Talk:GetRight

This article was nominated for deletion. Please review the prior discussions if you are considering re-nomination:

Keep, 12 September 2018, see discussion.
Keep, 14 October 2017, see discussion.
keep, 20 January 2013 (UTC), see discussion.
no consensus, 14 January 2009 (UTC), see discussion.

*: Keep (fair maj), March 2005, an additional earlier AfD, see discussion

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the GetRight article.
This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic.
New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help.

Article policies

Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL

Computing: Software Low‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Computing, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of computers, computing, and information technology on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.ComputingWikipedia:WikiProject ComputingTemplate:WikiProject ComputingComputing articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
	This article is supported by WikiProject Software (assessed as Low-importance).

Advertisement[edit]

Is this an advertisement? I don't like the product. it cost me 3 days of my life before I dumped it for another brand. There is a problem if you lose the link to your original site and it goes looking for alternate mirrors and the one it finds is a log in site.. It erases all progress so far and replaces it with the log in url. 0k file. :(

Definitely! I was shocked when I first spotted it, I thought that I would puke, never in my life have I read such a shitty article on Wikipedia! O.K., I think I have removed the most obnoxious marketing shit and disgusting weasel words. Maybe I hurt the article a little, but at least it is somewhat readable now. However, I'd like to ditch it completely in favour of the exact translation of the Polish version. If you understand Polish, just check it out. In its enumeration, it is very concise and contains much more information than this obnoxious advertisement. Besides, I like the program, since it contains a lot of features, however, it also contains a lot of bugs. E.g., at least in former versions, when loaded esp. with menay small files, it would often crash, which meant stopped downloading. Sometimes the files were not properly renamed, or were saved in the wrong place. While many of the bugs may have been fixed, it still leaks GDI handles, which may be fatal for other programs as well, esp. on Windows 2000, which has a system-wide limit of 2^14. 78.99.211.122 (talk) 16:33, 22 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

An ad? It may be, the program is one of the more established managers and it's features, ease of use and stability are much better than even Firefox's best (and only) integrated download manager. As far as I know the program contains no spyware, it has never caused me any problems and I have always used it quite simply because it is the first manager I found on Google all those years ago and it has never failed me. I'm sure there are better programs, better looking ones, faster running, sleeker and full of useful features such as dancing pigs and the numa numa song when your download has finished, but this has served me well. I don't work for Getright either, I just forgot to sign in >.< 202.191.107.40 12:52, 10 September 2006 (UTC) (usually JayKeaton)[reply]

Just got the new version now, looks like they added a "would you like to instal desktop armor" or summat at the end, it is optional, but i would never use the armor thing JayKeaton 12:55, 10 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Advert?[edit]

Thought I'd give my penny's worth ;) I think the programme is very useful and widely used therefore warrants the article, but yes it is important that it doesn't read like an advert. I've therefore made a few changes which I hope will help us reach that goal. I've also added the citation needed to my comments about IE users, because whilst I know that to be true I need to find some evidence when I get a moment :) Paulfp 12:49, 7 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

(One of) the first Windows download managers?[edit]

I've been using Getright since around 1997 or '98 (when I was still in high school). I remember switching briefly to Go!Zilla, and then to DAP, and remember switching back when all those other download managers got a bad rep from all the GAIN related, Gator infested, adware whatever-stuffs, while Michael Buford declared that he has exorcized GetRight of all spyware / adware. And if I'm not mistaken, GetRight had by then replicated DAP's multi-mirror "download-accelerating" capability. I first downloaded GetRight for its download resuming capabilities.

I don't have any web-based hard evidence verifying any of the above claims, other that what is recorded in my brain from actual lived experience. Don't take my word for any of this.

From my first use in the late 90's I have yet to buy a GetRight license. But I sure hope that this little blurb makes up a little bit of the very much that I owe him in prevented lost downloads. So like, thanks Michael!

--Lemi4 16:42, 14 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

"And if I'm not mistaken, GetRight had by then replicated DAP's multi-mirror "download-accelerating" capability."

I do not know if GetRight really replicated this feature. What I do know is that I once described this (IMHO rather obvious) idea to Michael Burford (I called it interleaved downloading). Some time later it appeared in GetRight. However, this has been apparently so long ago that I do not find my email with my suggestion any more. I do however have an answer of Mike Burford (of September 1999) in which he confirms the inclusion in release 4.1.

In other words, it remains unclear who "invented" this download acceleration method the first time. --80.134.13.44 13:57, 19 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]