Geek Answers Handbook

Should I use HTTP or FTP to upload images from the North Pole?

Here is an interesting request. A client will need a blog from the North Pole. Their connection speed on a satellite phone is very poor, so everything should be as dry as possible.

In the past, they sent text via an HTML form via HTTP, and FTP sent images.

Anecdotally, because of the comfort of my desk with a high-speed broadband connection, it seems like HTTP downloads files a lot faster than FTP. But I’m just an encoder, I don’t know anything about the underlying technology, which receives data from one part of the network to another, so I thought it was best to double-check people who, as a rule, know much more about these things.

I guess the problems are: bandwidth and reliability.

So, given these very strict conditions

  • Lower dial-up bandwidth
  • Any number of small images (300x300px 72ppi)
  • Text data (max. 1500 characters)

Should they use FTP or HTTP to download images from the North Pole?

+5
source share
3 answers

Definitely HTTP if the client and server support partial downloads. The reason is that FTP is a command reaction protocol, and with a lousy connection it's pretty easy to lose it even before it uploads the file. Further, FTP requires two sockets, which are an additional network load (and possibly a weak point in case of an unstable connection).

, (.. , ). , (.. ), , , FTP.

+3

FTP HTTP : http://daniel.haxx.se/docs/ftp-vs-http.html

HTTP, , North Pole Blogger.

0

- FTP , ... HTTP, FTP, , , , , ...

-1
source

More articles:


All Articles