On Tue, 24 Dec 2002 02:36:47 -0500, Sam Ewalt wrote: > On Mon, 23 Dec 2002 19:59:11 -0500, Glenn McCorkle wrote:
> (first quoting Sam H.) >>> Why can't you simply do FTP instead of doing "browser upload"? The >>> techies say you can't do it, but they refuse to explain why. Until a year ago my provider behaved likewise and only HTTP upload was possible. HTTP upload could not be done with Arachne since you had first to call a special page with a lot of WIZARDS... java script and all that nonsens. This took about 5 minutes extra to log-in with M$ Internet Explorer. Until a year ago they made FTP possible and FTP is much faster, no bload at all... and files are smaller. HTTP is a 7 bit system so files, eg images, must be encoded by the sender and decoded by the provider. Is MIME the en/decoder; 8 bit => 7 bit ?? Like attachments becomming larger than the original files. For FTP I use Windows Commander. The commander behaves like the Norton Commander an gives you a screen divided into a left and a right screen. Everything you can do with the commander on a local file can now be done on remote files, like copy, download, upload, delete etc. and very fast. Why not use Arachne for FTP upload? Well I tried once, being a total newby on internet matters and Arachne was not that intuitive as has been stated on this list... not to me anyway ;-)( Maybe I will give it a new try one of these days... FTP is fast and uncomplicated but I would not know how to FTP with M$ IE. Windows Commander is very good and easy... perhaps the latest versions of Norton Commander for DOS also support FTP?? (I use a very old version.) >>> Isn't plain old ordinary FTP still the standard and normal and >>> most universally acceptable method for transferring files? >> HTTP-upload is on my to-do list for version 1.73 ;-) > There's the answer. "Browser upload" is done by HTTP. Different > protocol than FTP. I guess most people just use their browsers and > the servers in question aren't setup to accept FTP transfers. As stated: my provider just recently introduced FTP. > You could call this Internet Evolution. (which may not be actual > progess) > I don't know if there is an advantage of one over the other for > file transfers. FTP is much faster. Regards, Bastiaan > Maybe Glenn could elucidate. > Sam Ewalt > Croswell, Michigan, USA > -- Arachne V1.70;rev.3, NON-COMMERCIAL copy, http://arachne.cz/
