• 𝒍𝒆𝒎𝒂𝒏𝒏@lemmy.one
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    276
    arrow-down
    10
    ·
    1 year ago

    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

    • garyyo@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      119
      arrow-down
      6
      ·
      1 year ago

      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?)

      • GrindingGears
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        18
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        edit-2
        1 year ago

        It’s gone the job done for me, for over 16 years now. It was the only real option for Mac computers back in University. I still use it to this day.

        • garyyo@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          42
          arrow-down
          2
          ·
          1 year ago

          I guess I just don’t really know what feature-rich means in this context but being proprietary, not fully cross platform, and banned on most private trackers seems like huge downsides for power users compared to customization, built in search, and integrated chat.

          I get this chart probably not made for people like me in mind though.

          • uranibaba@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            2
            ·
            1 year ago

            Feature-rich

            To be able to set download location, not download into folders, change location based on category, stop seeding after ratio or time, watch a folder for torrent files, delete said files after importing them, minimize to tray.

            Not sure what transmission can and cannot do, but those are some examples of features in this context. Others may have a different opinion.

      • w2qw@aussie.zone
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        4
        ·
        1 year ago

        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.

    • millie@lemmy.film
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      31
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      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 bet this person hates GIMP too.

    • redfellow@sopuli.xyz
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      7
      ·
      1 year ago

      And Qbit also has network binding, which is the single most important feature for me as a VPN user.

    • investorsexchange
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      5
      ·
      1 year ago

      I use transmission because I can install it from Ubuntu repos and it runs from the command line in Ubuntu server.

    • deegeese@sopuli.xyz
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      4
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      I dropped Transmission because I found it had severe performance problems with very large torrents. qBittorrent has been great.

        • deegeese@sopuli.xyz
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          1 year ago

          Neither did I until I tried running torrents > 100GB.

          There was some bug in the way it was using Java’s non-blocking IO and buffer classes that caused resource starvation with very large torrents.