This is why I stick to the old 0.5 series.

Deluge is still in 1.X series..?

The problem with Deluge vs Transmissing has been on one hand stability, and on the other footprint size. I think if Deluge were to make a "lite" version similar to Transmission (although with Deluge's better UI), that has a good change of becoming the new default.

Below is my opinion of various clients: Utorrent: -slow downloads (traffic shaping) -closed source/owned by evil BT Inc. +tiny footprint +stable Overall: Not going to use Utorrent. Ever. Azureus: -unstable downloads (even worse traffic shaping) -large footprint +stable +NoVuze version+open source Ov...

I agree that Deluge > utorrent. Still, there are a number of factors influencing Deluge's publicity: Torrentfreak seems to hate Deluge, so I don't expect much publicity from them. At the same time, Deluge seems to be consistently unstable (small glitches). It's fine for casual downloaders, and peopl...

There's no need for Deluge to be anything more than a light weight BitTorrent downloader (to the developers) because in a cost-benefit approach, unless Deluge goes the route of Opera and tries to become an all-in-one approach (jack of all trades, master of none), developing a single specific plug-in...

works for me

Deluge has a history of this I remember, problems with fast-resume.....at least be glad you didn't have to restart downloading everything again, sometimes Deluge decides not to save the data downloaded until it is done....I remember seeing a feature request thread for every hour back-ups I think, do...

It is what BT clients are supposed to do as far as I remember from a earlier thread, they aren't supposed to connect to all trackers at once. (italicized because there are clients that ignore the standard)

No idea, but I'd switch back to 0.5.x for now (although I'm still on SP2 on my XP computer), works fine for me (except for this one website incompatibility).