Whoever designed that seems like they have something against transmission lol.
For me personally: it gets the job done, is allowed by most private trackers, fast and responsive, has a functional webui, and a very vast selection of third party apps (in addition to the cross platform first-party offering)
It's simplicity is kind of its selling point. Only real criticism I have is that it's unfortunate some of the supported features aren't accessible in the first party apps, and especially from the lightweight web interface
Yeah, seems weird that simple "it downloads torrents" client gets a D. It gets the job done, is easy to figure out, and doesnt fuck about with features I would never touch. Maybe thats not enough for a power user but for me its exactly what I want.
(but then why is Tixati in B, seems to have mostly downsides?)
They say "barely lacks any features" which I think they mean it's full featured. I feel like Transmission and rTorrent are good clients for their niche though.
Yeah, I've used qbittorrent, deluge, utorrent, and a number of other clients over the years. I greatly prefer transmission. I don't need my torrent client to do anything but download and seed.
I'm caught between the dual urges of "reject tierlist, embrace tradition" and "I've been sleeping on over a decade of FOSS torrent client development, maybe it's time to up my game".
I will say, as someone who used rTorrent some time ago to automate torrent downloading and whatnot, it was awesome. I’m glad to see it still going and gaining popularity.
Stable software doing its job out of the way is what I want.
It really is lacking basic functionality. Hell, o can't even order torrents that are currently running by size or % done, which would be really helpful if it existed
Also, I don't think it's actively developed anymore, I haven't seen an update in its functionality in at least 5 years, maybe even 10
Transmission is good precisely because it does one thing and one thing really well - download torrents. No other crap, spam and non-related garbage required.
It does not do it very well (no sequential downloads, tracker scanning etc) and others like qBitTorrent also do not come with spam nor unrelated garbage, only μTorrent does that.
I get what you mean, but none of those downsides to Transmission are just "downloads torrents". So yes, it does do that very well, outside of special circumstances...
Transmission used to be my preferred app hands down but recent updates have negatively impacted its performance on my end. If all it needs to do is download torrents, why does it now sometimes seem incapable of connecting to a given (popular) swarm ?
Particularly unfortunate is that once it does connect, the download speed has now become arbitrary: it keeps alternating between 'incredibly fast' and 'surprisingly slow' and takes three or four times as long to complete. I've become so exasperated with it that I've been forced to move on (deluge instantly connects and consistently downloads at five times the speed).
I've had an issue on a recent install in an LXC where it consumed more memory over time until a reboot. It hasn't really been an issue yet, but I will have to investigate and maybe switch to another webgui client.
Is there an equivalent to "thin client" mode of Deluge, where you can connect the desktop version to a server and control it as if it was a local install, but the server does all the legwork?
That would require installing client software though, no?
Qbit is just a web app accessible from anything with a browser. (I keep mine behind a vpn for auth, but it's got http form based password auth aswell.)
That's one of the only things you can't do via the web app, but there is a 'torrent creator' under the 'tools' menu. I haven't used it though so I can't really say how good it is.
Transmission is probably one of the best clients to use in a headless setup. I think it usually ranks lower because it doesn't do a lot of things for you. What it does it does well, but nothing beyond that. Technically there is network binding, but by IP address and not interface. That means you have to script it which I know most people aren't going to want to do. As far as searching, again you have to rely on other services that probably do it better anyway. Still I rank it alongside qbittorrent. It just takes a less user or beginner friendly route.
Everyone sleeping on qBittorrent with the search plugin enabled. I never have to go to websites ever again, I can just pull from various domains with one search built into the program.
I think quite a few of us use torrents on a remote server, so the thin app / remote client combo mode that deluge/transmission support puts them ahead of any other for consideration.
Are you taking about remotely accessing the insurance interface from the web interface? Qbittorrent offers that, and honestly I think most of the clients on this list do as well?
Nope, I mean a remote client. You get a full GUI on your local machine, but that actually is connected to a remote server, where the downloads actually take place. This has the extra responsiveness of an app vs a web UI, and you can also associate magnets/torrents as if it was a local app.
Transmission does have network binding. At least, i'm pretty sure it does. At least on Linux. It also has a cli interface and is a "full" client so it should at least be on par with rTorrent in that sense. It's not a great cli interface but it works.
qbittorrent-nox mate. Its command line based. I run it as a service on a debian machine. WebUI as soon as you run it will all the features of qbittorrent. The default ui isnt great for mobile but you can replace it with VueTorrent which is so sleek.
Although rtorrent is a masterpiece, there hasn't been any development in years... of course it got behind and it's outdated now.
Qbittorrent on the other hand really easy to work with and frequently updated.
Used qBittorrent for a long time now. No complaints. Ever since I've set up a home server, I almost exclusively use qBittorrent-nox now. Its qBittorrent, but headless! Runs all the time. Just use a web ui to access it. I can even run a reverse proxy and access it from afar!
I'll never understand the FOSS mentality of "There's already a quality project out there with active development and most of the user-share. Perfect, so I'll utilize my off-time to create my own inferior competitor and fragment the users instead of contribute to the existing one".
I mean, I get it if the existing project maintainers start acting with shady interests - the threat of the fork can be a powerful tool. But it seems like many of these alt projects do it right out of the gate. Meanwhile, it took linux desktop how long to get a functional wifi driver out of the box??
Likely what happens is that while the existing options are fine for the masses, a power user has a specific use case that is not covered by said options, so they create their own program to fit their specific needs. Eventually this new program evolves into something that is also useful to the masses, and that's how we get to where we are now with several good FOSS options.
A lot of it is just difference in vision. FOSS projects often have an owner and they might not be open to switch the direction of their project or be willing to maintain a large feature that someone wants to contribute.
there is also the “I rewrote it using Rust/Go/whatever because that makes it better” people.
Seconded for Transmission. It's light on features because (as far as I know) it's the only ine in this list that's built to run unattended in a Docker container, with a web interface.
I used to use it but then I just downloaded aria2 (what motrix is using) and it's as fast as motrix with a little bit of configuration. aria2 supports both direct downloads and magnet links, it's a command line tool though
It has a really easy to use User-Agent switcher so it can fake being a different torrent client. I'd love to use it however because of this it is a pretty much universally based client.
It is possible to do on other clients however it isn't a dedicated menu in settings.
I switched from Transmission to qBittorrent a while ago, and I have some regrets: mainly that the qBittorrent web ui is extremely hard to navigate on mobile. Everything is tiny, and I can't zoom in and navigate around the page without right-click menus popping up
If you use the 'arr suite of software, NZB360 is invaluable for controlling them from android.
Sonarr, Radarr, Lidarr, Prowlarr, your torrent and usenet clients, as well as any web app you want to add, all in the same place with a really smooth interface.
It even combines the release calendars from them together into one. :)
Zero issues with Transmission. I seed way more than that. Putting it so low really indicates who put together this chart. Definitely an Ubuntu GUI-only user.
Torrent client is supposed to handle torrents. Transmission isn't lagging behind on any protocol features. All the other (very optional) features are trivially handled by docker/podman.
I run Transmission on a VM that is permanently connected to a VPN. It dumps the completed files on an NFS share. I'm open to trying something different. Transmission seems like the best option.
I run it headless in a small pc in my basement that I use as server. it also has an http api so other systems can integrate with it (eg another program that looks for torrents and pushes the torrents into it.
I have to use it every once in a while when Radarr and Sonarr don’t know how to properly search for a show. How do I get it to recognize s01-s05 packs when I’m requesting s01-s05?
Good list. Honestly, if it doesn't have network interface binding it's not a even an option for me. It's so important to keep your IP from leaking, it should be a priority feature.
I am still using the last (ancient) version of Azureus (Vuze) because it has great plugins. I have the plugin to allow it to use the Mainline DHT, and I use the i2p plugin too (because the default i2p torrent UI is bad). Azureus is (was) the only client that can download/seed a torrent on clearnet and i2p at the same time.
Having said that, I didn't know that BiglyBT has i2p support, so I need to check that out.
The Vuze devs forked the code and went on to create and continue developing BiglyBT. So technically if you want to keep using that client best to switch over to BiglyBT.
You can stay with the old Vuze if you want but it's no longer developed since it lost its devs.
I want to use qbittorrent, but my Mac won't let me install it - says it's too old for the operating system and/or that it can't be verified.
I've just installed bigly bt, and I have three questions: 1) is it possible to set the seeding ratio 2) do we really need to confirm the deletion of every torrent via the pop up? (I have RSI, and the less popups or clicking the better) and 3) why does searching for a torrent via the internal search engine result in a captula.?
I want to use qbittorrent, but my Mac won’t let me install it - says it’s too old for the operating system and/or that it can’t be verified.
You can fix that verification check like this. If it's saying it's too old then you might have an Apple silicon Mac while the app could be for x86. Even then, it should automatically emulate.
qBittorrent is great, but Transmission also works well on Mac.
Is there a docker container for BiglyBT that handles java and has a webUI, similar to qBittorrent? And can it integrate with the *arrs in the same way?
The fact that it doesn't have a docker/headless install automatically disqualifies it from S tier. This tierlist is junk anyway. Use any tool that suits your needs while living up to FOSS ethos
Yeah that's an immediate hard pass from me. I don't miss the days of manually searching and adding every single torrent by hand. Though jfc could Sonarr hurry up and add multi-season pack support.
It's completely overkill for pretty much everyone but I have been thinking about building a kubernetes native client for months now.
Like the torrent should be treated as a normal resource with a Torrent CRD. It should be scheduled onto whichever node has available capacity and rescheduled onto a different node if it goes down. If allowed by the tracker, multiple instances could be run. You could set resource limits programmatically, easily configure block storage, build dashboards, export logs/metrics.. It would be open ended enough that you could have interfaces built as browser extensions, web ui, mobile app, tui, cli and be unopinionated so much that the method for torrent ingestions could be left up to the used. HTTP request, watch directory, rss client, download manager.. You could even do stuff like throw magnet links into a queue.. etc, etc..
I keep thinking it would be a great project but I just do not have the spare time to dedicate to it.. I imagine it could be used for large scale deployments for something like the Internet archive or whatever.
Does anyone have recommendations on configuration for qbit? I'm a casual user and I have been using out of the box for years now, but I've been wondering how it could be improved.
I really like biglybt, but why is it so... slow to add torrents or shut itself down? It seems as if the app does so many different things simultaneously that it doesn't do them seamlessly or instantaneously. I mean, why does it need 'up to twenty seconds' to close after you've downloaded something? Is it bloat? Is there a way to streamline its running?
Can someone help me with qbittorrent? After a couple of days of running the docker container all my torrents get stalled until I restart the container.
I am interested in some of the features of BiglyBT, but don't love the .sh installer for Linux - they should have rpms and debs IMO. I'm a little concerned they don't end up in EPEL or whatever like qbittorrent is.
I'm not in any private trackers so it doesn't really matter, but why is tixati banned? I use it because it's the only client that worked on the crusty old computer I use to run my torrents. Is it evil or something?
I have some custom scripts which kinda do what the *arr apps do.
I download torrent files into a folder. My script picks it up, identifies whether it is movie, TV, music, Games, ebooks, or something else. Based on this it selects the right folder. Then calls Transmission API and adds the torrent with the relevant path.
In case of movies and TV shows, it then calls the transmission APIs to rename the files properly. This way I can have my folders well organised and continue seeding without the need of creating duplicates.
This setup works quite well. The only fear I have is the transmission remote GUI for Windows hasn't been updated in 4 years. It works quite well, but it's only a matter of time before it stops working.
Yeah. I wrote this script wayyy before I found out about the *arr apps. After almost 4 years of tweaking and fixing, now it works so well, I don't really want the hassle of configuring the *arr apps. Also, I download everything from just a couple of trackers, so there's no searching involved.
I've tried most of these clients, but I keep going back to the old uTorrent 2.2.1 (the newer versions are indisputably awful). I find that it still has the best UX to date. On nix machines I use qB.
Edit: Warning: newer versions of uTorrent are malware. I recommend people pick a different client, as uTorrent actively tries to trick people into downloading the newer versions.
I don't understand why everyone shits on uTorrent. Maybe new versions are bloated with miners and ads, but for example on Rutracker a custom version of uTorrent 3.2.3 is the most popular one and i've been using it for like 3 years without any problems. The only downside of it is that it has no dark mode, but that's it.
When i tried using qBitTorrent i couldn't set it up to use 100% of my traffic, it was very abrupt. So i just stick to uTorrent. Am i missing out on something?
Yeah, you're missing the part that it's proprietary, and you have no real way of knowing what's running on your system. It could be mining bitcoin at night or forcing ads on you.