Using default BitTorrent client?

[NitrouseXpress60]

Well, since I've moved from Ubuntu 6.06 to 6.10, Azureus has been having some problems and some of my torrents don't like to work. (They did in 5.10 and 6.06)

Is there anything wrong with using the default BitTorrent program? I mean, it get's the download, but is the only downfall it has is that it is slower than Azureus? Anything else I should know about BitTorrent?

Thanks.

 

[Mem]

Just move over to uTorrent ,very low memory usage.

 

[phisrow]

The default client is a trifle spartan; but there is nothing wrong with it.

Personally, I use Ktorrent when I want an easy, graphical, desktop setup and btlaunchmanycurses running in the background for automated and semi automated jobs(I have it set so that if I save a .torrent to a specific folder exported from my file server, it will automatically begin downloading to a folder on the file server. I can check the curses interface if I need to see the status and, when the download is finished I can access the folder as a mounted filessytem, or as a webpage served to the local network by apache.)

 

[Nothinman]

The only thing I know of that the default client in Debian/Ubuntu doesn't do is the encryption so if it's slower it might be because you're ISP is able to spot and throttle the traffic now.

 

[SleepWalkerX]

Bit torrent clients generally differ in features, not performance (although there are a few features that may slightly increase performance, I've maxed out my connection on every client I've used). Its just about how you set up the client.

 

[NitrouseXpress60]

Alright, I tried BitTornado and that started working good and then it came up with a port error and stopped. I'm going to see if I can open up a port to use. Maybe that was the problem with Azureus. Even BitTorrent is working extremely slow.

 

[NitrouseXpress60]

Well, I gave uTorrent a try under Wine and it's working! I use uTorrent on Windows, but have never tried it under Wine.