and the site doesn't allow me to do it. i've tried from different computers w/ firebird, moz, op, even ie and it doesn't work

all cookies accepted etc.. i just can't get it

please

and i'm trying to get it from foorbar2000.org btw

deaktivate your Getright or what ever...

i don't have getright or anything like that installed

i'm not behind a proxy either

With IE at least you have to LEFT click the link. (NOT right click -> save as)

none of both work (save as and left click). both brings the msg telling me i'm hotlinking of have a prob w/ info my browser is supposed to send

can one of you dl it? i've asked some friends to dl too and none of them can't

Do you use a firewall? Try disabling it.

wooooooooooooooooooopie (w00t)

now i can dl it! many thanx, i never thought i would have to disable it (and note that when i'm asked to in order to perform a task i usually turn my back away)! had already given up but i went back to thank posters and now i'm happier


thanks to all of you for taking the time to read and to answer

I still can't download foobar2000 any more. I am inside a corporate firewall (not sure if that's what's causing the problem) and I definitely can't get past that. Can someone with a more sensible usage policy please mirror fb2k so I can actually download the new version? This is the most stupid thing I've seen for a software download.

+ Domain Name
- Anyone being able to actually download the software.

Good one.

try Case's big installer: http://www.saunalahti.fi/~cse/foobar2000/f...r2000_0.667.exe (1.7 mb)

Well I'm glad to know that someone who doesn't have to concern themselves with paying the rather large bandwidth bills thinks this is "the most stupid thing ever", heh. Of course, I wouldn't expect most people to see beyond their own selfish existence and try to understand the necessity of things like this, after all, it's your God given right to not be inconvenienced on the internet even when someone is offering a service for free (whether it be HA's network service or Peter's fb2k software product).

And FYI, out of the number of people who attempt to download the software, only a handful of complained of having problems, and these problems are due to configuration issues and nonstandard behavior on the part of their software/network.

The download system will be changed at some point to be more "accommodating", but when this will happen depends on my desire/motivation/interest, etc.

I fully understand large bandwidth bills and I feel sorry for anyone who has to pay them. I myself have an open source product that receives tens of thousands of downloads a year at about 1.5 megs and that hurts me in the pocket. I sympathise. However, when distributing free or open source software something that doesn't make sense to me is to stop people from downloading it - whether intentionally or not.



Many firewalls remove referer information due to the potential security risks that it can contain. It is (IMHO) unreasonable to expect people to remove firewalls in order to download files. I also wonder how many people will try to download fb2k and give up on it at the first hurdle - not everyone has time to join forums for each product they want to try in order to comment on the failure of a download.

I do appreciate the pain of bandwidth costs and I appreciate what you're trying to do - my complaint was simply due to the fact that I love foobar and wanted to get the new version. I had posted a comment before about not being able to download it on the main forum and didn't hear anything. I was a bit annoyed and vented my wrath. I apologise if I offended you - there was no personal attack intended, unlike in your reply.

For those of you running emule and having problems getting to official download sites -
ed2k://|file|foobar2000-0.667-installer.exe|1105575|343F670B65C7B33EC687881340247040|/
Good luck.

To clarify a bit on future possibilities, what I have planned is to implement a server wide policy of implementing bittorrent downloads for all files (via an automated server side system). Normal binaries will still rely on checking the HTTP_REFERER, but .torrents will not, since the point is to get as many people as possible to link directly to the download. Of course, concerning fb2k, this depends on whether or not Peter would be willing to distribute the files this way or not.

I can't say for sure when this will happen though, possibly in a week, possibly longer. However, this may not help those with overly restrictive firewall policies, but there's only so much that one can be expected to do to accommodate a small minority of users when there are larger issues to consider.

BitTorrent is an excellent file transfer method but inneficcient for small files, because there is not going to be enough downloads occuring at the same time for a long enough period to make it worth it. BitTorrent works best with CD sized files (or group of files). Too bad the project is not open source, it could go to sourceforge or something. Maybe Tucows?...

We'll see, but I doubt there will be a problem with seed starvation. The fb2k site pushes over 60GB a month of traffic and the HA server will always be a perminent seed (in this way it won't be so different than simply downloading the file, but there is still a possibility of gain from other downloaders). I think bittorrent will work out nicely for this. So far it's seemed to work out very well for Roberto's listening test too, and these are hardly CD sized files being used.

I think bittorrent is a very good idea actually. I had a bit of a problem with the bittorrent++ client though, I set the incoming directory to where the samples were (with regard to Roberto's AAC test) and even put the torrents in there too. But no-one seemed to download anything from me. I also tried the easy client that, i think, Hans Jurgen linked to and left the windows open but no-one downloaded from me. We are behind a linux firewall, could this be the problem? [unlike sss I can download foobar2000] But if I could "donate" a little bandwidth to the swarm without having a huge effect on my internet usage then I would like to. I think that probably a number of other HA users wouldn't mind setting up permanent or semi-permanent servers either.

Rarewares could get in on it too... that would be cool.

Just a few thoughts...

It could be your firewall (you may need to open the ports mentioned in the bit I quoted), or it could simply be that people were downloading from enough other sources already that nobody needed to connect to you.



That's kind of what I'm hoping at least.



Rarewares will actually get it first. I'm creating a CMS for Roberto to use with his site to allow him to more easily update and manage content, and automatic bittorrent functionality is built in. It's almost completed by I'll be so busy for the next few days that it won't launch until sometime after then.

Take your time, it'll be awesome when it's done...

What open source product might this be, out of curiosity? Why not host on SourceForge?

Thats an amazingly good idea. I already have a few BT machines I use for getting TV shows. Once you do this I can seed indefinately as well.

What I still don't understand, though, is how the hotlinking policy will lower the bandwidth bills, I mean, if someone downloads Foobar2000 regardless of the referer (A software index, Foobar's page, etc.) isn't HA still billed for the bandwith?

I suspect the idea is that people then at least pass by HA, so more people discover the forums.

Well, it's a good idea but isn't that sort of counter productive, getting more people to download the pages and the player, would increase the bandwith, therefore raising the costs?

It encourages mirroring the FB2K stuff instead of linking to this site.

Ohhh, I see...

the bit torrent idea seems interesting.

Canar: My open source project is Programmers Notepad:

www.pnotepad.org

and it already has a sourceforge page too where the development of the new version is going on:

sf.net/projects/pnotepad

I have always previously hosted separately from sourceforge because I think it's important to have a unique site for a product (whether it's free or not). Sourceforge is useful but I wouldn't use its hosting as my primary site due to reliability. I am using its download facilities now, though, to try and stave off the bandwidth requirements a bit. I haven't yet changed the main download for the stable version of the product, though, because I don't like the mirror page that they've added. It takes users out of the originating site which is bad (IMHO).

Others: How would this bittorrent thing work? I've never heard of it before.

wheres the foobar scheme

anyways, bit torrent is a sort of distributed downloading method where parts of a download are streamed from different "seeds" at a time, rather than all from the same location.

its pretty brilliant as a way to save bandwidth

only problem is that the person downloading needs to install the bitTorrent client.

not too difficult, but not hella easy either.

i suppose it could be encouraged a lot if new releases of foobar were released on bitTorrent first, then on the regular download site.

EDIT: i downloaded your program to give it a try