After searching, I came up with five download managers, and was hoping
that I could get opinions on the best free download managers from the
following:

1)Go!zilla
2)Fresh
3)Mozilla
4)Stardownloader
5)DLExpert

I am looking for one that will not tend to wreck havok with my Win98
system.

Thanks a lot.

Darren Harris
Staten Island, New York.

1 vote for Fresh Download
"Darren Harris" <Searcher7@mail.con2.com> wrote in message
news:9437a27c.0308231527.2f0f8641@posting.google.c om...
| After searching, I came up with five download managers, and was hoping
| that I could get opinions on the best free download managers from the
| following:
|
| 1)Go!zilla
| 2)Fresh
| 3)Mozilla
| 4)Stardownloader
| 5)DLExpert
|
| I am looking for one that will not tend to wreck havok with my Win98
| system.
|
| Thanks a lot.
|
| Darren Harris
| Staten Island, New York.

Searcher7@mail.con2.com (Darren Harris) wrote in
news:9437a27c.0308231527.2f0f8641@posting.google.c om:

I like Stardownloader the most. Been using it a long time, win98, 98se,
me and now xp. Never had problems. I've used all you've mentioned
except mozilla, SD is my choice.

--
burnr
http://netwonder.us Freeware
http://netsharkdownloads.com Shareware

"Darren Harris" <Searcher7@mail.con2.com> wrote in message
news:9437a27c.0308231527.2f0f8641@posting.google.c om...
Gozilla has spyware in it or use to.. Fresh works pretty well but it use to
be kind of complicated to work with.. I am not familar with a couple of the
others.

I use Download Accelerator Plus but I know that is a no no to post here as
it is nag wear and adware. Although Spybot will remove nicely the ads and
then it is not bad to use...

Fresh I have heard some good things about....

Seconded!


---
Virus free says AVG, but thou may choose not to agree!
Scan again, just in case the virus runs free!
Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
Version: 6.0.512 / Virus Database: 309 - Release Date: 19/08/2003

I like Stardownloader the most. Been using it a long time, win98, 98se,
me and now xp. Never had problems. I've used all you've mentioned
except mozilla, SD is my choice.
_____________________

I use Star Downloader. Another good feature about it is keeping the
downloads (until you delete them) readily available should you need to
re-install them.

Helen

Darren Harris wrote:

Look for true freeware one.

(I'm not the original poster.) I tried Fresh Download recently. After
three weeks it said the trial period was over, so I removed it. I was
already bothered that there didn't seem an option not to use it - that
is, with an iffy dialup connection I need a downloader that can resume
where it left off, but at the same time I don't want one at all for
small files.

Searcher7@mail.con2.com (Darren Harris) wrote in
news:9437a27c.0308231527.2f0f8641@posting.google.c om:

I don't know how Mozilla can be classified as a download manager. It's
actually an Internet browser.

On 23 Aug 2003 16:27:07 -0700, Searcher7@mail.con2.com (Darren Harris)
wrote:

begging me for more donations, Stardownloader works as well if not
better..just my opinion, James

Searcher7@mail.con2.com (Darren Harris) wrote in
news:9437a27c.0308231527.2f0f8641@posting.google.c om:


MetaProducts Download Express 1.5.206 Beta 1
http://www.metaproducts.com/mp/mpPro...loads_Beta.asp

You can't beat the speed and stability.
Trash the others. Try something an adult would use

--
°¿°
Latitude: 44º 48' 20" N
Longitude: 68º 45' 41" W

Searcher7@mail.con2.com (Darren Harris) wrote in message news:<9437a27c.0308231527.2f0f8641@posting.google. com>...

This ng has had several threads on downloaders. Some thoughtful
discussion can be found amongst the "me too"/"I use"/OT-flame posts.
Googling newsgroups might be enlightening if you haven't already.

Fabulous Freeware has a small feature comparison that compares 6 free
download managers. Their favorite: Star Downloader.
http://fabfree.av-services.net/download.html

In June, PC Magazine published a feature and performance comparison of
ten download managers (mostly upgrade/premium commercial versions)
that includes freeware. Star was clearly rated higher than Fresh.
(For comparison table choose "Click here to view the Scorecard
results.")
http://www.pcmag.com/article2/0,4149,1094855,00.asp

"On our speed tests, Star Downloader 1.42 tied for first place. Its
feature set, while not as rich as some, is adequate, and it's free.
The one feature we miss is the ability to store site-specific user
name/password pairs, but not everyone requires this."
http://www.pcmag.com/article2/0,4149,1094919,00.asp

If you can tolerate flashing ads (or carefully filter) and downloads
that don't start until you select a destination name, FlashGet has
much better IE integration, bandwidth sharing, category control, and
downloaded file updating than Star Downloader. I can't determine
how/why PC Mag determined some ratings of Star versus FlashGet.

This is one more illustration that particular features are weighted
differently by different people. As earlier posters said, just try
some yourself and see which one you like best. These above two sites
plus review of the Download Accelerator Plus Premium manual (as the
most feature rich choice) should provide you with a comprehensive set
of criteria for screening and eventually evaluating download managers
yourself.

N.B., read the comments on individual packages for corrections.

If nothing else, these two references might help you determine your
own evaluation criteria.

BillR

PS - On Topic explanation for certain rabid flamers
- FlashGet provides the basis for an absolutely On Topic illustration.
- DAP Premium is probably the most feature rich package. As such it
is the best source to review when developing criteria for comparison
and eventually noting shortcomings.

BillR5temp@hotmail.com (BillR) wrote :

Leechget was strangely forgotten is this test.

--
Antoine

burnr wrote:
I went to your freeware site, must not be coded for older 4.X Netscape,
it froze my screen.

Mike Sa

burnr <burnr@hotmail.com> wrote in
news:Xns93E142C679307burnrhotmailcom@148.78.248.75 :

browsers. Sorry to hear it's a problem for 4.x.


--
burnr
http://netwonder.us Freeware
http://netsharkdownloads.com Shareware

BoB wrote on Sun, 24 Aug 2003 14:40:36 GMT

out by SpybotS&D.
Firebird has it's own (Mozilla I expect).
Apart from DAP, Leechget is the only one I know which searched
for alternative/faster sites which is useful on dialup, but
like someone said it hammers resources.
Had trouble with all the others integrating with MyIE2, which
was my favourite browser then.
--
Jim

To e-mail me direct:
miss out the big X from my reply address above.

Thanks much for going to the trouble of posting this detailed
comparison information, Bill!

On Sun, 24 Aug 2003 11:35:50 GMT, burnr <burnr@hotmail.com> took a
very strange color crayon and scribbled:

That's not what he said...read it again.


--
I have seen the life on this planet
and that's why I'm looking elsewhere.
- Fox Mulder, X-Files

tlshell@concentric.net wrote in
news:qkohkv00v7405hbqj7tapjpl1t508c6r02@4ax.com:

Yes, I realized that and sent another reply (only a few min. later)with OT
added to the subject explaining I mis-read the post. I see it didn't "go
through" for some reason? The corrected reply from me is in my sent folder
but it didn't show up here. I've sent a second apology for the mis-
read/reply.

--
burnr
http://netwonder.us Freeware
http://netsharkdownloads.com Shareware

Antoine <noemail@noemail.com> wrote in message news:<Xns93E16E982BB13AntoineNews@193.252.19.141>. ..
"On our speed tests [of 10 download managers], ...."

I don't know what criteria PC Mag author or editor used in choosing
which ones to test. I remain pleasantly surprised that that so many
products were included, especially so many freeware and (potentially)
simple adware products. Reviews of this sort often include only a
half dozen commercial products.

While on the topic of performance, I'm not sure how performance was
measured in the above test. For example, I suspect that Flashget may
have performed so poorly because it does not appear to begin
downloading until you have specified the download filename. This
could make its performance for smaller files highly dependant upon the
delay introduced by completing the naming process in the test harness.
A couple of others that I have used appear to have already started
downloading prior to the download location having been specified.
There may also be differences in how and when mirror sites are
checked. I don't rememeber seeing any explanation of the performance
options choosen.

Hence despite my recommendation of the article, I find the review far
from perfect. That said, the author/editor managed to squeeze a great
deal of useful information onto one page of the printed version. This
topic within the larger feature easily could have been expanded into a
small feature article in its own right, especially if the number of
reviewed products had been increased slightly and the features
detailed further.

Any freelance authors out there looking for a topic?

BTW, the comments about individual produts correct a few factual
mistakes.

BillR