My only gripe was that it doesn't handle (unencoded) spaces in a URL name, which is probably correct behavior but they're in the titles of torrents on some sites, so I'd have to manually edit them each time. I ended up just using qBT.

[–] LodeMike@lemmy.today 7 points 6 days ago

Its Single-threaded

[–] stevedice@sh.itjust.works 2 points 5 days ago

It doesn't have a proper dark theme in Windows so it let me down when it flashbanged me.

[–] crmsnbleyd@sopuli.xyz 3 points 6 days ago

It gets messed up when downloading files onto a slow smb share but that's mostly my bad

[–] ookiiBoy@lemmy.blahaj.zone 4 points 6 days ago

True. Sometimes it's weird about packed files, and cleaning up after itself. Still worth it.

[–] Andromxda@lemmy.dbzer0.com 34 points 1 week ago* (last edited 5 days ago) (4 children)

Has anyone even used uTorrent in the last decade?

Edit: Apparently, unfortunately, yes

[–] TriflingToad@sh.itjust.works 25 points 6 days ago* (last edited 6 days ago)

you would not believe how common it is. It's like making a class of highschoolers take a colorblindness test. There's always ONE who had no idea

sidenote, it's really sad how the education system won't even spend 10 minutes a year to diagnose something that effects millions of children. There's FREE websites that they can just open on their board or projector

[–] charade_you_are@sh.itjust.works 18 points 6 days ago (1 children)

I remember on Reddit I'd see like a post a month from some uneducated pirate person asking how to fix a utorrent issue. It was fun watching them try to justify using it with all the other legit, updated clients. It didn't ever go well for the OP.

[–] Emmie@lemm.ee 5 points 6 days ago* (last edited 6 days ago) (1 children)

I mean if they want to use it despite being told the state of things then who cares? There’s nothing to win here, it’s their pc

I couldn’t care less if someone on the internet sabotages their files because they want to be right 100% of time

[–] charade_you_are@sh.itjust.works 2 points 6 days ago

lol, true dat. It was fun fucking with them too

[–] nova_ad_vitum@lemmy.ca 4 points 6 days ago

I used 2.2.1 well into the last decade. Every version after that was either pointless or full of some sort of malware.

[–] cupcakezealot@lemmy.blahaj.zone 2 points 6 days ago

i still see it in my peers list

[–] Xanza@lemm.ee 2 points 5 days ago (1 children)

If they would support a client like Rain I would actually switch to the *arr stack.

[–] American_Jesus@lemm.ee 3 points 4 days ago

Don't need to support every client, if the client supports folder monitor you can use blackhole

[–] Ohh@lemmy.ml 4 points 6 days ago (1 children)

I'll be the one: use rtorrent

[–] CarbonBasedNPU@lemm.ee 11 points 6 days ago

Why rtorrent vs QBittorrent?

[–] ctkatz@lemmy.ml 5 points 6 days ago

if I still downloaded directly to my local drive, I'd use utorrent BUT only the 2.2.1 version. it's been at least 4 years since I've done that due to a lack of having a functional laptop so I've been out of downloading stuff that way for years, but even then I knew that modern utorrent was bad. I actually stopped using any new version once bittorrent bought it.

[–] cavemeat@beehaw.org 2 points 6 days ago

Damn, I don't know the context but this is cool af

[–] Psiczar@aussie.zone 0 points 6 days ago (1 children)

Why torrent when you can use newsgroups? No need to seed, just download and done. Haven’t torrented for 10 years.

[–] crmsnbleyd@sopuli.xyz 10 points 6 days ago (2 children)

Don't you need to pay to be able to get access?

[–] dan@upvote.au 4 points 6 days ago* (last edited 6 days ago)

Depends on how much you download. You can pay a once-off payment for a block of data and it lasts indefinitely. I've got a 5TB block I've had for over 10 years. I think it was maybe $25 when I got it?

Edit: If you need more data, there's plans with unlimited data for a few dollars per month.

[–] Psiczar@aussie.zone 4 points 6 days ago (2 children)

Yes, but not a massive amount. I pay annually and it works out to about $7-8 a month for 50mbps of bandwidth and unlimited downloads. Then use *arr apps and sabnzbd to manage everything.

[–] boonhet@lemm.ee 4 points 6 days ago (1 children)

I mean it's completely valid if you find that to be a better deal than torrenting, but I can use my full 500 mbps bandwidth for free.

[–] Xanza@lemm.ee 1 points 5 days ago (1 children)

It depends on how you look at it.

You pay for your internet. Isn't that you paying to pirate?

If it is then it's only a factor of cost. He pays slightly more for Usenet access and internet access and then he pirates.

If it's not then it's not a factor of cost and it's only a factor of pedantism.

[–] boonhet@lemm.ee 0 points 3 days ago

I need to have access to the Internet anyway. In fact, having it makes me a decent amount of money. You could say it costs me negative several thousand euros a month. Piracy or scrolling Lemmy is a bonus.

Getting Usenet means additional cost, but the only benefit is piracy. Therefore, it's paying to pirate.

[–] American_Jesus@lemm.ee -4 points 6 days ago (2 children)

So you pay for piracy

Pay a subscription to watch subscription content for free!

[–] Canonical_Warlock@lemmy.dbzer0.com 10 points 6 days ago

Yes? If I could get everything in one place then I would happily pay for that. I don't pirate to save money. Saving money is just a nice sideeffect. I pirate because it's literally more convenient than juggling 15 different services.

[–] Pika@sh.itjust.works 6 points 6 days ago* (last edited 6 days ago)

I mean, I don't use the service but, $7-8 a month that gives you access to everything versus 14 to $16 a month per streaming service on everything else. It sounds like they're still getting a steal at a more convenient rate.

Being said, yeah there is plenty of free options that could be being done as well so there is that argument

[–] Mondez 124 points 1 week ago (8 children)

If it keeps newcomers from making mistakes in client choice it looks like a good thing to me?

load more comments (8 replies)

[–] DebatableRaccoon@lemmy.ca 108 points 1 week ago (1 children)

Took long enough. uTorrent has been cancerous for a long time now.

[–] Quill7513@slrpnk.net 57 points 1 week ago (3 children)

at least 15 years lol

load more comments (3 replies)

[–] Jeef@sh.itjust.works 72 points 1 week ago

didn't realize people were still using utorrent. been at least a decade since it was decent

[–] RedSnt@feddit.dk 58 points 1 week ago* (last edited 6 days ago) (1 children)

Only a decade late.. Luckily qBittorrent is brilliant. And if qBittorrent somehow wasn't an option, I might go with BiglyBT - it's not the easiest on the eyes, but lots of settings.

load more comments (1 replies)

[–] LiveLM@lemmy.zip 36 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago) (1 children)

uTorrent's brand recognition is crazy, it's been crap for years and it still the name people who don't torrrent often recognize.
Nice change, good to steer the novices away from that junk.

[–] ggtdbz@lemmy.dbzer0.com 5 points 6 days ago

It’s so ubiquitous that for about a second I thought wait what I thought that was the good one until I remembered that I’ve been using qBittorrent for a decade.

For a time, it just was the client.

load more comments