«

I used to upload files with ftp. But recently the ftp on my notebook
computer does not work well. So I have to upload files at the
control panel of my web site. My files are rather small, and there are
not many.

My question is: Of these two methods for uploading files, is one better
than the other? Or they are equally good?

Thanks.

"Dung Ping" <> wrote in message
news: oups.com...
>I used to upload files with ftp. But recently the ftp on my notebook
> computer does not work well. So I have to upload files at the
> control panel of my web site. My files are rather small, and there are
> not many.
>
> My question is: Of these two methods for uploading files, is one better
> than the other? Or they are equally good?
>
> Thanks.
>

Assuming that this means you need to upload each file individually then it
sounds a bit laborious to me. A decent FTP client would help - but if your
FTP tool is one where you have to copy each file individually then there
won't be much to choose between them. I wouldn't lie awake at night
wondering whether uploading via your control panel will have broken anything
(if that was the reason behind asking).

Once you have more than a small handful of files I'd advocate an intelligent
ftp uploader - such as Web Site Publisher
(www.cryer.co.uk/downloads/websitepublisher/), which is free but there are
others to choose from.

Hope this is useful.

Brian.

Dung Ping wrote:
> I used to upload files with ftp. But recently the ftp on my notebook
> computer does not work well. So I have to upload files at the
> control panel of my web site. My files are rather small, and there are
> not many.
>
> My question is: Of these two methods for uploading files, is one better
> than the other? Or they are equally good?

FTP, no contest. From a single file to multiple directories all in one
go. All files, changed files, new files, easy. Even scheduled,
scripted uploads/downloads so that I can transfer large amounts of data
to/from a site.

Control panel stuff is all very well for very small sites, but apart
from that they're rubbish. Don't even entertain using it long-term,
and get your FTP client sorted out.

--
Hywel

You can also use Internet Explorer as an FTP client

-Corey

Hi ,

> You can also use Internet Explorer as an FTP client

How?

Gufus

private.php?do=newpm&u=
http://www.gypsy-designs.com

.... History is a set of lies agreed upon by the victors

In article <>,
says...
> Hi ,
>
> > You can also use Internet Explorer as an FTP client
>
> How?
>

Google:


http://www.google.com/search?num=20&...ow=1&rls=GGLD%
2CGGLD%3A2003-44%2CGGLD%3Aen&q=using+ie+for+ftp

saz wrote:
> In article <>,
> says...
> > Hi ,
> >
> > > You can also use Internet Explorer as an FTP client
> >
> > How?
> >
>
> Google:
>
>
> http://www.google.com/search?num=20&...ow=1&rls=GGLD%
> 2CGGLD%3A2003-44%2CGGLD%3Aen&q=using+ie+for+ftp

Thanks for all the information. It helps a lot.

Gufus wrote:

> Hi ,
>
> > You can also use Internet Explorer as an FTP client
>
> How?

Why?


--
Blinky Reg Linux User 297263
Killfiling all posts from Google Groups
Details: http://blinkynet.net/comp/uip5.html

Hi Blinky,

> From: lid
> Why?

Do you mean, ftp://ftp.someftpserver.com as a FTP client?

Gufus

private.php?do=newpm&u=
http://www.gypsy-designs.com

.... If you're in heat, Package Your Meat lid

On Wed, 11 Jan 2006 19:39:14 +0000, Gufus wrote:

> Hi Blinky,

Hello.

> > From: lid
> > Why?
>
> Do you mean, ftp://ftp.someftpserver.com as a FTP client?

Beats me. You didn't quote enough to show context.


--
Blinky
Killing all posts from Google Groups
Details: http://blinkynet.net/comp/uip5.html