Antoine said:
Leechget was strangely forgotten is this test.
"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
