this post was submitted on 21 Sep 2023
1072 points (97.8% liked)
Open Source
31396 readers
321 users here now
All about open source! Feel free to ask questions, and share news, and interesting stuff!
Useful Links
- Open Source Initiative
- Free Software Foundation
- Electronic Frontier Foundation
- Software Freedom Conservancy
- It's FOSS
- Android FOSS Apps Megathread
Rules
- Posts must be relevant to the open source ideology
- No NSFW content
- No hate speech, bigotry, etc
Related Communities
- !libre_culture@lemmy.ml
- !libre_software@lemmy.ml
- !libre_hardware@lemmy.ml
- !linux@lemmy.ml
- !technology@lemmy.ml
Community icon from opensource.org, but we are not affiliated with them.
founded 5 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
My purpose to put it there is that it still is the most recognised torrent client in computing history, and since it does not have a * mark, nobody should pick it over QBitTorrent or Deluge (FOSS and superior). It is only a way for new, less literate computing users (who this guide covers) to recognise what is a torrent client with a familiar name.
Fair enough, but considering the possibilities and the shitty things they've verifiably done, knowing that QB is available on both, it just seems like a bad idea to recommend uTorrent.
Best I can do as balanced approach is to add another bullet point in notes below the table or within the table entry (not to use uTorrent), when I update the guide to a new .1 release. The guide was meant to be future proof, and atleast I am glad that it does not have many flaws to make it ideal and prune away issues.
Do you have any other serious criticisms or flaws in the guide, that I linked on top of the table?
No, and I appreciate your efforts, it's a good list but that one entry caught me off guard.