 10/12/2007, -1/+6Your argument is not much different than "if you have nothing to hide you shouldn't worry about surveillance." I don't care about downloading illegal *****. There are tons of ways to do that. I don't want a record someplace of everything I download, when I download it, and all that ... even if it is just Linux distros and porn.
    • erkokite, on 10/12/2007, -0/+8I don't think anyone here is opposed to a legal movie or music download service. We are opposed to DRM and software that calls home and violates our privacy.
    • Afreyt, on 10/12/2007, -1/+5Even Hitler liked dogs

      The truth is most bittorrent use is, if not illegal, questionable. How many times do you download a linux iso, or the complete wikipedia database, or the creative commons library, or all of project gutenberg? Most usage is for copyrighted movies, TV shows, music. But, that said, any DRM or Phone Home placed in uTorrent would be quickly patched out when discovered, there is NOTHING to worry about except the usual XXAA organization looking at the information you choose to make public when you log in to a tracker and holding you accountable for it... which is the same as it was yesterday.

      Likewise, the XXAA industry organizations think they own the customers and its their God Given Right to make money off us by selling us media that we already have the rights to over and over and over in different formats Records, CDs, Beta, VHS, DVD, ... and extending copyright.

      But bittorrent isn't the front of that war. Bittorrent is just a technology. If the technology turns bad, someone will write a better one. Where is the encrypted peer to peer software we were all promised for creating P2P darknets? There is no law against private, secure communication the XXAA can't spy on.

      People would just rather whine about the crappy software they get for free rather than write something that would do what they want.

    • MistressRoninS, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2@next
      I'm not worried about the movie companies making better ways to sell their movies, I think that is a good idea. My concern is mainly for the product itself changing. A good product being modified when it is so nice now.
      I wonder if they really are taking questions in mIRC.
      MRS
    • FreydNot, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2@Afreyt

      http://waste.sourceforge.net/
    • gfnw, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1Personally I'm opposed to a pay-to-download-and-then-to-distribute-the-companies-product-for-them-using-my-bandwidth-which-I-pay-for movie service.

      If I'm paying for something, then I expect a high-speed http/ftp direct download, unless there are HEFTY discounts involved.
  • striker1211, on 10/12/2007, -9/+1How come nobody uses BitComet? It's fast like uTorrent. It did have some dht issues but they've been fixed for a while.
    • raitchison, on 10/12/2007, -2/+9Cause we're not leechers?
    • ccheath, on 10/12/2007, -2/+1you can leech just as easy with μTorrent (or any client for that matter)

  • disciple19, on 10/12/2007, -4/+0sigh..
    the reason they bought utorrent is because it is small, efficient and very stable..
    the ideal thing to leverage, as he said on the front page, to small devices such as PDAs , cell phones etc ( warner already plans to deliver via torrent)


    why would they screw over their investment by bloating it up?
    as they said, the intention is to leave well enough alone..



    everyone who claims he 'sold out' by his deal with the MPAA, did you even read what the deal covers and what it really entails?
    if he's getting paid because the MPAA doesn't fully understand what they were buying into, i'm more than happy for him
    i'm sure most of those who are crying him down wouldn't even dream of donating $1 to the project, if donations was his business model

  • neFariou5, on 10/12/2007, -1/+3[19:03] join #utorrent-questions if you have questions!
  • wisam, on 10/12/2007, -0/+4They created a FAQ here
    http://forum.utorrent.com/viewtopic.php?id=17280
    • raitchison, on 10/12/2007, -2/+3Conspicuously absent from the FAQ is any discussion of adding DRM technology to uTorrent. I'd suspect that would be the frequentest asked question out of this announcement.
    • Sanchez, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2
      Q: Will any DRM related technology be implemented in the uTorrent or mainline BitTorrent clients?

      A: DRM is function by content and media players, and doesn't involve content distribution tools directly.
  • merdiesel, on 10/12/2007, -0/+3@striker1211

    DHT issues might have been fixed but most of the better torrent sites (I'm definitely not about to name them) still discourage the use of BitComet because of the problems it has with reporting your ratio.
  • mykroceph, on 10/12/2007, -4/+1guess this means I'll have to switch to M$'s Avalanche protocol, errr, i mean keep my old version of uT around..
  • slaystench, on 10/12/2007, -0/+3I hope this doesn't ruin uTorrent.
  • mrgone, on 10/12/2007, -0/+6"Conspicuously absent from the FAQ is any discussion of adding DRM technology to uTorrent. I'd suspect that would be the frequentest asked question out of this announcement."

    He does mention uTorrent being "improved" with "patented innovations BitTorrent has made at the protocol level" though..
  • neokyotodragon, on 10/12/2007, -0/+9From the FAQ:
    "Q: How will uTorrent’s technology be integrated with the current BitTorrent client?

    A: Although uTorrent is lightweight, it is missing the patented innovations BitTorrent has made at the protocol level. "

    looks like they are going to cram a whole bunch of crap onto utorrent...
    • Ribald_Jester, on 10/12/2007, -0/+6"patented innovations" = DRM.

      Does anyone know if bittorrent protocol is still "open"? I thought I heard Bram removed it from being an open source protocol?

      and if BT is now a closed/proprietary protocol - why should I continue to use/support it?
  • angrycat, on 10/12/2007, -0/+8They better add that catfood dispenser to utorrent like I recommended.
  • dAbReAkA, on 10/12/2007, -0/+5"( @Bram ) there aren't any user monitoring features in mainline BitTorrent, and there aren't going to be any added to utorrent"
    no DRM and ***** expected for now..
  • xxdesmus, on 10/12/2007, -0/+3They better not ***** up uTorrent. It's a great lightweight program right now.
  • Fetching more discussions...
    Show 51 - 100 of 109 discussions
  •  

    Login or register to add a comment

    Create a new account or login to join in the conversation on Digg. You'll also be able to Digg stories to help promote things you like.


© Digg Inc. 2008 — Content posted by Digg users is dedicated to the public domain.
DIGG, DIGG IT, DUGG, DIGG THIS, Digg graphics, logos, designs, page headers, button icons, scripts, and other service names are the trademarks of Digg Inc.