This is a read-only archive. Find the latest Linux articles, documentation, and answers at the new Linux.com!

Linux.com

Feature: Reviews

Azureus vs. KTorrent

By Anze Vidmar on August 02, 2007 (9:00:00 AM)

Share    Print    Comments   

BitTorrent is popular peer-to-peer sharing communication protocol used for transferring all kind of files over the Internet. Two of the most popular BitTorrent clients for Linux are Azureus and KTorrent. If you're looking for a robust, fast, simple, and powerful BitTorrent client, you will probably go with KTorrent. If you want a Java-based client that runs on every platform and allows you to configure every detail for BitTorrent transfer, consider Azureus.

Both Azureus and KTorrent are feature-rich and powerful BitTorrent clients with powerful file transfer management GUIs, statistics, and highly configurable settings menus. Azureus is written in Java and therefore can be run on practically all platforms, while KTorrent is written in C/C++ using Trolltech's Qt toolkit, and can be run only on Linux and Unix-like systems (including Mac OS X).

Both clients are available for installation from software repositories in all modern distributions. If they're not there, you can install Azureus by downloading it, extracting it from the tarball, and running the binary:

tar xvjf Azureus_x.x.x.x_linux...tar.bz2
cd azureus
./azureus

You will also need to have Sun's Java Runtime Environment installed.

KTorrent's installation and compilation uses the standard ./configure, make, make install process.

Now that we know how to install them, let's have a look at some of the features that Azureus and KTorrent provide.

Features

When you choose to download specific BitTorrent file, both programs let you choose only the files you want from a specific torrent archive. For example, if you're downloading an openSUSE10.torrent file that contains all five ISO images of openSUSE Linux, but you need only the first one, you can uncheck the other four files in the download dialog and download only the desired one.

Both clients can generate statistics for you, including average transfer rates, share ratio, what peers are you connected to, file availability (also per-host), and file chunks. You can also view how many peers are connected, what their IP address and port number, on which BitTorrent they're running, their BitTorrent client, where are they from (this is a extra feature with Country Locator plugin), what is the transfer speed between you and a peer, and what file chunks are available from them.

Both Azureus and BitTorrent allow you to download and upload as many files as you like simultaneously. You can configure desired maximum and minimum file transfer speed for both upload and download globally, and limit transfer speed per-file as well.

Both client supports IP address blocking via plugins. If you feel that some host is not welcome on your torrent ride, you can list its IP address in the IP blocking menu to prevent it from connecting to you.

Both clients support BitTorrent protocol encryption, which makes BitTorrent traffic harder to identify by third party. For example, you would use this if you were worried that your ISP was sniffing network traffic for peer-to-peer connections and possibly blocking it. With this feature, an ISP probably wouldn't even know that you're using any peer-to-peer programs. Protocol encryption doesn't provide anonymity, however; it only makes peer-to-peer traffic harder to identify.

You can expand both programs' functionality via plugins. For example, Azureus can send you SMS for every finished torrent with its SMS notifications plugin, or alter you to torrent status changes using Google Talk (Jabber protocol) with it Instant Messaging Notifications plugin. You can see a full plugin list for Azureus and for KTorrent online.

You can control Azureus remotely via a Web interface with the help of the Swing Web plugin. KTorrent provides the same feature with the WebGUI plugin, which is included in the program by default. You need to specify a username and password in the plugin's settings before you can use this service.

Both clients support Universal Plug and Play (UPnP), which allow devices to connect seamlessly, meaning zero network configuration for user. BitTorrent clients need this for peer-to-peer transfers. The other option is to turn on and configure port forwarding on your router, but this requires some network knowledge, so it's not the best choice for all users.

Both clients let you create your own torrents. However, KTorrent requires you to upload your torrent content to a torrent tracker before you can start seeding. By contrast, Azureus is capable of serving as its own tracker, allowing you to start seeding to users right away.

A full list of differences between the torrent clients is available on wikipedia.

The glitch

I had a lot of problems with the Azureus client and my Linksys WRT54GS v2 wireless router. When I was using Azureus for a few hours at a time, my network connection would drop consistently, and before that, it was so slow it took my Web browser five minutes to open any Web page. I reconfigured Azureus to use UPnP and directly mapped ports on the router, but still saw the same problem. I limited the number of connections -- still the same problem. Upgrading the router's firmware didn't help. It took me quite some time to figure out that it's the router's problem; read this short FAQ about Linksys WRT54G/GS routers and the BitTorrent protocol.

I liked the look and feel on Azureus client, but because of my router at home, I was forced to make a switch. Although I'm not using KDE at home, I found KTorrent to be a great piece of software. Both clients are feature-rich and extensible via plugins. The choice is yours, but if you're a Linksys router owner, you might just go with KTorrent.

Share    Print    Comments   

Comments

on Azureus vs. KTorrent

Note: Comments are owned by the poster. We are not responsible for their content.

Azureus vs. KTorrent

Posted by: Anonymous [ip: 192.6.178.101] on August 02, 2007 10:11 AM
uTorrent+wine works quite well too.

#

Azureus vs. KTorrent

Posted by: Anonymous [ip: 91.120.130.112] on August 02, 2007 10:57 AM
Deluge is also a good bittorrent client, I prefer it because it uses gtk and integrates well with gnome

#

Azureus vs. KTorrent

Posted by: Anonymous [ip: 129.9.163.106] on August 02, 2007 01:21 PM
I've used both and I think the choice is obvious. If you can use Ktorrent, you should. If you can't, use Azureus.

#

Azureus vs. KTorrent

Posted by: Anonymous [ip: 71.41.135.186] on August 02, 2007 01:43 PM
rtorrent. Use it because it doesn't need any kind of GUI and can be run within screen. Fewer dependencies, faster build time. More light weight.

#

Re: Azureus vs. KTorrent

Posted by: Anonymous [ip: 213.192.60.111] on August 03, 2007 03:01 PM
With Azureus you can do the same with only azureus2.jar and two additional .jar files:

http://www.azureuswiki.com/index.php/ConsoleUI

And combining with Web UI plugins (html or java) you can control it remotely...
[Modified by: Anonymous on August 03, 2007 03:04 PM]

#

Azureus vs. KTorrent

Posted by: Anonymous [ip: 83.72.129.159] on August 02, 2007 01:59 PM
Azureus is written in Java and therefore can be run on practically all platforms, while KTorrent is written in C/C++ using Trolltech's Qt toolkit, and can be run only on Linux and Unix-like systems (including Mac OS X).


C++ and Qt is definitely not the reason it does not have a Windows binary ;)

#

my 2 cents

Posted by: Anonymous [ip: 207.96.190.254] on August 02, 2007 03:00 PM
After some epic battle with severals torrent client I tried and sticked to rtorrent, a ncurses base client, robust, very fast and light. especially usefull with screen to manage your download remotely.

http://libtorrent.rakshasa.no

and torrentflux, a web base PHP torrent client.

http://www.torrentflux.com

#

Azureus vs. KTorrent

Posted by: Anonymous [ip: 10.34.22.88] on August 02, 2007 04:29 PM
Dude if you didn't configure the up speed in Azureus then NO DUH it will kill your router. It has only so much memory for open sessions and you flooded it. Fix your up speed and all will be well in the force.

#

Azureus vs. KTorrent

Posted by: Anonymous [ip: 80.116.187.225] on August 02, 2007 11:56 PM
qbittorrent is the best!

#

Re: Azureus vs. KTorrent

Posted by: Anonymous [ip: 68.59.121.101] on August 12, 2007 03:50 PM
I concur.

#

Azureus vs. KTorrent

Posted by: Anonymous [ip: 68.126.183.5] on August 03, 2007 02:01 AM
ctorrent is extremely lightweight and for the most part not as configurable as rtorrent, but i've customized it to my liking, so the upstream authors can shove their patches where the sun don't shine



these captchas are ridiculously easy to break btw

#

Azureus vs. KTorrent

Posted by: Anonymous [ip: 121.247.233.206] on August 03, 2007 07:52 AM
KTorrent is perfect clone of utorrent. Works perfect on my machine.

#

Azureus vs. KTorrent

Posted by: Anonymous [ip: 71.168.82.94] on August 03, 2007 01:40 PM
I've used a bunch of linux torrent clients and nothing reaches perfection yet.

Lately, I've been using Azureus because of it's queue management and IP blocking capabilities.

Torrentflux was my preferred client for the last year and half but it's queue management is extremely lacking (and it has no IP blocking). Can't beat the remote management capabilities though.

For command line usage, the plain old btlaunchcursesmany works well and is screen friendly (but no queue management).

I've tried ~really~ hard to use KTorrent but it's been too unstable on the several systems I've tried. (Queue management and IP blocking are good; remote management is borked).

I'm waiting for a native utorrent client (I know it works with wine; phooey on that). Now that Google owns them, I hope they're stepping up the Linux porting effort.

#

Azureus vs. KTorrent

Posted by: Anonymous [ip: 32.104.18.240] on August 03, 2007 01:41 PM
The choice pretty much depends on your usage. I for example would love to use KTorrent and use it whenever I can but most of my torrents are from private trackers, which in most cases will limit your choice of torrent clients to uTorrent or Azureus (BitComet and others popular clients are a no-no) because of share ratios, DHT, etc, so Azureus takes most of my torrents. But the performance penalty after long periods running definitely cannot be neglected. KTorrent is lightweight, blends nicely into a KDE desktop and runs like a champ.

#

Azureus vs. KTorrent

Posted by: Anonymous [ip: 69.146.240.231] on August 05, 2007 06:30 AM
i had the same connection issues until i disabled dht

#

Azureus vs. KTorrent

Posted by: Anonymous [ip: 69.37.3.180] on August 05, 2007 04:36 PM
What about Transmission? It's even simpler than Ktorrent and I use it almost daily. I used to use Azureus but it is so overly complicated. You can't get any more simple and efficient than Transmission in my opinion.

#

Re: Azureus vs. KTorrent

Posted by: Anonymous [ip: 63.77.33.33] on August 10, 2007 08:31 PM
Not a fan of Transmission myself. Too simple. I like to be able to fully control the torrents, and transmission just simply doesn't allow for that.

On Ktorrent, I've tried it, and I just could never get the speeds out of it that I do with Azureus.

#

http://unidadlocal.com/?buscar=linux

Posted by: Anonymous [ip: 189.169.13.181] on August 08, 2007 03:41 AM
ktorrent !!

#

Azureus vs. KTorrent

Posted by: Anonymous [ip: 74.92.173.86] on August 10, 2007 09:36 PM
Personally I find Transmission to be the fastest, lightest and most stable of all the GUI bittorrent clients. Not a lot of features, but that's part of being light and fast, which is the most important feature in my book.

#

Azureus vs. KTorrent

Posted by: Anonymous [ip: 68.78.193.130] on August 15, 2007 06:40 PM
Loved Azureus on Windows, hate it on Linux. It's a total crash-o-matic.

#

Re: Azureus vs. KTorrent

Posted by: Anonymous [ip: 125.99.112.86] on September 10, 2007 11:03 AM
absolutely! Imba memory leak, quits without any warning.. complete disaster on linux. I use uTorrent on laptop(windows) n ktorrent on desktop(sabayon linux). N I'm more than happy with this combo.

#

r

Posted by: Anonymous [ip: 78.57.193.83] on August 22, 2007 07:12 PM
is good

#

Azureus vs. KTorrent

Posted by: Anonymous [ip: 87.72.2.21] on August 24, 2007 06:50 PM
jgkhjk

#

Azureus vs. KTorrent

Posted by: Anonymous [ip: 87.72.2.21] on August 24, 2007 07:41 PM
zzzaaa

#

Azureus vs. KTorrent

Posted by: Anonymous [ip: 41.220.3.51] on October 29, 2007 09:16 AM
Good article - thanks! had problems with azureus (though loved it on windows), may try ktorrent now.

#

Azureus vs. KTorrent

Posted by: Anonymous [ip: 85.81.93.32] on March 01, 2008 12:24 PM
I use uTorrent on Vista and Ktorrent on Ubuntu, both works great!

#

This story has been archived. Comments can no longer be posted.



 
Tableless layout Validate XHTML 1.0 Strict Validate CSS Powered by Xaraya