Log in

View Full Version : Bit Tornado v BitLord


yorkielap
25th June 2007, 04:21
Have been using BitLord for a long time now for fileshare.....couple of colleagues suggesting Bit Tornado for faster speeds.

Anybody got some info to pass on regarding the better option and why please?

Thanks
:thanks:

foxyshadis
25th June 2007, 05:25
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/BitTorrent_client

If you want more subjective answers, there are hundreds of flamewars on this very topic online, or you can just download a few and give them a shot. Ten minutes with each client beats all the forum threads in the world when it comes to which you like better.

Odd that you'd use BitLord instead of BitComet though, given that the former is just a recompile of a very old and buggier version of the latter.

Dark Shikari
25th June 2007, 06:02
BitLord/BitComet are horrible if only for the fact that, as cheating clients, they're banned from half the trackers out there and have to rely on distributed tracking in order to get any peers.

Use uTorrent.

LANjackal
25th June 2007, 10:02
BitLord/BitComet are horrible if only for the fact that, as cheating clients, they're banned from half the trackers out there and have to rely on distributed tracking in order to get any peers.
That's partially true.

First of all, BitLord is a crap client (clone of BitComet) with adware mixed in. AVOID IT.

Second, while BitComet had some upload reporting issues in the past, they've been cleared up now. Let's also not forget that BitComet pioneered the peer exchange feature now found in most advanced BT clients.

Use uTorrent.
I'd have to agree. Unless you're running a non-Windows OS, there's really no reason to use anything else. uTorrent is light, fast, and second only to Azureus in features (then again, Azureus' expanded features are of largely no interest to the average user).

Soulhunter
25th June 2007, 12:58
My favorite is Azureus... Okay, its a mem hoggin b**** compared to uTorrent, but unfortunately uTorrent is missing some important features imo [ie. no IP blacklist afaik]. And, since RAM is cheap nowdays, I updated my inet box to 2GBs, so I dont have to care anyway! :D


Bye

insomniak1981
25th June 2007, 13:23
Hi, I would agree that bitlord and bitornado are a bit rubbish. I'd recommend utorrent. It does have ip filtering but you have to download an ipfilter.dat (see [URL="http://www.zeropaid.com/news/6443/IP+filtering+with+uTorrent"[/URL]
I personally use peerguardian anyway so its a bit of a non issue.

_xxl
25th June 2007, 14:15
BitLord/BitComet are horrible if only for the fact that, as cheating clients, they're banned from half the trackers out there and have to rely on distributed tracking in order to get any peers.
Use uTorrent.
Just remove tracker address from list and you have a leech client.Upload and download are not reported to tracker.

Dark Shikari
25th June 2007, 14:46
Just remove tracker address from list and you have a leech client.Upload and download are not reported to tracker.
"Cheating" means *lying* about how much you upload to the tracker, not refusing to give the information altogether.

Soulhunter
25th June 2007, 15:24
It does have ip filtering but you have to download an ipfilter.dat (see [URL="http://www.zeropaid.com/news/6443/IP+filtering+with+uTorrent"[/URL]


Oh, I see...

Thanks for the info!


Bye

insomniak1981
25th June 2007, 19:07
No problem soulhunter, It would have been nice if they could have made it a bit easier to use the ip filtering though. Whichever client you use, if you arent sure it has any sort of filtering I would recommend peerguardian, it has it's bad points but it does a very good job as far as blocking bad ip's.

yorkielap
25th June 2007, 23:08
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/BitTorrent_client

Odd that you'd use BitLord instead of BitComet though, given that the former is just a recompile of a very old and buggier version of the latter.

Was the first one I was introduced to, got used to it and just carried on really.....only just starting to experience bugs.

To all of you guys.....THANKS for your advice, will try the two mentioned in your posts (ie Azureus & uTorrent) and if I get probs, will look at advice from foxyshadis.

:goodpost::thanks:

insomniak1981
25th June 2007, 23:25
Glad you got some useful info yorkielap, I agree foxys advice is best, try a few and use whatever you feel suits you.

check
26th June 2007, 03:27
"Cheating" means *lying* about how much you upload to the tracker, not refusing to give the information altogether.
Since the BT protocol requires clients to report this data to the tracker I think it's safe to call this cheating.

Dark Shikari
26th June 2007, 03:44
Since the BT protocol requires clients to report this data to the tracker I think it's safe to call this cheating.
I guess it is cheating in a sense. Its the difference between not sending in your tax forms to the IRS and sending in forms that are faked to show that you are owed a million dollars in tax rebates.

Solo_Senshi
26th June 2007, 09:22
I'd have to agree. Unless you're running a non-Windows OS, there's really no reason to use anything else. uTorrent is light, fast, and second only to Azureus in features (then again, Azureus' expanded features are of largely no interest to the average user).

uTorrent runs great with Wine :)

Hellworm
26th June 2007, 21:36
enhanced-ctorrent. It has the lowest requirements. I run multiple instances on 32MB RAM and it's still pretty fast.

sujit
26th June 2007, 21:44
Tried many, found utorrent the best.

kumi
26th June 2007, 22:03
uTorrent is nice for normal day-to-day leeching :p But I've found the "Initial Seeding" to be incredibly inefficient. If you're trying to get out files in a new torrent as quickly as possible, I recommend Azureus' super-seeding mode. I've also heard the BitTornado does super-seeding well, but have yet to try it.

Shinigami-Sama
26th June 2007, 22:27
I'd have to agree. Unless you're running a non-Windows OS, there's really no reason to use anything else. uTorrent is light, fast, and second only to Azureus in features (then again, Azureus' expanded features are of largely no interest to the average user).

most of azureus's features don't play well with the mainline's implementations(which most other clients go by), dht didn't for a while, same with peer-exchange, they're getting close though

sujit
26th June 2007, 22:38
But I've found the "Initial Seeding" to be incredibly inefficient.

Even i have noticed this problem with utorrent.

If you're trying to get out files in a new torrent as quickly as possible, I recommend Azureus' super-seeding mode. I've also heard the BitTornado does super-seeding well, but have yet to try it.

Hmm, i will keep that in mind.

Thx for the information:).