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.
Kinda neat, though I'm not really convinced that it's necessary.....I don't think a web UI is unresponsive, and it's pretty easy to just copy and paste magnet links. Also, if you're looking for a way to automate things and manage torrents remotely.....Radarr/Sonarr and the other 'arrs are the way to go.
It's not absolutely necessary. But then again, you could use rTorrent and work from console. Not that the WebUI is indispensable either, when your main source is the -Arrs. But still, I still prefer to have a full blown GUI at hand that takes files and links natively, if I have the choice, instead of a more limited WebUI.
I miss that from transmission, but qbit is more suitable for arrs and that was a dealbreaker for me
In which way is it more suitable? I'm using Deluge now. It allows labels, so my Sonarr and Radarr torrents have their individual labels and get moved to specific folders accordingly.
Well, I was talking about transmission, not deluge. Transmission doesnt support categories afaik. I never tried deluge tbh
That's the point...I ended up moving away from Transmission to Deluge back in the day. Deluge has a lot of quirks and its own messiness too, so if you're happy with Transmission, by all means stick to it.
I mean ... qbittorrent has that and more in a web interface and is plenty responsive. Why an app of a web interface gets the job done?
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
insuranceinterface 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.
Kinda neat, though I'm not really convinced that it's necessary.....I don't think a web UI is unresponsive, and it's pretty easy to just copy and paste magnet links. Also, if you're looking for a way to automate things and manage torrents remotely.....Radarr/Sonarr and the other 'arrs are the way to go.
It's not absolutely necessary. But then again, you could use rTorrent and work from console. Not that the WebUI is indispensable either, when your main source is the -Arrs. But still, I still prefer to have a full blown GUI at hand that takes files and links natively, if I have the choice, instead of a more limited WebUI.
I miss that from transmission, but qbit is more suitable for arrs and that was a dealbreaker for me
In which way is it more suitable? I'm using Deluge now. It allows labels, so my Sonarr and Radarr torrents have their individual labels and get moved to specific folders accordingly.
Well, I was talking about transmission, not deluge. Transmission doesnt support categories afaik. I never tried deluge tbh
That's the point...I ended up moving away from Transmission to Deluge back in the day. Deluge has a lot of quirks and its own messiness too, so if you're happy with Transmission, by all means stick to it.
I mean ... qbittorrent has that and more in a web interface and is plenty responsive. Why an app of a web interface gets the job done?