|
Anonymous
|
Date: July 28, 2000 @ 3:09 PM
just because you don't know what the real napster stats are, that doesn't mean they're worse than those pathetic scour stats. |
|
Chad
|
Date: July 28, 2000 @ 3:20 PM
As opposed to.. the fake ones that he provided?
`Chad |
|
Chad
|
Date: July 28, 2000 @ 3:22 PM
I'm dumb.
I didn't use threaded commenting.
`Chad |
|
jark
|
Date: July 28, 2000 @ 3:45 PM
Oh yes, I believe having access to 14 TB of files is honestly the most "pathetic" thing I have ever heard. Get over it and deal with the fact that Napster is not the best program of it's type around. |
|
Anonymous
|
Date: July 28, 2000 @ 4:36 PM
TO: Jark
I'll bet you that you have used Napster before.
Nice to see that you would support them so fast, JACKASS! |
|
Anonymous
|
Date: July 28, 2000 @ 4:47 PM
Is Napster the only sharing file program shutting down? I think its kinda wierd, because what about all types of other programs similar to it? I'm switching to scour probably. |
|
Anonymous
|
Date: July 28, 2000 @ 5:02 PM
Doesn't anybody care that Napster's search parameters are far superior to that of Scour. I like Scour, but Napster's unlinked servers become easily accessed with Napigator. Yes, I'll probably convert to Scour when Napster goes down, but I think Napster's interface is more friendly. |
|
Anonymous
|
Date: July 28, 2000 @ 5:09 PM
hmm
once when napster was expermenting with linking the servers the amount of files went up to 29 000 000
and 120 000 gigabytes.
just a pity they have to shut down before they could get the servers linked permently. |
|
scripto
|
Date: July 28, 2000 @ 5:21 PM
Since when has dmusic begun to praise a software product (which i might ad was a sponser of this site) when another one was about to go under (at least for a while). This just seems a little weird to me considering this isn`t really news, and seems more like a commercial to scour. I use both on daily basis and sx is a very good product and very well written, however this just seems a little out of place and inapropriate.
Ryan |
|
jark
|
Date: July 28, 2000 @ 5:34 PM
Uhm...is there something that I missed here? Angelo wrote the story, not I. Either way, yes, I have used Napster before...what is your point? I have always supported Napster. Who is the real jackass here? |
|
jark
|
Date: July 28, 2000 @ 6:01 PM
Do not count on that anytime soon. |
|
jark
|
Date: July 28, 2000 @ 6:02 PM
It was the only one ORDERED to shut down though Globalscape turned off CuteMX all on their own. |
|
Anonymous
|
Date: July 28, 2000 @ 6:47 PM
Napster is fine even if the servers aren't connected - you do a search for what you want, if you don't find it disconnect, reconnect and search again. Too easy! |
|
Chad
|
Date: July 28, 2000 @ 9:33 PM
Uh.. with so much "OOH! I GUESS WE WILL HAVE TO GO BACK TO IRC AND FTP NOW" talk going on, and with so many people asking me about other-napster like software, it seems well placed that we would bring people's attetion to a superior product that before was overshadowed by Napster's (now estranged) userbase.
`Chad
|
|
Anonymous
|
Date: July 28, 2000 @ 9:34 PM
Personally i do not believe that the napster and scour exchange programs can be compared... Yes they are both file sharing programs, but napster is music (except for wrapster) and scour is almost any file. I think that overall scour is a better program only because of the wider file types. I use both, napster for music, and scour for any other file i may be searching for. |
|
scripto
|
Date: July 28, 2000 @ 9:55 PM
hmmm Intresting point chad!
But still if you will re-read angelo`s original story, it is like a commercial hidden inside what appears to be a story. I like scour as previously stated, however the story angelo posted is just laughable!
And *strangely* enough look what happened just hours after the original story was posted! Wham! An interview with Scour`s CEO, now com`on....for anyone who reads dmusic or any of it`s other sites on a regular basis know that the dmusic staff praises and endorses sx at EVERY OPORTUNITY! I`m not going to read into the post anymore than i already have, but it was a stupid post and somewhat unprofessional! If anyone *needs* another file sharing app then they can find it on just about every major internet site, cnet, zdnet i`ve even heard about it on radio stations and cnn. Anyway so thats all i have to say...
Ryan |
|
Anonymous
|
Date: July 28, 2000 @ 10:20 PM
napster is ten times more reliable, faster and easier than scour. if it wasnt for porno scour wouldn't even be in existence. therefore...SCOUR RULES!!!!!!
|
|
Anonymous
|
Date: July 28, 2000 @ 10:23 PM
i routinely get 40 k/s+ w/ napster ... im lucky to get 8 w/ scour .... with much slower search results. |
|
Anonymous
|
Date: July 28, 2000 @ 10:24 PM
this website is subsidized by scour right? |
|
jark
|
Date: July 28, 2000 @ 10:32 PM
Not at all...what gives you that impression? |
|
spyed
|
Date: July 28, 2000 @ 10:35 PM
I find it strange that you're so oppsed to our writing a story.... about anything.
The _fact_ is that Scour is _far_ superior in technology from just about every standpoint.
We don't push it for any other reason. |
|
spyed
|
Date: July 28, 2000 @ 10:36 PM
DMusic pushes Scour because it's a superior product.... and for no other reason. |
|
jark
|
Date: July 28, 2000 @ 10:36 PM
If Napster is so much more reliable then why are all their servers not yet linked? Tell me that they are "ten times more reliable, faster and easier" when they actually are able to handle the amount of traffic that SX does. Until then, keep your ignorance to yourself. |
|
jark
|
Date: July 28, 2000 @ 10:38 PM
If you knew how the things worked then you would realize that the transferring of files has NOTHING to do with EITHER service. Transferring is done PEER TO PEER and does NOT involve the server at all, therefore one has nothing to do with the other. Get educated and come back another day! |
|
jark
|
Date: July 28, 2000 @ 10:39 PM
AMEN! |
|
spyed
|
Date: July 28, 2000 @ 10:40 PM
Napster just isn't built from the ground up to handle that many users.
Scour on the other hand was built from the ground up to handle hundreds of thousands of users all at the same time... I don't understand why people aren't praising Scour for their accomplishments instead of waving the Napster flag around...
Napster at the end of the day *is* the inferior product.. but I guess they have the first mover advantage. |
|
jark
|
Date: July 28, 2000 @ 10:42 PM
With a well thought out, and well designed protocol, one should not have to do that. Imagine if you had to hit refresh each time you attempted to load a webpage and the reason it did not work was because the protocol was not designed to handle that many users. You'd be pissed, right? What makes Napster, or and file sharing for that matter, different? Why should we "live" with shoddy design and architecture?
|
|
jark
|
Date: July 28, 2000 @ 10:45 PM
Napster was created by a guy who NEVER programmed a windows application before...who never had REAL experience with client/server environments. That is why we have to deal with Napster in the way we do. Shawn may have created a phenomenon but Napster will NEVER be the best.
If it did, then that would mean that NCSA Mosaic would still be around today... |
|
jark
|
Date: July 28, 2000 @ 10:46 PM
Kindly explain how Napsters search parameters are "far superior"? SX allows for searching for specific bitrates, file sizes, etc... How is what SX offers any less than Napster? |
|
Anonymous
|
Date: July 28, 2000 @ 10:57 PM
look jarkass ... i understand HOW it works and i understand why scour SHOULD be more reliable, and faster ................ BUT empirical knowledge is really all that matters when your tring to get a 10meg mp3 of britney spears live in japan. and you cant argue with the speed and the fact that you get less incomplete downloads with napster. the bottom line is if napster gets songs faster and you're not screwing around trying to find a user that has an adequate transfer rate than it is superior. to be honest, when napster goes bye bye i'll prolly use scour and gnotella, but i still think that i would get the most songs per session with napster; irregardless of the "inferior" technology. |
|
rob_n
|
Date: July 29, 2000 @ 4:26 AM
I disagree strongly...the reason there is so many files is because about 40% is pr0n (which is mostly videos which take up a lot of space) and about 20% videos of other sorts and then you're left with images and mp3s. Napster is specifically for mp3s, and is a hell of a lot easier for getting quick mp3s witout all the bs that is involved in scour (error's, crappy sounding files, and even though it now tells you the birate on SOME of the mp3s it's still not as good as napster). We all understand that you think scour is better...good, we don't need to hear it a thousand times :) |
|
Anonymous
|
Date: July 29, 2000 @ 4:44 AM
Of course Dmusic is going to plug Scour. Not only is it an advertiser but Scour and Dmusic are both funded by the same company. See the notice below, posted by Dmusic a few weeks ago following the LA Times article about Scour:
"Note: DMusic Network, LLC and Scour.com, Inc. are affiliated through their ownership structure but are two separate companies with no particular obligations to one another. "
It's called disclosure. Funny how in all the articles posted by Dmusic about Scour since, that notice has never appeared. That "exclusive" interview with the Scour president must have been real hard to set up. |
|
Anonymous
|
Date: July 29, 2000 @ 5:22 AM
Napster IS the better programm. There are too much errors in Scour Exchange, and actually I found much more in Napster than in Scour. I hope that Napster will come back one day!! |
|
Anonymous
|
Date: July 29, 2000 @ 10:10 AM
napster still is the best!!!!scour has so many damn bugs!!! |
|
scripto
|
Date: July 29, 2000 @ 10:13 AM
Hold on a second! I am not oppsed to the dmusic staff writing stories! However this one (and this is the first one i`ve ever complained about!)
was a stupid plug for scour and anyone outside of the dmusic staff who read it knows exactly what i`m saying is true. When one company (which is suposed to be nutral) post a story full of pro scour and anti napster fud, it seems suspicious to me and obviously others. Further more when you consider the fact that both companys are partially holded by another company (AMG L.A.) then it makes it all the more skeptical!
My original post had nothing to do with this, but since you brought it up then i felt the need to reply! I`M NOT OPPSED FOR YOU OR ANY OTHER PERSON POSTING STORIES, JUST MAKE THEM WORTH READING AND NOT A BUNCH OF FUD!
Ryan |
|
scripto
|
Date: July 29, 2000 @ 10:18 AM
And just for the record, i think scour is the superior (technology wise) product! (and i use it daily) But just because it is, doesn`t mean you have to act real anit-establishment towards napster.
If napster didn`t come along, i bet we wouldn`t be using scour exchange right now either! And since you didn`t think anyone was praising Scour i`m going to! Kudos to the Scour team for making such a fine product, i might add that is far superior to napster in design and technology!
Ryan |
|
scripto
|
Date: July 29, 2000 @ 10:28 AM
I was thinking the same thing last night about the disclosure.
If Dmusic/Angelo wants to post stupid stories the only thing its hurting is itself! The fact of the matter is that the owners of Dmusic can do whatever they want to it, they could even put pr0n banner ads all over and there`s nothing we can do, but in the end Dmusic is only hurting their own integrity!
Ryan |
|
scripto
|
Date: July 29, 2000 @ 10:35 AM
Scour (from a technical point of view) is far superior to Napster. However when i want to find a song i *always* check napster first. Whether they have more concurrent user is not the point. This may be in part because napster users have been using Napster users and Scour is still quite new. This might change now that sx has so many more users than just days ago. But the shameful Scour plugs need to go, or i`ll be finding a new music site to visit.
Ryan
|
|
Anonymous
|
Date: July 29, 2000 @ 1:17 PM
Napster thoughtfully programmed TWO search lines into their gui. One for artist, and one for title, giving the user a very friendly means to make their searches as wide or as specific as they like. Furthermore, try searching elsewhere -- Scour for instance -- for a title and/or artist whose names contain common English words. That's right, it's one giant mess, there for the manual sorting and eyeballing. And since one can receive only 300 hits max, there's no guaranteeing that even if the track one's searching for is currently in the community that it will be one of those hits.
Dmusic's search engine gives similar results with regard to its unbridled search for words, but at least dmusic kindly places the most likely hits at the beginning.
Napster's searches are phrase searches, not character-sequenced word searches. |
|
Anonymous
|
Date: July 29, 2000 @ 1:22 PM
Sorry, I didn't think the comment button was responding. |
|
Anonymous
|
Date: July 29, 2000 @ 1:45 PM
NAPSTER, SCOUR, IMESH, GNUTELLA, CUTEMX THEYYYY ALLLLLLLLL SUCKKKKKKKKKKKKKK THE BEST IS AUDIOGNOME IT CANT BE SHUTDOWN AND YOU CAN EVEN USE NAPSTER SERVERS ON IT AND IT WILL LET YOU CONNECT TO 10 BILLION FILES LISTEN PEOPLE 10 BILLLION FILESSSSS NAPSTER SUCKSSSSS AND SO ALL THOSE ATHER PROGRAMS. AUDIOGNOME IS HTRE BEST AND IS THE FUTURE HERE AT I have nothinig to say about napster but in fact about the program that will defeat napster, and has all of napsters things and more, the program is AUDIOGNOME and was released Friday July 28 at http://www.napster.org.uk/ This Program is a thousand ways better than napster and the good thing is it cant be shutdown, unlike gnutella gnutella sucks it has no help and hard to understant well this is wat better with chat search up to 3000 songs per search and log on into the napster servers with your password and name and use napster on AUDIOGNOME. http://www.napster.org.uk/ I have nothinig to say about napster but in fact about the program that will defeat napster, and has all of napsters things and more, the program is AUDIOGNOME and was released Friday July 28 at http://www.napster.org.uk/ This Program is a thousand ways better than napster and the good thing is it cant be shutdown, unlike gnutella gnutella sucks it has no help and hard to understant well this is wat better with chat search up to 3000 songs per search and log on into the napster servers with your password and name and use napster on AUDIOGNOME. http://www.napster.org.uk/ I have nothinig to say about napster but in fact about the program that will defeat napster, and has all of napsters things and more, the program is AUDIOGNOME and was released Friday July 28 at http://www.napster.org.uk/ This Program is a thousand ways better than napster and the good thing is it cant be shutdown, unlike gnutella gnutella sucks it has no help and hard to understant well this is wat better with chat search up to 3000 songs per search and log on into the napster servers with your password and name and use napster on AUDIOGNOME. http://www.napster.org.uk/ |
|
Anonymous
|
Date: July 29, 2000 @ 1:48 PM
NAPSTER, SCOUR, IMESH, GNUTELLA, CUTEMX THEYYYY ALLLLLLLLL SUCKKKKKKKKKKKKKK THE BEST IS AUDIOGNOME IT CANT BE SHUTDOWN AND YOU CAN EVEN USE NAPSTER SERVERS ON IT AND IT WILL LET YOU CONNECT TO 10 BILLION FILES LISTEN PEOPLE 10 BILLLION FILESSSSS NAPSTER SUCKSSSSS AND SO ALL THOSE ATHER PROGRAMS. AUDIOGNOME IS HTRE BEST AND IS THE FUTURE HERE AT http://www.napster.org.uk/ |
|
B00MER
|
Date: July 29, 2000 @ 1:57 PM
quit posting advertisments.
You CAPS lock freak!! |
|
Chad
|
Date: July 29, 2000 @ 3:15 PM
Well..Dmusic's search is provided by Scour...so
`Chad |
|
spyed
|
Date: July 29, 2000 @ 3:26 PM
Hmm... I'll leave half of your comments behind me, because they're rediculous.
But I would like to know why you feel so strongly on this issue... |
|
spyed
|
Date: July 29, 2000 @ 3:26 PM
Hmm... I'll leave half of your comments behind me, because they're rediculous.
But I would like to know why you feel so strongly on this issue... |
|
jark
|
Date: July 29, 2000 @ 4:57 PM
If there is _1_ more SPAM from AOL then EVERY AOLer will be BANNED from posting! It is that simple...abuse and lose.
|
|
aircutter
|
Date: July 29, 2000 @ 4:58 PM
is 14 tb really that much? i remember i had 21 once with gnutella ... |
|
jark
|
Date: July 29, 2000 @ 5:09 PM
What you said makes absolutely NO sense whatsoever when it comes to the far superior technology behind SX and the archaic one behind Napster.
If you have to resort to name calling to try and make a point then take the ignorance elsewhere. |
|
jark
|
Date: July 29, 2000 @ 5:11 PM
Either way, there is NO conspiracy going on - the fact that DM pushes SX is because it is a SUPERIOR product and no other reason. If we thought Napster was then we'd push it instead. |
|
jark
|
Date: July 29, 2000 @ 5:12 PM
For example, what bugs? |
|
jark
|
Date: July 29, 2000 @ 5:14 PM
Thats why you hit is 8 times? Riiiight.... |
|
jark
|
Date: July 29, 2000 @ 5:17 PM
Apparently some people are unable to deal with the fact that certain websites like to push certain products. Ryan, specifically, is always into the DM conspiracy theory and therefore you should not be surprised that he says things like this. If we pushed Netscape over IE all the time do you think he'd be this pissed? |
|
jark
|
Date: July 29, 2000 @ 5:19 PM
And having 21TB on Gnutella means that it is shared between EVERY file type imagined, not just multimedia files. |
|
jark
|
Date: July 29, 2000 @ 5:20 PM
...and anyhow, aren't you getting into semantics now...14TB is a hell of a lot more than Napster could ever hope for concurrently. |
|
Anonymous
|
Date: July 29, 2000 @ 6:57 PM
My IE wasn't responding. Don't be a dick. |
|
Anonymous
|
Date: July 29, 2000 @ 8:53 PM
So if there's no conspiracy then why doesn't Dmusic post a disclosure message with every article about Scour, not just one? Have you ever noticed how CNN, when they run a story about the Napster case, always notes the fact that their parent company, Time Warner, is one of the participants in the lawsuit? So their reporting may not be balanced, at least they let us know of the connection. If Dmusic isn't going to consistently disclose their connection to Scour, as far as I'm concerned, every article Dmusic posts about Scour is suspect.
Add that to the laughably unresearched story about the nonexistant RIAA lawsuit against that Superpimpin' program and it makes me wonder if any of the "news" writers at Dmusic actually know how to write a news story. |
|
jark
|
Date: July 29, 2000 @ 10:02 PM
Look...it is VERY simple - we have NO affiliation with SX, as that ONE disclaimer said. Other than that, the only reason we push SX is because WE LIKE IT and feel it is SUPERIOR - we have MUCH research behind why we've decided that.
As for our news, if you do not like it...then simply leave. |
|
rob_n
|
Date: July 29, 2000 @ 10:05 PM
"DMusic pushes Scour because it's a superior product.... and for no other reason."
-Angelo
Shall we hold you true to your word? *cough* music *cough* match.... |
|
hashterix_
|
Date: July 30, 2000 @ 8:08 AM
Am I missing the point here or does it really matter which file sharing program is better ?
Surely we should be supporting all such software and simply using the one which best suits our needs at the time.
Scour, Napster, Gnutella, Audiognome, good luck to them all and thank-you for providing a much appreciated service. |
|
jark
|
Date: July 30, 2000 @ 8:37 AM
Why people do not understand that MMJB is really a good product is beyond me. After all, it has the BEST ENCODER on earth; the people that INVENTED MP3 are the ones that created the encoding engine that MMJB uses - Fraunhofer. Now can anyone tell me of a product that offers SUPERIOR encoding to that of MMJB? |
|
Anonymous
|
Date: July 30, 2000 @ 8:43 AM
WHAT DOESN'T MAKE SENSE? can you understand english? what the hell do you need explained to you. the point is when i want to get a song i would spend MORE time getting that song on scour than on napster. that is the true test of superior file sharing. i agree, down the road, scour type p2p file sharing architecture will prolly be the shiznit but right now it smacks of corporate pimping to say that scour is a far superior file sharing utility.
and lastly, a bit of advice, you DO NOT come across very sharp when you admit that you don't understand a pretty simple concept that has been reiterated on this thread consistently. a true comparison would be to pick ten songs and compare the time it takes to get them using each program. sorry for the rant but you guys seem to have an agenda that your not disclosing.
|
|
Chad
|
Date: July 30, 2000 @ 2:02 PM
Right, Rob..
MusicMatch, is the best All-In-One application availible.
Free high quality encoder? Oh yes... oh yes.
I even know people who use it just for encoding.
Can you tell me why you do not like the product?
`Chad
|
|
Anonymous
|
Date: July 30, 2000 @ 3:24 PM
wow... what a boring and off-topic thread!
Quit whining...
If you prefer Napster, use Napster (while you can)
If you prefer Scour, use Scour.
etc.
etc.
DO NOT bitch about it, no-one cares! |
|
Anonymous
|
Date: July 30, 2000 @ 4:09 PM
I'm trying to give Scour a good chance, but I have yet to successfully transfer a movie. Perhaps Scour compares very favorably on music downloads, but movie transfers don't work very well. So, it doesn't really matter if Scour provides 1MB or 100TB of available material. If I cannot get what I want, the software is useless to me. With Napster, I was able to get almost every song I searched for.
I'm going to fire up Scour in a few minutes to see if I can transfer The Phantom Menace. Wish me luck. |
|
jark
|
Date: July 30, 2000 @ 4:33 PM
Notice, though, that you're comparing a 5MB song to a 60MB movie file. Either way, because the transfer stops, that does not automatically make it SX's fault. 1) the user on the other end that you are DIRECTLY connected to may have decided to cancel your download, 2) bad Internet weather caused connection aborts or 3) the transfer got so slow because of lack of available bandwidth that it cancelled on it's own. Those are just a few reasons there...all of which are NOT related to SX.
|
|
jark
|
Date: July 30, 2000 @ 4:35 PM
Oh yes, you're absolutely right. Everyone is sitting here, after having read a story about Napster and SX, discussing Napster and SX. That is completely off topic. Too bad I hadn't noticed until someone as intelligent as you came along and pointed that out. Thanks for being our savior and my hero.
...if it is/was such a boring thread then why did you bother to post? |
|
scripto
|
Date: July 30, 2000 @ 5:32 PM
Angelo,
Maybe i missed it, but what is so "rediculous" in my above post? And i understand that some sites push certain technologies and products more than others, it`s your site, you have the right to.
However when you openly admit that you are (in ownership) affiliated with that company is when people draw the line and start to question. My promoting the heck out of sx like the dmusic team has whether the product is superior or not isn`t the question. You invite questioning and doubt on your news,reviews and other such sections on your site. I know i`m the easy target for the attacks by the dmusic staff on questioning because i`m the only one (except rob_n) who has the guts to make comments about dm and not play the anonymous game.
Ryan |
|
Anonymous
|
Date: July 31, 2000 @ 12:49 AM
how the fuck do i download it... |
|
Anonymous
|
Date: July 31, 2000 @ 1:14 AM
I use to use Napster, got fucking tired of getting cut off and not being able to resume, or getting the whole file, but it being half a song, so I tried iMesh (which -I- think is the best program) but got tired of the files not even BEGINING to transfer
in there somewhere I tried that POS Gnutella, it's cool, there was a lot of files, but it also used FUCKING 1.5 k/sec of my available less than 3k/sec of bandwidth just sitting there doing nothing, so needless to say I shit canned that one right away
then there is Scour, I'd used it a LONG time ago when I just started getting mp3s (of cource then it was called Scour Media Agent) it wasn't as good as iMesh, but the files actually started coming to me, so that was nice
oh yeah, I aslo use CuteMX in there, I think after Napster, that was too buggy, I didn't feel like downloading the new version every time I wanted to get an mp3
Napster - only mp3s, shut down, I found the file quality to be bad in general
CuteMX - too damn buggy
Scour - it's good, you can get porn
Gnutella - glitch program, lots of files, (for me ALL downloads are half speed)
iMesh - the modem users dream, download the same file from several different people at once, if one leaves, the others will take over, also, untill you finish the file, it doesn't share it, therefor, you don't get a bunch of half-song-mp3s floating around
if iMesh's servers were better, it would blow Scour, Napster, and all those other pieces of shit out of the water
...Hirudin |
|
Fletch
|
Date: July 31, 2000 @ 1:45 PM
heh. k. :) |
|
Anonymous
|
Date: July 31, 2000 @ 3:42 PM
Am I right or am I wrong? If Napster has to stop, we can still use the program because of Napigator and the OpenNapservers etc. So why move to Scour? Napster is eternal already. |
|
Anonymous
|
Date: August 2, 2000 @ 11:24 AM
Come on Sotira, how much did they pay your ass to post that article? |
|
darci333
|
Date: August 4, 2000 @ 9:27 PM
Well for what it's worth...I care!! I am trying to find out which ones are good and which ones suck so I don't waste my hard drive space downloading stupid programs!! It is NOT boring, off-topic, or whatever--when Napster goes, I want to know which one is best so keep letting us know!
Thanks!! |
|
Anonymous
|
Date: October 12, 2000 @ 10:34 AM
I tried AUDIOGNOME last night after experiencing weeks of problems with searching for MP3s on Scour. So far I think AUDIOGNOME is much better than Scour. I was able to find songs that I could not find with Scour. AUDIOGNOME allowed me to connect to nearly 5000 other users with access to nearly 1 million files last night. The download speed is pretty good as well. On a 56K modem, I was able to download a 4MB file in about 15 minutes. At first I had some problems downloading and kept timing out. After going to the AUDIOGNOME website and looking for answers, I learned that I needed to set my port to 0 under my options and restart AUDIOGNOME. After doing this, I was able to successfully download. Everyone should at least check AUDIOGNOME out for themselves. |
|
Navigation
