FlashFXP or WS-FTP Pro??????

bmcfarl · 11-22-2004, 11:55 PM

Hi Guys,

I am having a hard time deciding on FlashFXP or WS-FTP Pro v9. I hear about the industry-standard stuff on WS-FTP and I like the PGP option that you have in WS-FTP.

But, I love the numerous options that you have in FlashFXP, the free upgrades, nicer interface (i.e, folder listing looks more natural than WS-FTP), etc.

I guess the biggest difference between the two in features is the PGP option in WS-FTP and, of course, the price.

Can anyone give me some opinions on this comparison...including thoughts on the PGP stuff?

Thanks!

neoxed · 11-23-2004, 03:27 AM

No one can make you decide, ultimately it is a decision that you and you along should make. Any users opinion on this forum is quite biased. They would more then likely recommend FlashFXP; after all that is why they frequent this forum.

I would suggest installing and testing the trial version of both products. Weigh the pros and cons of each client, and base your decision on that.

Good luck.

bmcfarl · 11-23-2004, 10:17 AM

Yea,

That's why I posted a message on this site. I've been trying both, and I love FlashFXP. But, I like the business features of WS-FTP. I'm a software programmer that deals with customers in various fields (student loans, medical, etc.) where secure communications is important.

So, for me it's the neat, integrated interface of FlashFXP or the industry-standard WS-FTP with new business features (especially security).

I wish I knew what enhancements are coming down the pike for FlashFXP. If it's going to gain the business features that WS-FTP has, then I would go with it.

MxxCon · 11-23-2004, 11:02 AM

what exactly is wsftp's PGP feature?
taken from their site

Quote:

OpenPGP (Pretty Good Privacy)
OpenPGP is a feature that gives you the ability to create an additional level of privacy. It does this by encrypting each individual file with key technology so that only the intended person, who had previously provided their public key, can read it. When encrypted, the message looks like a meaningless jumble of random characters.

it just generally says what PGP is...says nothing about what it got to do with FTP or how it is used in the client.

what do you mean by "business features" and "industry-standard"?

FlashFXP also support SSL encrypted transfers. and your sites info can be security encrypted with your password. tho (currently?) FlashFXP doesn't support SFTP becuase it is totally different protocol, not based on FTP.

ffxp license is much cheaper...
you could buy ffxp instead of ws-ftp and then donate the difference in price to WinSCP project

bmcfarl · 11-23-2004, 12:59 PM

Howdy :-)

Well, from Google newsgroup searches, a lot of people mentioned that WS-FTP has been around for ages and is considered an industry-standard in FTP processing.

As far as business features, those were mainly the security features that you mentioned...PGP, etc.

I do like the free, unlimited upgrades to FlashFXP. And, it looks like it is updated on a good, regular basis. I am definitely not crazy about paying $29.95 every so often for a new version of WS-FTP.

Later!

:-)

MxxCon · 11-23-2004, 04:38 PM

flashfxp have been around for a long time too...i have been using it since like v1.0.0.56 back in 1997

i think bigstar started coding it in 1996?

bmcfarl · 11-25-2004, 09:58 PM

Hi Guys!

I finally decided on FlashFXP instead of WS-FTP, CuteFTP, etc.

I got on WS-FTP's web site forums and saw how many people were complaining about their tech support. It's horrible!!!

That was enough to convince me that WS-FTP is not the right path to go. At the FlashFXP web site, people answer the forum messages on a regular basis as some of you have on this thread.

And, I checked out CuteFTP. It has similar compliants with tech support as with WS-FTP.

So, I just purchased FlashFXP. I love it's speed and reliability. And, the free upgrades.

I'm converted!!!

:-)

WinEggDrop · 11-28-2004, 02:36 PM

I know cuteftp is suck.I have found some problems on cuteftp such as cuteftp crashing or freezing as exiting or doing some weird operations.I reported that with the screen-shot to cuteftp company long ago,but have not replied and these problems remains.cuteftp's file transfer speed is unreliable and slow,especially in FXPing.

MxxCon · 11-28-2004, 07:04 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by WinEggDrop
cuteftp's file transfer speed is unreliable and slow,especially in FXPing.

well that's not true. FXP trasnfer speed has absolutly nothing to do with a client you are using. client tells server a to connect to server b, and that's it. it does not affect any transfer buffer size or anything else like that.

WinEggDrop · 11-28-2004, 10:58 PM

you may mis-understand what I mean "slow".I mean cuteftp is unreliable on FXPing,and there are many disconnection as doing site to site transfer,which make cuteftp take more time than other ftp clients to complete the site to site transfer.

chotaire · 12-02-2004, 10:06 AM

I've been a longtime (registered) user of WS_FTP Pro for a couple of years. Once I really tested FlashFXP, things were clear to me.

FlashFXP had tons of more options completely unknown to WS_FTP. Things like FXP (very useful for both professional and kiddie use), SSL Encryption, Queueing and much more has been a part within FlashFXP much longer than in WS_FTP (if they implemented it at all).

One day, I wrote a HOWTO on secure FTP transfers and I tested all currently available FTP clients that claim SSL functionality. WS_FTP Pro (7.0) completely lost during my tests because at that time, they only offered 40bit data and control connections, and no FXP (SSL or not) at all. Since that day, I have never been using WS_FTP again, and I never regretted it.

I'm not affiliated to IniCom in any way, so I dare saying: FlashFXP has always been and probably will always be more advanced, with a better interface and a better support.

Here's a sniplet of my past-time HOWTO (it's already some years old so the data is no longer correct, e.g. FlashFXP can do more than 168bit SSL today):

-----
FlashFXP 1.4.4 build 849 (best client, will do 168bit data, control and allow FXP = PERFECT)
CuteFTP Pro 2.0 (client is quite ok, will do 168bit data and control = EXCELLENT)
WS_FTP Pro 7.5* (client is good, will do 168bit data and control = EXCELLENT)
WS_FTP Pro 7.0* (client is very good, will do 40bit data and control = OK)
IglooFTP Pro Win/Linux (client seems ok, will do 40 bit data and control = OK)
pftp Linux (client is buggy hacking, but will do 168bit data and control = EXCELLENT)
There are more clients such as lftp (Linux), ftp-tls (Unix) and SecureFTP, but they're untested.
-----

Again, the data is not uptodate and this is only a short sniplet from my HOWTO. Should I ever rewrite the HOWTO, I will make it available to all users. It includes complete instructions for both servers and clients how to set up a secure FTP server. For FlashFXP, there are screenshots etc.

One thing I want you to know though... Using PGP for file transfers is kinda hoax. Files get encrypted before being uploaded and the only way people can download this is to use the same FTP client or do it manually. This is nothing else than a normal file encryption and actually hasn't much to do with an FTP client, it seems a lame trick to get customers believe they are buying an FTP client with ultimate security. However, remember one thing... all that gets encrypted is the files BEFORE you put them onto the server, so the connection itself stays completely unencrypted (e.g. username and password can still be sniffed). Forget about crap like that, you don't even need WS_FTP to do things like this, all you need is a free PGP program. Also, if you are e.g. uploading files to a webserver, the files can NOT be used if encrypted by PGP. You would have to log onto the server by SSH and decrypt the files manually using a command line pgp client. Is this lame?

Use a secure SSL FTP client (or SCP if you are ok with limited functionality) and for the server, use an encrypted filesystem. This way, things are COMPATIBLE and everybody can use your server, no matter what FTP client they have, as long as they support SSL. Or simply said, use FlashFXP and be happy.

See you.

bmcfarl · 12-02-2004, 10:02 PM

Hi Chotaire :-)

Thanks for the info. I never thought about the PGP in that way, but you're absolutely right.

I have been using FlashFXP for several weeks now, and I am very happy with it. I used CoffeeCup's Direct FTP with some frustration. It would not reconnect properly with using Task Manager to kill it, then open the application again...very annoying.

With FlashFXP, I have been really happy with how bullet-proof and reliable it has been.

Kudos to FlashFXP!

chotaire · 12-03-2004, 03:05 AM

Yup, it's very bullet-proof. FlashFXP is one of the best designed and most stable programs that I am using. And I need FTP for professional use on a daily basis.

Recently there are some other clients like e.g. UltraFXP and Staff-FTP that come close, but yet they've never been better. If you look at tiny details and especially the stability and usability of the GUI, FlashFXP still wins big time. Once I thought UltraFXP was winning the race because it was free and with some stunning new features - until FlashFXP 3.0 was released. FlashFXP 3.02 makes my day, and I recommend it to all customers (and then, UltraFXP stopped giving away the application for free).

What a pity that FlashFXP is said to be a warez-oriented program, this is not true. I know many professionals using it too. Whoever is into the internet business should really give FlashFXP a try, in combination with a good ftpd it's simply a very secure and feature-rich file transfer client that still lacks real competition

Hm, I sound like a FlashFXP developer. Well, I'm just a beta-tester and that's because I simply enjoy working with this program.