Jesse

Member
 View profile  See their activity

  • Content count

    13

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Posts posted by Jesse

  2. Posted

    Hi everybody!

    I think it would be great if Apex contained an option typed in topic. It would be very useful when going to make a magnet link to some program distributive, for instance, where every file strongly tied with each other. It will prevent from sharing corrupted distributives in this case, and also from having to download the whole program by clicking on each separate file link (imagine if distributive contains hundreds of files). I think there's no reason not trying to make this, you would help very much.

    Thanks ;)

  6. Posted

    OK. Now rightclick on any file downloading from several users and choose "Collapse All". And you'll get the "plus" near ktm950. At least that occurs in my client. Maybe it depends on system, because as I can see you use Vista, but I do XP SP2. They are known to be too different ones. Anyway I'd like you to test it on XP.

    Isn't there anybody observing such a bug? I'm surprised. It's not an ocassional bug. I see it permanently.

  7. Posted

    Not to be proofless I want you to take a look at the attachment. Single nicknames and hub names were just hidden.

    As you can see if you clicked on the "plus" signs in the red circle, nothing would happen. Naturally :) Such a situation occurs if you click "Collapse All" context menu item. You'll get this bug if there is at least one single username/hub from which you take your file downloading. I mean each file from the first two in the picture has its own single source and isn't downloaded from any other hub or user.

    post-10128-1207749652_thumb.png

  8. Posted

    When I chose Collapse All context menu option on any file downloading from several hubs simultaneously I saw "plus" signs opposite each file downloading, though there were single-hub-files among them, which shouldn't be expanded further. Undoubtedly, they cannot be expanded as they have the only one source from which they can be downloaded.

  10. Posted

    Sometimes I'm ready to believe in everything when it sounds evidently in any direction. But now I have to ask:

    Big Muscle, what did you mean behind the words "summary size" in your last reply? I've attached two shots which show my accident. Did you refer to summary size in rectangle 3 in either image as to the size of bytes transferred in actual session? If it's so I have got to say that I knew it and to state the question again but more directly: why do the sizes of rectangles 1 and 2 (red ones I've drawn for you) differ from each other? Now I can say more. I'm sure the file "The Unforgiven II" was downloaded in only one actual session (look at the image), 'cause it was done in the only once launched application from the very beginning till the end of downloading. It must have been downloaded entirely in 33.79 MB in my session, but I see "1 Items - 30.81 MB". What is this? But if you mean rectangle 2 contents is the trasferred bytes then I must apologise to everybody and confess the real complexity of that system :).

    I think now I've expressed the problem the best. I'm waiting for your response. :)

    post-10128-1205608017_thumb.png

    post-10128-1205608022_thumb.png