Bestest Windows Download Manager
December 17, 2007 10:55 PM Subscribe
Fastest, bestest, prettiest, lightest, freeest Windows download manager for large files. Did I mention fastest?
@6am: TalkFilter me as you wish but....."fast as tits"????
Yes, DownThemAllRocks.
Also, the last free version of Net Transport might do as well.
posted by flutable at 2:31 AM on December 18, 2007
Yes, DownThemAllRocks.
Also, the last free version of Net Transport might do as well.
posted by flutable at 2:31 AM on December 18, 2007
Exhaustive wikipedia comparison of download managers
posted by aerotive at 3:46 AM on December 18, 2007
posted by aerotive at 3:46 AM on December 18, 2007
I used to use Download Express and it was pretty decent. Integrates with Firefox as well.
posted by purephase at 5:09 AM on December 18, 2007
posted by purephase at 5:09 AM on December 18, 2007
DownThemAll.
posted by musicinmybrain at 7:58 AM on December 18, 2007
posted by musicinmybrain at 7:58 AM on December 18, 2007
Does it have to be the prettiest?
If not, then the wget Windows port.
posted by pallak7 at 8:37 AM on December 18, 2007
If not, then the wget Windows port.
posted by pallak7 at 8:37 AM on December 18, 2007
I hope this isnt considered "thread-jacking"... but I'm wondering if someone can explain to me the logic/benefit of using a "download manager"... because I have never been able to figure out why people use them. Is there some "killer-app" functionallity of download-managers that I'm completely ignorant of that will make my browsing experience THAT much better ?
The reason I ask is because I consider myself pretty web-savvy,... I bet I spent 10+ hours a day on the internet... yet I've never run into a situation where I've stopped and said "Hey, I really need a download-manager for this!"
posted by jmnugent at 8:39 AM on December 18, 2007
The reason I ask is because I consider myself pretty web-savvy,... I bet I spent 10+ hours a day on the internet... yet I've never run into a situation where I've stopped and said "Hey, I really need a download-manager for this!"
posted by jmnugent at 8:39 AM on December 18, 2007
I really like ReGet Pro. It is not free, it is $10.
jmnugent: most people use download managers because they think that downloading a file in eight slices in parallel will magically make their Internet connections faster. And it actually will, in some cases where you have a very congested pipe. Me, I use ReGet for the opposite reason; to download large files slowly so I don't saturate my network with a single download for an hour. I also like that it handles resuming a broken download transparently and reliably.
posted by Nelson at 8:57 AM on December 18, 2007
jmnugent: most people use download managers because they think that downloading a file in eight slices in parallel will magically make their Internet connections faster. And it actually will, in some cases where you have a very congested pipe. Me, I use ReGet for the opposite reason; to download large files slowly so I don't saturate my network with a single download for an hour. I also like that it handles resuming a broken download transparently and reliably.
posted by Nelson at 8:57 AM on December 18, 2007
Response by poster: but I'm wondering if someone can explain to me the logic/benefit of using a "download manager"
Nelson has got it. We're talking several large files (2 GB+) that I'd like downloaded with little or no chance of corruption or congestion.
Thanks for all the great answers.
posted by Avenger50 at 9:09 AM on December 18, 2007
Nelson has got it. We're talking several large files (2 GB+) that I'd like downloaded with little or no chance of corruption or congestion.
Thanks for all the great answers.
posted by Avenger50 at 9:09 AM on December 18, 2007
Nelson:
"...because they think that downloading a file in eight slices in parallel will magically make their Internet connections faster. And it actually will, in some cases where you have a very congested pipe."
I guess thats the attitude I've always had. It seems to me that there are so many variables in the "Download speed" equation (congestion/bandwidth limits on the sending end.... congestion/bandwidth limits on the receiving end.. and/or any internet backbone traffic wierdness).... that the benefits of a "download manager" would be minimal to nil.
"Me, I use ReGet for the opposite reason; to download large files slowly so I don't saturate my network with a single download for an hour. I also like that it handles resuming a broken download transparently and reliably."
This I can understand, and I guess when I sit back and think about it, I use other programs (not necessarily "download managers" per se) to accomplish the same thing.
posted by jmnugent at 9:19 AM on December 18, 2007
"...because they think that downloading a file in eight slices in parallel will magically make their Internet connections faster. And it actually will, in some cases where you have a very congested pipe."
I guess thats the attitude I've always had. It seems to me that there are so many variables in the "Download speed" equation (congestion/bandwidth limits on the sending end.... congestion/bandwidth limits on the receiving end.. and/or any internet backbone traffic wierdness).... that the benefits of a "download manager" would be minimal to nil.
"Me, I use ReGet for the opposite reason; to download large files slowly so I don't saturate my network with a single download for an hour. I also like that it handles resuming a broken download transparently and reliably."
This I can understand, and I guess when I sit back and think about it, I use other programs (not necessarily "download managers" per se) to accomplish the same thing.
posted by jmnugent at 9:19 AM on December 18, 2007
GTA and others can also, for example, download all the MP3 (or PDF, etc.) links from a webpage, with a single click.
posted by signal at 9:46 AM on December 18, 2007
posted by signal at 9:46 AM on December 18, 2007
Speed is a function of your bandwidth. A program can do things in a stupid way to slow them down, but nothing is really going to be significantly faster than anything else. Of course, ones that resume downloads that are broken from the last point are better than ones that start over at the beginning, which makes it "faster"...
posted by jeffamaphone at 9:46 AM on December 18, 2007
posted by jeffamaphone at 9:46 AM on December 18, 2007
Throwing my vote in for Free Download Manager...works fantastically with the FlashGot Firefox extension.
As for using a download manager, I find it useful because if Firefox were to crash in the middle of a large download (which has happened to me often enough), there's the chance that I'll lose my progress on that download and have to start it over. Much easier to load said download into FDM and let it go.
posted by phaded at 12:10 PM on December 18, 2007
As for using a download manager, I find it useful because if Firefox were to crash in the middle of a large download (which has happened to me often enough), there's the chance that I'll lose my progress on that download and have to start it over. Much easier to load said download into FDM and let it go.
posted by phaded at 12:10 PM on December 18, 2007
« Older At the very least, I imagine that the people in... | this is my street! I don't care if you like it or... Newer »
This thread is closed to new comments.
posted by Happy Dave at 11:02 PM on December 17, 2007