PC Review Forums Newsgroups Hardware Freeware Fresh Download Vs Stardownloader

Reply

Fresh Download Vs Stardownloader

 
Thread Tools Rate Thread
Old 22-06-2003, 01:29 PM   #1
Mike
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Default Fresh Download Vs Stardownloader


I have been using Real Download with my old win 98 system but apparently its
not compatible with XP.

I want to use a simple download manager only so that downloads can be paused
if necessary.

I want a download manager that will work in the background and then
disappear.

When clicking on a download link in Internet Explorer the main program
window of Fresh Download opens as well as the download progress window. I
have tried various options within the program but cannot see a way to
stopping the main screen from opening when clicking on a download link.

Any advice welcomed.

Mike.


  Reply With Quote
Old 22-06-2003, 07:13 PM   #2
DC
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Default Re: Fresh Download Vs Stardownloader

On Sun, 22 Jun 2003 14:29:09 +0100, Mike <notme@here.com> wrote:
> I have been using Real Download with my old win 98 system but apparently its
> not compatible with XP.
>
> I want to use a simple download manager only so that downloads can be paused
> if necessary.
>
> I want a download manager that will work in the background and then
> disappear.
>
> When clicking on a download link in Internet Explorer the main program
> window of Fresh Download opens as well as the download progress window. I
> have tried various options within the program but cannot see a way to
> stopping the main screen from opening when clicking on a download link.


Consider LeechGet. http://www.leechget.de/

Works in XP and you can config window behaviour. Only drawback for me
(a feature I liked in the all too buggy Stardownloader) is that the
program cannot be set to close after the download(s) complete. It
remains in memory and leaves a systray icon.

Otherwise, it might be an option for you.

HTH

--
DC

Don't get Longhorned -- get Linux.
  Reply With Quote
Old 23-06-2003, 04:36 AM   #3
29150
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Default Re: Fresh Download Vs Stardownloader

Mike wrote:
> I have been using Real Download with my old win 98 system but
> apparently its not compatible with XP.
>
> I want to use a simple download manager only so that downloads can be
> paused if necessary.
>
> I want a download manager that will work in the background and then
> disappear.
>
> When clicking on a download link in Internet Explorer the main program
> window of Fresh Download opens as well as the download progress
> window. I have tried various options within the program but cannot
> see a way to stopping the main screen from opening when clicking on a
> download link.
>
> Any advice welcomed.
>
> Mike.


Not sure what you're looking for but I just d/l Download Express the other
day at http://www.metaproducts.com/mp/mpPr...etail.asp?id=18

Haven't installed it yet as I use Opera or Phoenix and they have their own
d/l managers. It's payware for commercial, freeware for private users.
Enjoy


  Reply With Quote
Old 23-06-2003, 10:41 AM   #4
badgolferman
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Default Re: Fresh Download Vs Stardownloader

> Consider LeechGet. http://www.leechget.de/
>
> Works in XP and you can config window behaviour. Only drawback for me
> (a feature I liked in the all too buggy Stardownloader) is that the
> program cannot be set to close after the download(s) complete. It
> remains in memory and leaves a systray icon.
>
> Otherwise, it might be an option for you.
>
> HTH


This program is nice, but the memory usage is incredibly high. My Task
Manager shows 11,804 K for LeechGet application.



  Reply With Quote
Old 24-06-2003, 02:18 AM   #5
DC
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Default Re: Fresh Download Vs Stardownloader

On 23 Jun 2003 15:56:49 GMT, bob <me@privacy.net> wrote:
> "badgolferman" wrote:
>
>>> Consider LeechGet. http://www.leechget.de/
>>>
>>> Works in XP and you can config window behaviour. Only drawback for me
>>> (a feature I liked in the all too buggy Stardownloader) is that the
>>> program cannot be set to close after the download(s) complete. It
>>> remains in memory and leaves a systray icon.

>>
>> This program is nice, but the memory usage is incredibly high. My Task
>> Manager shows 11,804 K for LeechGet application.

>
> I can't say about RAM, but it sucks resources BIG TIME. (I use a resource
> meter whenever I search.) I couldn't get LeechGet off my system fast
> enough!


Standard disclaimer applies: YMMV. }:O)

--
DC

Don't get Longhorned -- get Linux.
  Reply With Quote
Reply



Thread Tools
Rate This Thread
Rate This Thread:

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off