Best FTP clients
in [Mac Systems]
|
From: Wes Groleau on 21 Mar 2010 12:28 nospam wrote: > the first version of bbedit did not have ftp. if i recall correctly, it > was added in version 5, about 10 years ago. Maybe added because Network Browser didn't work? Or because about ten years ago was when OS X appeared--with Network Browser gone and one-way FTP taking its place? -- Wes Groleau Curmudgeon's Complaints on Courtesy: http://www.onlinenetiquette.com/courtesy1.html
From: Wes Groleau on 21 Mar 2010 12:30 dorayme wrote: > nospam <nospam(a)nospam.invalid> wrote: >> that's great but you don't speak for everyone. others do need to upload. > > Conveniently ignoring that this only makes it useless for some > people and not for everyone. And one might note that it's only useless for people who never download. -- Wes Groleau Guidelines for judging others: 1. Don't attribute to malice that which can be adequately explained by stupidity. 2. Don't attribute to stupidity that which can be adequately explained by ignorance. 3. Don't attribute to ignorance that which can be adequately explained by misunderstanding.
From: Wes Groleau on 21 Mar 2010 12:42 Ian Gregory wrote: > Enabling the Finder to access files on an FTP server as if they were > local files is a kludge, only made tolerable by implementing it > read-only. Exactly what would become intolerable if uploads were not blocked? Ten years ago the evil empire made two-way FTP transparent. You type the URI into the address bar of IE _or_ a directory window, and start dragging things in and out, including directories. The only indication that it's not a local disk is the protocol in the location field. Sure it's insecure. So what? I'm capable of shifting to other methods when I _need_ them. For that matter, Apple could easily make those other methods act like Finder windows if they chose to. -- Wes Groleau Don't get even -- get odd!
From: erilar on 21 Mar 2010 12:45 In article <1jfq0aa.1ov1pf11aizax7N%jamiekg(a)wizardling.geek.nz>, jamiekg(a)wizardling.geek.nz (Jamie Kahn Genet) wrote: > Still, since I bought Fetch years ago and it does everything I want to > do, I've not felt the need to change. But if faced with having to buy an > FTP client today, either Fetch, NetFinder, or Interarchy would be my > first choices, admitedly mostly due to my comfortable familiarity with > all three since classic days. I was beginning to wonder whether ANYone but me uses Fetch 8-) My only use for FTP is for changing things on my web page, so I've been reading this thread with a "Huh?" feeling 8-) -- Erilar, biblioholic medievalist http://www.mosaictelecom.com/~erilarlo
From: Steven Fisher on 21 Mar 2010 14:16
In article <ho5hfi$k2n$1(a)news.eternal-september.org>, Wes Groleau <Groleau+news(a)FreeShell.org> wrote: > Or because about ten years ago was when OS X > appeared--with Network Browser gone and one-way FTP > taking its place? Mac OS X didn't support FTP until 10.2. Steve |