Pros of AriaNg

• Modern and responsive user interface with a cleaner design
• Supports multiple languages and themes
• Better performance and faster loading times

Cons of AriaNg

• Lacks some advanced features present in webui-aria2
• May have a steeper learning curve for new users

Code Comparison

AriaNg:

angular.module('ariaNg').controller('MainController', ['$rootScope', '$scope', '$route', '$window', '$location', '$document', '$interval', 'clipboard', 'aria2RpcErrors', 'ariaNgCommonService', 'ariaNgNotificationService', 'ariaNgLocalizationService', 'ariaNgSettingService', 'ariaNgMonitorService', 'ariaNgTitleService', function ($rootScope, $scope, $route, $window, $location, $document, $interval, clipboard, aria2RpcErrors, ariaNgCommonService, ariaNgNotificationService, ariaNgLocalizationService, ariaNgSettingService, ariaNgMonitorService, ariaNgTitleService) {
    // Controller logic
}]);

webui-aria2:

angular.module('webui.services.rpc.syscall', ['webui.services.deps', 'webui.services.base64', 'webui.services.utils'])
.factory('$syscall', ['$_', '$json', '$name', '$utils', '$alerts', function(_, JSON, name, utils, alerts) {
    // Factory logic
}]);

Both projects use AngularJS, but AriaNg's code appears more modern and organized, while webui-aria2's code structure is older and potentially more complex.

Pros of Aria2-Pro-Docker

• Includes a pre-configured Aria2 setup with optimized settings
• Offers additional features like auto-update and HTTPS support
• Provides a more comprehensive solution with integrated WebUI

Cons of Aria2-Pro-Docker

• May be more complex to set up and customize
• Larger image size due to additional features and dependencies
• Less flexibility for users who prefer a minimal Aria2 setup

Code Comparison

Aria2-Pro-Docker (docker-compose.yml):

version: "3"
services:
  aria2-pro:
    image: p3terx/aria2-pro
    container_name: aria2-pro
    environment:
      - PUID=1000
      - PGID=1000
      - TZ=Asia/Shanghai

webui-aria2 (Dockerfile):

FROM node:14-alpine
WORKDIR /webui-aria2
COPY package*.json ./
RUN npm install
COPY . .
EXPOSE 8888

The Aria2-Pro-Docker project provides a more feature-rich and pre-configured solution, while webui-aria2 offers a simpler, more lightweight approach focused primarily on the web interface. Aria2-Pro-Docker includes additional optimizations and integrations, making it potentially more suitable for users seeking a comprehensive out-of-the-box solution. On the other hand, webui-aria2 may be preferable for those who want more control over their Aria2 setup or require a minimal installation.

Pros of aria2

• Core functionality: aria2 is the actual download manager, providing powerful and flexible download capabilities
• Performance: Optimized for high-speed downloads and efficient resource usage
• Cross-platform support: Available for various operating systems and architectures

Cons of aria2

• Lack of user interface: Primarily a command-line tool, which may be less intuitive for some users
• Steeper learning curve: Requires more technical knowledge to configure and use effectively

Code comparison

aria2:

int DownloadEngine::run(bool oneshot)
{
  while(!commands_.empty() || !downloadHandlers_.empty()) {
    if(oneshot && commands_.empty()) {
      return 0;
    }
    waitData();
    executeCommand();
  }
  return 0;
}

webui-aria2:

function addUri(uris, options) {
  var params = [uris, options];
  return invoke('aria2.addUri', params);
}

The aria2 code snippet shows the core download engine implementation, while the webui-aria2 code demonstrates how it interfaces with aria2's API to add download tasks through the web interface.

Pros of YAAW

• Lightweight and minimalistic interface
• Supports multiple aria2 RPC servers
• Offers a dark theme option

Cons of YAAW

• Less actively maintained (last update in 2017)
• Fewer advanced features compared to webui-aria2
• Limited customization options

Code Comparison

webui-aria2:

$scope.getProgress = function(d) {
  var percentage = (d.completedLength / d.totalLength) * 100;
  percentage = percentage.toFixed(2);
  if (!percentage) percentage = 0;
  return percentage;
};

YAAW:

YAAW.prototype.getProgress = function(task) {
  var percentage = (task.completedLength / task.totalLength * 100).toFixed(2);
  return percentage === "NaN" ? 0 : percentage;
};

Both projects implement a similar function to calculate download progress, but webui-aria2 uses AngularJS scope, while YAAW uses a prototype-based approach.

Summary

While YAAW offers a lightweight and minimalistic interface with multi-server support, webui-aria2 provides a more feature-rich and actively maintained solution. YAAW's simplicity may appeal to users who prefer a straightforward interface, but webui-aria2's ongoing development and broader feature set make it a more robust choice for those seeking advanced functionality and regular updates.

Pros of Persepolis

• Native desktop application with a more user-friendly interface
• Supports scheduling downloads and setting time limitations
• Integrates with browsers via extensions for easy download management

Cons of Persepolis

• Limited to desktop platforms, lacking web-based access
• May require more system resources compared to a lightweight web UI
• Less flexibility for remote management of downloads

Code Comparison

While both projects serve different purposes, here's a brief comparison of how they handle download management:

webui-aria2:

aria2.addUri([url], options, function(err, gid) {
  console.log("Download added with GID " + gid);
});

Persepolis:

download = DownloadLink(url, options)
persepolis_db.addLinkToDB(download)

webui-aria2 uses JavaScript and directly interacts with aria2 for download management, while Persepolis uses Python and manages downloads through its own database system.

Both projects aim to improve the download experience, but Persepolis offers a more comprehensive desktop solution, while webui-aria2 provides a lightweight, web-based interface for aria2.