Talk:ΜTorrent/Archive 2

Archive 1

Archive 2

Archive 3

Archive 4

got bought by bittorent, page should reflect that

utorrent just got bought, should probably be in the page but I don't know here to put it. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 67.120.85.115 (talk) 03:24, 8 December 2006 (UTC).

Move back.. again?

By adding {{lowercase}} at the top of the article µTorrent can be displayed correctly. I suggest we do this and move things back to µTorrent. --Scandum 13:19, 12 December 2006 (UTC)

• Support. I didn't know we could do this, or would have done it myself. µTorrent is the correct title. -SpuriousQ 22:19, 12 December 2006 (UTC)
• Strong Support. µTorrent is most certainly the proper name, though many users don't type it that way out of convenience. Likewise, a lot of people call Röyksopp Royksopp just because it's easier. That doesn't mean it's correct. --LakeHMM 04:01, 16 December 2006 (UTC)

• Support. Software is named by its developers, not by its users. Facts are not determined by public opinion or popular convention. Such disputes are often referred to as popular misconceptions. Should Wikipedians rename the George W. Bush article 'Dubya' or the Bill Clinton article 'Slick Willy' simply because of popular nicknames? 68.58.28.162

68.58.28.162: while the majority of your statement is true, I just wanted to address one thing. Popular conventions are seen throughout Wikipedia, because there is reasoning behind it. See, Billy the Kid. — Hucz ^{(talk · contribs)} 21:33, 10 February 2009 (UTC)

Speculation

I don't think an encyclopedia article is a good place for speculative claims or really even mentioning them. Encyclopedias are supposed to contain known and documented facts, not varying opinions. I mean is this an encyclopedia article or an argument thread?

A basic principle of logic is that if you make a claim then the burden of proof is on you. Until it can somehow be proven that these speculations are based in fact, it isn't appropriate (in my opinion_ to mention them.

This is true. What in the article are you addressing, specifically? -SpuriousQ 21:59, 17 December 2006 (UTC)

It does seem to be a pretty NPOV article, the speculation about what work a coder actually did for a contracted company is a bit out of place. Someone tried to write it to sound non-biased, but didn't really pull it off :) At least some rebuttal is needed, such as the fact that Ludde founded and created at least one pretty major, and trusted, open-source project (ScummVM). -- Unsigned —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 203.15.140.129 (talk) 05:37, 23 December 2006 (UTC).

Is downloading legal or not?

Is downloading content with UTorrent legal or not? How can the user know/verify that the content has been correctly licensed and can be used and shared and downloaded/uploaded? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 75.53.102.201 (talk) 07:13, 11 February 2007 (UTC).

• Most Linux live CD distributions (.iso) have a torrent tracker, so it all depends on the content. WalrusMan118 21:37, 9 June 2007 (UTC)

• μTorrent is a neutral download program that can be used to download any kind of material made available through a .torrent file. Whether the download of that material is legal depends on (your) local laws. µtorrent and other BitTorrent clients are for as far as I know not responsible for the actions of their users in any country. Neither is µtorrent responsible for helping you determine whether the content you try to download with a loaded .torrent file is legal or not in any country. I personally consider µtorrent in a similar position as an internet browser such as IE, Firefox and Opera. They are not responsible for those things either. Lord Alderaan 16:01, 15 June 2007 (UTC)

• Wrong,μTorrent has givin away my ip before--Michael Jackson FOREVER!! (talk) 16:50, 11 January 2010 (UTC)

Of course! BitTorrent is a Peer-to-peer protocol. This means that you need to connect to other peers and other peers to you so that you can send data to each other. This is done (for example) by giving your IP to the tracker when you announce. This way the tracker can give your IP to other peers when they ask the tracker for new people to connect to on that torrent. It's essential to the workings of BitTorrent. All clients do this. It also has completely NOTHING to do with whether downloading is legal or not. --Lord Alderaan (talk) 09:41, 12 January 2010 (UTC)

then why do some peers bust you for it? ANSWER THAT!!!Michael Jackson FOREVER!! (talk) 04:32, 30 June 2010 (UTC)

image

I have a screenshot of uTorrent on the 'speed' tab which I think would be interesting to add into this article. Let me know if I should upload it.

Planned Features.

I have deleted the planned features. I think they will not be anymore of utorrent because they been brought. Also adding planned features violates WP:CRYSTAL. --SkyWalker 03:08, 14 February 2007 (UTC)

heres the screenshot

Heres a screenshot of the "speed tab" on uTorrent, if you think its useful feel free to add it to the article: http://i16.tinypic.com/48zkx9v.png —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 68.146.236.11 (talk) 19:28, 23 February 2007 (UTC).

bit o' POV

There was a bit of POV in the many mentions of the program's size in KiB. So I trimmed that back, putting all the detailed numbers in the ==Size== section.

1. Can someone round up some reviews, aside from the controversial issues?
2. A brief summary of "skins" would be helpful. Lotsa folks like skins.
3. An established source for the sale: http://www.infoworld.com/article/06/12/08/HNbittorrentbuys_1.html

--Lexein 20:52, 15 April 2007 (UTC)

Easter Eggs

Renamed Trivia to Easter Eggs. --Lexein 23:12, 19 April 2007 (UTC)

SO cool! I never knew about the hidden tetris game! That's is just SWEET! 72.192.135.223 19:01, 12 September 2007 (UTC)

Reinstated the Easter Eggs article that someone seems to have deleted without checking about it's usefulness. Frosset Mareritt
07:48, 3 January 2008 (UTC)

What's the point of including them? They're against WP:TRIVIA and WP:IINFO. --Saber^Excalibur! 06:13, 4 January 2008 (UTC)

In uTorrent's case, the app's remarkably small size, and the presence of two Easter Eggs, makes them notable at least as a footnote. I concede that the image of uTris may not survive a relevance cull, and that the EEs may belong either in Features or as a footnote. WP is not a User's Manual is why I trimmed off the "p" and nav keys text. --Lexein (talk) 15:21, 4 January 2008 (UTC)

Servant_Saber, could you please point out where exactly "Easter Eggs" are mentioned in the guides that you linked above? ∴ AlexSm 16:27, 4 January 2008 (UTC)

"As explained in the policy introduction, merely being true, or even verifiable, does not automatically make something suitable for inclusion in the encyclopedia." I could be inclined to agree with that the inclusion of easter eggs in such a small program, even if it is only a publicity stunt, might warrant inclusion. However, in no larger extent than a line or two under Features, not it's own top-level header, and not without a source on what makes the easter eggs notable. Simply including it because "that's how it is" is nothing but WP:OR and your personal POV. --Saber^Excalibur! 17:10, 4 January 2008 (UTC)

I moved Eastern Eggs section, already minimized to justifiable size by Lexein, to the Features section and placed it directly below the size subsection so that the article flows nicely. I removed the importance template because I anticipate Saber agrees with this new setup because it complies with his inclination. Correct me if I'm wrong. I also merged the two separate Eastern Eggs discussions into one. --Lord Alderaan (talk) 14:36, 7 January 2008 (UTC)

There doesn't appear to currently be any mention of the Tetris Easter Eggs. In fact, I came here to remind me how to access the minigame, only to find the content had to be removed (I've worked it out now though). I know some editors might claim that without press coverage it amounts to original research, but as with all wiki policies that is only a guideline so if the general feeling among people visiting this page is that the Easter Eggs should be mentioned then this is what should happen. Skip1337 (talk) 17:55, 7 December 2008 (UTC)

Criticism

• moved to TALK

"This program has been criticized because its GUI looks like Azureus', and due to Azureus-like features such as: Swarm, Download Bar which shows Downloaded and Availability, and the Tab-like feature or the Advanced Tab in Azureus."

- If true, let's see some non-blog non-forum non-wiki sources. --Lexein 17:00, 26 April 2007 (UTC)

- http://forum.utorrent.com/viewtopic.php?id=251 It's interesting... Chewyfood says µTorrent looks more like Rufus, and it's true, it looks more like Rufus than it does Azureus. Does that mean Rufus copied Azureus too? Many clients look similar to each other -- get over it. Azureus isn't so special that it became the entire source of inspiration. --Arbitrarynick 20:40, 27 April 2007 (UTC)

M?

While the article itself has been successfully renamed µTorrent, the edit and history pages all say MTorrent still. Why is that? 71.185.139.57 23:12, 27 April 2007 (UTC)

• Because it wasn't successfully renamed. It's a sham accomplished by {{lowercase| µTorrent}}. The whole "M" debacle was foisted on the article by rather viciously opinionated editors who:

1. Prioritize Wiki-rules capitalization of the greek letter mu and

2. Prioritize use of the greek letter "mu" over the english letter "u" as used in the name of the executable file on the computer, web URI, and documentation

3. Prioritize their wanky linqua-purism over the software author's expressed intent(see Pronunciation).

As in all things Wikipedia, the shrillest, largest-lunged editors tend to get their way, either by just being bigger bullies, being admins, or by subterfuge (using little-used Wikipedia functions) to present the appearance of appeasing their critics. --Lexein 01:05, 28 April 2007 (UTC)

Agreed, I stopped regular editing of Wikipedia ages ago after running into one too many of these prats.

I would support a move to u if there's a new proposed rename, but it isn't a big deal anymore. I don't know whether {{lowercase}} is little-known, but it is widely used. –Pomte 01:44, 28 April 2007 (UTC)

stricken --Lexein 01:56, 28 April 2007 (UTC)

• Edit warring over this must stop, well-intentioned though it may be. The cut/paste move was against policy - I didn't know that either. The article needs to be cleanly moved from MTorrent to UTorrent by an administrator, since some deletion of redirects are required en route. --Lexein 19:43, 29 April 2007 (UTC)

Should be at µTorrent, of course. ¦ Reisio (talk) 04:07, 7 May 2009 (UTC)

Deleted controversy and closed source sections

Most software is closed source and they assume bad faith were there is none. There is no evidence that this software contains spyware, rootkits or viruses anywhere on the internet, because it doesn't. I've used every version of this software including the current beta and it categorically isn't malware. Propagating paranoia isn't the job of wikipedia. Operating 17:11, 1 May 2007 (UTC)

• Reverted, and copyedited. Since it's controversial, deletion of a section MUST be accompanied by DISCUSSION in TALK. Whitewashing is POV, and is strictly prohibited. The SUSPICION of spyware was reported in citable sources. The SUSPICION of privacy loss due to ad tracking was reported in citable sources. All that's missing here is proper citations from those citable sources, to replace the forum cites. --Lexein 06:51, 3 May 2007 (UTC)

• There are no citable sources and until there are these sections have to be DELETED! Forum posts and blog posts are NOT evidence. Spreading misinformation/speculation in the HOPE that citable sources will appear is not acceptable! Operating 13:54, 4 May 2007 (UTC)

• I added a bit to the Closed Source section to reduce the (in my opinion large) likelihood someone interpreted it as a warning that spycode in µTorrent is likely. Lord Alderaan 14:37, 4 May 2007 (UTC)

• You are right, the closed source section simply says this software contains spyware, when it doesn't. And the peerfactor SARL section simply says the author of this software can't be trusted. Once again without citable evidence.Operating 14:46, 4 May 2007 (UTC)

• The introduction of the whole Controversy section addresses this issue. Although by the time people get through the whole section they might have forgotten about the introduction. Lord Alderaan 15:04, 4 May 2007 (UTC)

• I have deleted the closed source section again. It fails wikipedia:verifiability Any statement without citable evidence can be deleted at any time. This section can only be restored if a reliable citation is found which says "utorrent may/does contain spyware because it is closed source". Sorry, i know you're a good guy! Operating 07:04, 6 May 2007 (UTC)

• True, but it being closed source is a valid part of the controversy. Maybe it shouldn't be worded as a accusation or possibility but as a informative section about the (baseless) claims that were made and are still made about µtorrent. Lord Alderaan 12:30 7 May 2007 (UTC)

• I can see what you are saying, but you say yourself the claims are "baseless" and we both know there isn't any evidence anywhere on the internet that says "utorrent may/does contain spyware because it is closed source". It is noted elsewhere in the article that utorrent is closed source so the fact hasn't been ignored. If you could find an article that says "in general" closed source software is more prone to spyware and word it in a neutral way this would be ok. But i think its probly still going to look like an accusation and its best left unsaid. If spyware is ever put in utorrent with a user base of millions it'll be detected within hours and be all over digg/ slashdot. At that time the article can be updated. Operating 13:21, 7 May 2007 (UTC)

• The topic is the accusation of µTorrent containing Spyware, not the fact that µTorrent contains Spyware (which it doesn't). For this section to be valid it doesn't need a citable source that µTorrent contains Spyware or that its likely/posible but it needs a citable source that this accusation was/is being made on a large enough scale to become a 'controversy' (regardless of it being baseless and false). However I can't find such sources either at this time and thus agree with the viewpoint that Closed Source as a controversy need not be mentioned. If someone comes with an article or other valid source about this accusation it is my opinion that this section could and should be readded. --Lord Alderaan 12:48, 8 May 2007 (UTC)

• I agree, if citable sources become available and a neutral comment is passed it can be readded.Operating 13:17, 8 May 2007 (UTC)

• Congratulations. User:Operating has successfully bullied, gutted, owned, and whitewashed the article. I found the cites:CNET, WIRED, Information Week, but I'm not going to add them. Fuck this shit. Fucking fanbois. --Lexein 12:55, 8 May 2007 (UTC)

• I care about neutrality. Your comment here simply says you don't care about neutrality. Operating 13:17, 8 May 2007 (UTC)
• Gut away, fanboi. This isn't the first article I've abandoned due to aggressive gaming like yours. --Lexein 14:33, 8 May 2007 (UTC)

• Yes we are both µtorrent users but that is beside the issue. I just searched for any source about utorrent possibly containing spyware and couldn't find anything even remotely useful. No (false-)positives by anti-spyware software, no articles on wired, CNET or through different google search queries. Except for a few topics on the µtorrent forum itself there wasn't much about spyware in utorrent I could find at all. The only citable link I found is that BitTorrent Inc. opposes spyware and addware in the privacy policy of the µtorrent website: http://www.utorrent.com/privacy.php So if µtorrent doesn't contain spyware and if there hasn't been a widespread accusation either what exactly DO you want mentioned in a closed source / spyware section? We could say a couple of people have felt uneasy about it and link to the µtorrent forum but thats about it. --Lord Alderaan 13:26, 9 May 2007 (UTC)

• He's a utorrent user as well, same name on the forums. You are of course right Lord Alderaan. There are no credible sources to back up the bias that was in this article. Millions of people use this software happily every day. There just is no controversy worthy of words like "backlash", "suspicion" and "paranoia". What there is are 2 bits of information about ads and peerfactor which have been commented upon and are in the past.Operating 15:14, 9 May 2007 (UTC)

• Lexein: http://gamepro.com/gamepro/domestic/games/features/110788.shtml
  I see *no* indication of fanboyism from either Lord Alderaan or Operating. On the other hand, I see a case of anti-fanboyism from you (see #6 in the link). Granted, GamePro's article isn't the be-all-end-all definition of fanboyism, but you know, it's hit a lot of valid points on the head.
  
  It's funny -- if you want to prove your point, providing articles would *obviously* be the best way to make your case. If you're gonna back out because of a fear of "fanbois" where there is none to begin with, I must question whether you really have your proof. Lord Alderaan and Operating have *clearly* shown that they're open to readding parts of the article should new citable sources come up, but if you're not gonna cough 'em up, then no one here's losing but yourself. Arbitrarynick 05:34, 13 May 2007 (UTC)

Major Bugs

Versions 1.7 and 1.7.1 were banned on some of the private trackers and there has been a lot of discussion about it on the forums. Although these versions deserved to be banned the rumors about MPIAA/RIAA involvement returned and I decided it might be noteworthy enough to mention on the wikipedia thread. If you disagree, think its POV or have any other suggestion for drastic (not minor) change I hope we can discuss it here first. Lord Alderaan 10:42, 24 July 2007 (UTC)

Since this controversy has been happening for over a year now on this talk page, and considering the popularity of Wikipedia, I think this article and talk page are the biggest source of fuel for the rumors. I would vote to leave it off until proven otherwise. (Reminds me of the point Stephen Colbert made in tripling the elephant population on Wikepedia. It also reminds me of a song from the old TV show Heehaw "...you'll never here one of us repeating gossip, so you better listen close here the first time.") Nxtcru 01:19, 31 July 2007 (UTC)

You are right. The bit about the rumors falls under the discussion about the controversy above. I will remove the last sentence. The bugs itself and the banning are fact. I hope to be able to find refs for the bannings. The trackers in question can't be reffed because they are private (you can't get to the page without logging in and they won't like being reffed). For those interested in what was going on I just found this while looking for refs and the reply pretty much sums up what probably happened: http://filesharingplace.be/forums/index.php?showtopic=173872 Lord Alderaan 11:19, 31 July 2007 (UTC)

Linux and Mac OS X versions

Perhaps the article should mention that Mac OS X and Linux versions are being developed (the Mac OS one is, I believe, in private beta testing). dr.alf 04:49, 5 August 2007 (UTC)

Why is uTorrent faster than other clients?

uTorrent is faster than other clients (azureus, bittorrent, even faster than btdownloadheadless.py) when it is used in a fast network (lan, e.g.) Emulating uTorrent with wine has the same effect

uTorrent can handle the full bandwidth of a 100Mbit Lan while other clients use a maximum of 2MB/s I do not have test results, just noticed it on my own network.

Can someone explain why?

91.7.70.108 19:51, 24 October 2007 (UTC)

This discussion page is for discussing improvements to the article. I suggest asking this question on a message board, or help forum. — Hucz ^{(talk · contribs)} 21:28, 10 February 2009 (UTC)

utorrent data lost

for some reason i lost all of my downloads on utorrent so i cant see it or access it on utorrent but the songs i can still hear on my itunes wat gives???? HELP!!!!!! —Preceding unsigned comment added by 72.80.8.85 (talk) 21:50, 7 November 2007 (UTC)

This discussion page is for discussing improvements to the article. I suggest asking this question on a message board, or help forum. — Hucz ^{(talk · contribs)} 21:29, 10 February 2009 (UTC)

muTorrent

The article starts with 'µTorrent (also microTorrent or uTorrent)'. People keep adding muTorrent to it. The pronunciation paragraph in the article and the 'move' discussions on this talk page have made it clear that muTorrent is not intended by the author. Also I myself hang around in both a variety of BitTorrent communities and on dedicated µtorrent communities (official forum and irc) and I've hardly ever seen it used. There seems no basis at all for its addition but if anyone has good reason to add muTorrent again please discuss it here first. Lord Alderaan (talk) 00:25, 17 November 2007 (UTC)

Again someone (User:Fabartus) edited Pronunciation relevant info. Mu as pronunciation has been discussed and discarded a couple of times including a HTML comment in the page itself stating Another pronunciation is "mu-torrent" since this is the name of the Greek letter "μ". -- true but actually not notable: no proof that the developer, or any established journalist, ever used or would use this pronunciation. -- Lexein I've removed this in favor of a simpler comment. Also that Ludde wasn't native to English is not relevant as he obviously spoke enough English to write a English piece of software and communicated almost exclusively in English on his own website and forum. What IS relevant is that the usage of Mu as pronunciation is virtually none-existent. Get us some proof before adding it again. --Lord Alderaan 15:31, 4 December 2007 (UTC)

It may be true that the pronunciation MuTorrent was not intended, but the actual word "µTorrent" - divorced from any intention of pronunciation - can only really be correctly pronounced one of two ways in English: MicroTorrent or MuTorrent. I know that the character "micro" and the Greek letter µ are different in Unicode, but typographically they're the same and they look the same, since the Greek letter is the actual origin of the "micro" character. If a mathematician were asked orally how to write the prefix for "micro", he would say "the Greek letter mu." Also see Wikipedia's own page for Micro-. Since "Torrent" is not a unit of measurement, reading "µTorrent" as MicroTorrent is not natural when reading the word without any knowledge of what was intended; the natural reading is MuTorrent. Like the musician µ-Ziq. Although I will continue to call it MuTorrent, since... that's what it says, of course I agree that the article should state the intended pronunciation. But I also think it should say that it naturally would be pronounced MuTorrent - with the modifier that the developer has not stated it as a possible pronunciation - because he hasn't stated that it ISN'T a possible pronunciation either. 193.91.181.142 (talk) 00:21, 10 March 2008 (UTC) (Nick)

The fact that the µ is derived is from the greek Mu is mentioned, it is simply not mentioned as a pronunciation. The reason for the pronunciation section is to show common practices and intentions because it isn't always exactly clear how to pronounce it when you first read it. You have a reasonable basis for why you and others might pronounce it as Mu Torrent but it doesn't seem to be a widespread pronunciation. I don't think stating that a small number of people for whatever reason (etymological correct or not) might have considered a certain pronunciation first would fall within the scope of this section. There might be a whole bunch of pronunciations to list as 'not common or intended' and would we start listing them too and where would you fairly draw the line? --Lord Alderaan (talk) 10:06, 12 March 2008 (UTC)

The point I was making was not that "MuTorrent" should be mentioned because it's "not common or intended" (obviously), but because it's one of the only two valid ways of pronouncing the word "µTorrent", besides what the author made up himself. So you really present a non-argument in your last sentence. The author made up "uTorrent" and "MyTorrent" (he could also have made up "PartyTorrent" for that matter), but that's not what it says. It says "MuTorrent", or possibly "MicroTorrent". So the article should say that the pronunciation of the word would be "MuTorrent" or "MicroTorrent", but the author have stated that ... etc. Also, "common practices" can't be the only reason for stating something in Wikipedia. There are certainly "common practices" that are unquestionably wrong. 193.91.181.142 (talk) 16:50, 30 June 2008 (UTC) (Nick)

English pronunciation rules for 'new' words and the actually used pronunciations can vary, especially on the internet. That is why I think we should rely on commonly used pronunciations and intended pronunciations. I don't see that as a wikipedia policy itself but as the way to go in this specific case to keep in line with wikipedia policy. So I'm not endorsing always relying on common practices. If you want to add something along the lines of 'Even though English pronunciation rules would also allow pronouncing it as MuTorrent this pronunciation is hardly used.' it would fit a lot better in the purpose of the section but I'd still oppose it because is it information worthy of adding to the section? Then it would be a fairly small step to start adding things like 'In Swedish one would pronounce it as such-and-such but this isn't used much either'. --Lord Alderaan (talk) 11:02, 31 July 2008 (UTC)

May I point out that when I typed mutorrent on my web browser it redirected to the official site. It seems they understand the interpretation but I feel it is rarely used. --Marianian (talk) 17:45, 28 April 2009 (UTC)

I would add this (to clarify why people have such a problem): As a scientific prefix µ is almost invariably pronounced "micro", while the pronunciation "mu" is mostly used to refer to the letter by itself —Preceding unsigned comment added by Snaxalotl (talk • contribs) 22:36, 18 June 2009 (UTC)

About the author's suggestions: I just checked out the original post by Ludde on 2005-09-20, where he offers the often-sited suggestions (you-torrent, microtorrent, mytorrent). I then realized something I hadn't realized before. After "mytorrent" he writes "(because µ is pronounced like my)". The reason he writes this is because µ is pronounced "my" in Swedish (as it is in Norwegian, my native tongue). The Scandinavian "my" [myː] is not at all pronounced like the English possessive pronoun "my" [maɪ̯], but with a kind of rounded ee-sound. So the author never intended an English "mytorrent" (like "my torrent", "torrent belonging to me") pronunciation or meaning. What he meant with "mytorrent" was the Swedish pronunciation of the greek letter. But in English it is of course "mutorrent". In any case, I see that and later "mutorrent" as candidate pronunciations has been added to the section. 193.91.181.142 (talk) 15:05, 6 November 2009 (UTC) (Nick)

Influence

I just removed the influence section which falsly or at least without proof stated that µTorrent is based on the G3 client. I remember having a discussion about GUI influences on the official forums a long time ago. And the outcome was that Ludde based most of the GUI on mainline. However I couldn't find any confirmation about this. So instead of correcting it I removed the section until someone can come up with quotable facts about the influences on µTorrent. --Lord Alderaan 15:31, 4 December 2007 (UTC)