Opera's FTP client - download MULTIPLE files and folders with one click.
Wojciech Eysymontt
A huge limitation and inconvinience of FTP client built in Opera7 is that
there is no possibility to select multiple files and folders and download
them with one command or drag&drop to local folder like in IE. Currently
every file has to be clicked to be downloaded. This is very inconvinient and
time consuming if one wants to download let's say 50 files from 15
subfolders. I think the FTP interface/functionality in this area should be
changed to IE like.
Please comment this idea. Who likes it, who does not? Maybe there are even
better solutions?
Wojciech E.
Reto Conconi
i dont know how IE handles FTP, but i agree with you, the ftp support
should be better. It should be more like an (Windows File-)Explorer.
With folders and subfolders and a tree view etc.
Reto
Toman
> i dont know how IE handles FTP, but i agree with you, the ftp support
> should be better. It should be more like an (Windows File-)Explorer. With
> folders and subfolders and a tree view etc.
Thats advanced FTP... Try 'Internet Neighbourhood', which actually
integrates into Explorer. Very nice, but it's been a while..
<http://www.knoware.com>
I don't think Opera should be much more advanced in the ftp area. I think
it should treat an ftp site like it treats a website.
For stepped-up ftp'ing, there is always the dedicated programs. I think we
are getting too used to only using Opera when connected to the internet..
--
<http://launch.yahoo.com/launchcast/station.asp?u=1031052473>
"Nature outweigh Man to a greater extent than Experience outweigh
Definition."
Gollum
> [...]
> I don't think Opera should be much more advanced in the ftp area. I
I disagree, but I can live without one-click download of multiple files.
What I'd rather like to have is the ability to sort by name, date/time,
size and file type.
Toman
That would of course be nice, but would that make to it's usability what is
lost by size-increase?
No, wait.. The old mail-module had this option, and it seemed to integrate
in a light fashion. Perhaps it's possible to do it the same way with ftp?
Wojciech Eysymontt
U¿ytkownik "Gollum" <gol...@start.no> napisa³ w wiadomo ci
news:pan.2003.01.04....@start.no...
I agree. So summarizing, we can say that dowload of multiple files at one
click and sorting by columns would be the most requested and very handy
features, right?
I hope Opera Software's wishmaster notes it down.
Wojciech E.
robert coleman
money
Of course I agree that multiple ftp download features play a decisive
role in getting the best benfit of the web. However, I doubt that
Opera should design such a ftp web suck tool from the very scratch.
Better everybody -- including the Opera team themselves -- might reuse
such existing tools which already has been successfully proved.
This is particulaary true as -- IMHO -- a close-to-perfection tool
already exists: it is freeware (nothing to pay for!), avilable for
Microsoft's "Windows (TM)" and for any Unix. This tool had been tested
roughly, thereof has been deemed stable by whomever you might respect
as an expert on computer affairs and in any given moment of time is
been deployed by thousands of seriously working computer professionals
thoughout the world: as some guessed allready, all my paean of praise
refers to WGET.
Wget is a tool developed by GNU, this world famous group of
outstanding programmers, blessed by a compelling track record, who
created a huge number of award-winning software. One of these is WGET.
Among the features of WGET you find: (+) resume aborted downloads (+)
use filename wild cards (+) sucks recursively (+) many different
languages (+) Optionally converts absolute links in downloaded
documents to relative (+) Supports HTTP and SOCKS proxies (+) Supports
HTTP cookies (+) Supports persistent HTTP connections (+) Unattended /
background operation (+) Use ftp and http (+) pick out of your
textfile (free form) whatever web adress
you wrote into this file and sucks the web for thereafter (+) if the
file requested by you, is available on multiple web sites WGET can
suck them all at the same time -- and save your's there by (+) creates
your local "deep" index of any remote ftp / http site (!) hence you
can use this index to pre-plan your suck session or to uncover new
files on any server.
Here there is the web adress:
http://www.gnu.org/software/wget/wget.html
---
What is about an integration of WGET work in Opera?
I know .. GPL ... . Thus my idea is about using Opera as a convenient
"remote control unit" for WGET. In fact, the outcome will be an
appealing GUI tool for WGET. Well, an WGET GUI exists already,
integrated in Opera as an Opera WGET GUI it does not exist yet. To
follow this way means to heavily unload Opera's programmers team and
to bring faster to market a rock-stable retrieval software feature of
Opera, thus bringing a huge lot of fun to Opera's community.
Robert Coleman
Gollum
> Reuse what exists, integrate it in Opera, save time, distress and money
WGET is irrelevant here. The requested features are user interface
enhancements. WGET is a command-line tool. Opera can already do
simultaneous downloads. Maybe WGET can do that better, but that's another
issue.
Maybe using some GUI-based FTP client as a plugin could satisfy the
requests, but not WGET.
robert coleman
> robert coleman wrote:
> > Reuse what exists, integrate it in Opera, save time, distress and money
> > [...] One of these is WGET.
>
> WGET is irrelevant here.
I do not agree.
> The requested features are user interface
> enhancements.
Exactly! Thus there is no necessary to reinvent what exists already.
> WGET is a command-line tool.
What might be the definition of the term "command-line tool"?
Either you hint at a tool which is controlled by user's commands
entered into a shell; e.g. Opera is such a command line tool, as Opera
can be controlled by the command line of a shell, too. Or your term
"command line tool" might refer to any kind of shell script. However,
this definition would not match what wget is about. See yourself:
$ file /[Path]/wget
[Path]/wget: ELF 32-bit MSB executable SPARC Version 1, dynamically
linked, not stripped
$
The core of Opera, of wget eventually of any binary program is the
engine. The engine is useful for your project or not. If useful, you
will benefit when reusing a successful engine. In this case a GUI can
be easily added or enhanced. Likewise you can easily integrate the
control of an engine whithin any existing GUI ... e.g. Opera.
> Maybe using some GUI-based FTP client as a plugin could satisfy the
> requests ...
Yes that is what I do belive. This solution is convenient, it spares
time and money and it avoids any unnessary extension of the "lab to to
market" period.
> but not WGET
First of all: as there is already a GUI for wget, wget is clearly one
of the these "GUI-based FTP clients", mentioned by you.
Moreover there might be only one considerable argument against wget
and this is the protection of wget by the GPL ... and I wonder whether
wget is actually fully protected by the entire GPL or whether merely
by the "GPL light".
Robert Coleman
Gollum
> What might be the definition of the term "command-line tool"?
A command-line can only be controlled by passing parameters through the
command line. There's no GUI or menus for controlling it, but it may
sometimes prompt the user for a response (like Y/N or a filename).
> $ file /[Path]/wget
> [Path]/wget: ELF 32-bit MSB executable SPARC Version 1, dynamically
> linked, not stripped
What's that supposed to tell me?
Now, how is WGET going to help Opera:
1. Let the user *select* multiple links and only choose the target
directory once for each set of links?
2. Sort the file list in different ways by clicking on the header
(name/size/type/date)?
It probably could be used for downloading the contents of an entire
folder, but I fail to see how to make a selection of only some. When
downloading an entire folder, the user can just paste the URL from Opera
to WGET anyway; no need for integration.
> [...] Likewise you can easily integrate the control of an engine whithin
> any existing GUI ... e.g. Opera.
Opera already has the necessary engine for these requests. It's the GUI
that needs to be enhanced. And it probably would be more work integrating
WGET than adding those features anyway.
> First of all: as there is already a GUI for wget, wget is clearly one
> of the these "GUI-based FTP clients", mentioned by you.
If you're referring to http://www.jensroesner.de/wgetgui/, which is the
one mentioned on the WGET website, it's only available for Windows, and
the screenshots doesn't convince me that it can be used for the requested
features.
Toby A Inkster
> Moreover there might be only one considerable argument against wget
> and this is the protection of wget by the GPL ... and I wonder whether
> wget is actually fully protected by the entire GPL or whether merely
> by the "GPL light".
[tai@ophelia (pts/0) ~]$ tac /usr/share/doc/wget-1.8.2/COPYING | tail -1
GNU GENERAL PUBLIC LICENSE
[tai@ophelia (pts/0) ~]$
Either way, a GUI wrapper would be permitted by the GPL, as long as no
actual source code from wget was used in opera.
--
Toby A Inkster BSc (Hons) ARCS
E-mail: tob...@goddamn.co.uk
PGP: http://www.goddamn.co.uk/tobyink/?id=12
Web Page: http://www.goddamn.co.uk/tobyink/
IM: AIM:inka80 ICQ:6622880 YIM:tobyink Jabber:tob...@a-message.de
The FALAFEL SANDWICH lands on my HEAD and I become a VEGETARIAN ...