Which File Host Is Best?

JB Wannabe wrote:
I base this on a recent dl in which speeds varied from 7(!)kb/s up to a max of 20. I have yet to see any speed beyond 50 at upstore.

While the speed premium users get is of no particular use for free ones.

ckdk3 wrote:
Ah, there are useful replies too!

Thanks ckdk! I will give this a try.

fipps1 wrote:

If you were getting up to 20 kb/s, then why would you think/claim that they cut speed back to only half of that? You actually proved your own theory to be false.

I'm just yanking your chain a bit. But do post if the proxy idea works or not.

JB Wannabe wrote:
Would you agree if i'd say that 7kb/s is lower than 10kb/s?

So how exactly would you call cutting down speed temporarily to 7kb/s?

fipps1 wrote:

Of course I agree, but you're missing the point. You claimed they throttled back the downloads of free users to 10kb/s while at the same time claiming that you were able to get twice that speed. So which is it?

And again, you have zero evidence that the problem you had with 1 download was the direct result of them doing anything intentional. So why make a claim - lie - that you know you can't back up? In all likelihood, either your isp sucks or you just had a bad connection to one of their servers. I've been the 'victim' of both. One of my favorite TV streaming site uses putlocker aka firedrive, and on occasion the stream is so wretchedly slow that I can't even watch it. And I've had that happen with RS when I had a premium account with them. And the same is true of every service I have ever used. The difference is, as a premium user, you just kill the slow download and restart it

Hell, I've even had that very problem with porn sites that I have passwords to. And the same goes for youtube videos. Once in awhile, the download is super slow at youtube and I either restart it or wait awhile to try again.

You also have to factor in where you live and the time of day you are downloading. Both of those can have a profound effect on your internet speed.

ckdk3 wrote:
Yes, i have to correct myself!

This really seems to be the case. I tried dling via several tor connections and most of them came up with speeds around 80 kb/s. So most likely this seems to be the speed upstore is limiting the free dls and my lower speeds in fact had other reasons.

Thanks again for the hint ckdk3!

fipps1 wrote:
Thanks for feedback!

As I told you, the problem of slow speed is not in your side and also it's not of the other side of connection. It's in the route used by ISP to connect you and another country.

Many times, the most of Internet Service Provider use services of a third party to connect to a server which is in other part of world.
These third party services many times are leased for several ISP around the world.
If several ISP of several countries use a same route of connection at same time, the speed of transfer will be always lower.

Then when you use a proxy, you are able to change the main route used by your ISP, and this makes you get better download speed!

The only way proxies can increase your downloading speed is if your DNS servers suck, and the proxies are better. Other than that, nothing can increase the speed assigned by your internet service provider.

In most cases a direct connection to the other end instead of using a proxy that simply redirects the request is more advisable.
Most professional File Hosting Services will automaticly serve your download request to a server at the nearest location to you. Otherwise routing for sure is a speed killer and peek times (where there are multiple connections at the same time) might affect speed too.

After a few more (Tor) Downloads, i'm afraid, i have to correct this again. And beeing the suspect returns to Upstore.

First i can positively exclude my connection from beeing the culprit. I have a reliable 30 Mbit cable connection which is at no time downthrottled in any way.

But Upstore seems to offer just two different speeds to free users. The one around 80 kb/s and the other at about 15 kb/s. More often one gets the faster one and there is no visible reason for getting one ore the other. The come randomly even with the same connection. Maybe it's a free-traffic-on-their-side thing. But if the reason would be somewhere on the way, there would be more different speeds but just those two.

fipps1 wrote:

Its a business strategy. Simple as that. They want you to get frustrated with low download speeds at a free plan and tease you to sign up for a premium offer.

I don´t get it why people still complaining about that.

rakim2 wrote:
This might be what they want. What they get are nice workarounds for their limitations like multiple parrallel downloads via tor. At least in my case the least thing they earn from intended frustration will be a paying customer. Superb strategy!

What i don't get is why decent free usable filehosts like the kimble sites or hotfile where closed down by law enforcement while others like k2s, upstore or most of the other "new" ones, doing the exact same thing just being more greedy makin money out of other peoples work, are left untouched.

fipps1 wrote:

Because they might not be "big" enough yet and hollywood doesn´t have them on their radar yet! Also those "newer" hosts you mentioned tend to host 90% adult oriented content while hotfile and megaupload used to targed a far different audience (commercial software, movies, music).

However this is offtopic. What i don´t get is, why people who want everything for "free" complain about what they get in return... What ever in this world gets advertised for "free" always is a double-edged sword and people should not expect 2 cents out of it.

Traffic and Bandwith isn´t for free and a file hosting company is paying real money for it you know? Why they should give out any speed gurantee to free users. Sure there are lots of workarounds, if you have time for this shit feel free to use them otherwise sign up for a premium account or go with torrents or what ever.

rakim2 wrote:
Well, so at least they should have left Megaporn to us freebie-cheapos!

What i still don't get is, in wich way there could be any difference between little me, wanting everything for free, and those "new filehosts". Sure they pay for storage and bandwidth (which they resell for fortunes). But their whole business concept just wouldn't exist without content other people produce and they make their profit out of for free...

...and - to get back to topic - why the last few hosts, who follow the concept of free sharing, which in my thinking was the central purpose of this here forum too, are erased from the list of allowed ones replaced by just another one of these busy little money makers.

fipps1 wrote:

Are you talking about Rapidshare? If you think they are good for free users, check out their site and see how much it costs to buy a premium account. I had close to a TB of stuff in my account before they tried to force me to spend around $200 a month to maintain it! LOL!

I suggest you start up your own thread and keep track of how much time you spend updating and maintaining the thread. It will quickly start to make sense why so many people use paying hosts. And hey, you should make enough to pay for a free premium account!

RG more and more sucks in performance and file statistics keep beeing counted not accurate. Good for them, that is no really good alternative...