So your argument is that because you haven't used it lately, nobody does?
Seems legit.
Seems legit.
I mean, it's opposed by the argument that it used to be popular. It's a pretty low bar.
FTP is a protocol that dates to when NCP was the protocol suite that ran the Internet. It was retrofitted to TCP/IP. That's why there's a command session and a data session. The protocol is so old that it dates to a time when IP+port was the unique identifier for a half-duplex connection. Nobody even uses active FTP anymore because everyone has firewalls now.
It's not like web browsers have added SFTP support. They haven't even added FTPS support (either flavor) as far as I'm aware. I just don't see many use cases for FTP anymore. Why would you choose FTP at this point over HTTP(S), SFTP, BitTorrent, etc.?
The last system I used that required FTP actually used implicit FTPS. Worse, when the vendor implemented SFTP to replace FTPS like their customers had been demanding, they actually implemented Simple File Transfer Protocol (i.e., RFC 913) and not SSH File Transfer Protocol. I wish I were joking.
I'm seeing this a lot today. It's almost like people have forgotten what FTP stands for.
The use case is transferring files.
>Why would you choose FTP at this point over HTTP(S), SFTP, BitTorrent, etc.?
Because I don't have a client for any of the others installed
Yes, and it's not particularly unique or well suited to that task over any other protocol.
> Because I don't have a client for any of the others installed
Then I guess you can use telnet for FTP as well as web browsing.
When the files are on an FTP server it is. And given that there are more than a million anonymous FTP servers on the internet today, there are a lot of files that are on FTP servers.
I can’t think of a scenario where I would need FTP in 2021. Can you point me at one?
No, because it opened automatically and was nearly seamless. I didn't even notice that I'd been moved to Finder at first.
"my UX wasn't diminished"
"nearly seamless"
That's pretty funny.
>I didn't even notice that I'd been moved to Finder at first.
You... can't tell finder from a web browser??
There goes 100% of your credibility with regard to UX.
Of course I can tell the difference between a browser and the finder. My point was the transition was so seamless that I thought Safari was embedding the finder in the Safari window until I looked up at the app bar and realized it had actually switched apps.
But feel free to go on dismissing me, since it's clear from your comments that you think no one in the world is right but you.
You know, you're really not in a good position to criticize other people in this conversation with exaggerated complaints about their intellectual arrogance.
What's the "good" interpretation? That you suffer from an attention deficit disorder, so it's not your fault that you have no clue what you're looking at and the things you're saying are patently ridiculous?
> I thought Safari was embedding the finder in the Safari window
So, to summarise, your argument is that you have no idea about how your software works or what it does. It felt "seamless" to you because you had no idea what to expect and think your browser magically embeds other applications now.
Just in case I wasn't clear last time: If you think that switching to an entirely different different application is a reasonable thing to miss, you have zero credibility where UX is concerned.
>it's clear from your comments that you think no one in the world is right but you.
Lots of people who aren't me are right. It's just that statistically speaking those people tend to agree with me on most things.
Kragen, for example, has been saying things that are right all day (In particular I found this treatise on security stuff to be damn near sexy: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=27900935).
Even some people who disagree with me on a bunch of points have said things that are right. It's happened today. And you'll see me acknowledge them when they happen if you look.
The reason you haven't seen that is because you haven't said anything that was right.
But if you really believed this assertion you could easily prove it accurate: All you'd need to do is say "OK, yes, I had no clue what I was looking at. I don't know why I thought the finder was in a web browser. I guess I was just confused. That was dumb and inattentive of me". If your theory is accurate I won't be able to agree with that.
ftp://ftp.kontron.com/Products/Motherboards/Industrial/D3544-S_Mini-STX/Documentation/ ftp://ftp.panasonic.com/pub/panasonic/call_center/firmware/
One advantage of ftp is that it is much easier to have access control on different resources than dealing with .htaccess files so it was popular with customer service.
The consequence will be that many ftp servers still hosting software/firmware for legacy products will be taken down and their content lost.
> The consequence will be that many ftp servers still hosting software/firmware for legacy products will be taken down and their content lost.
Even if all the browsers dropped support for FTP, Finder and Explorer both have native FTP support, and there are plenty of clients otherwise. I doubt those resources will be taken offline.
Archive of apple 2 software and documentation. I use it a lot.
Oh Wow! cool! I'm so impressed!
So what you're saying is that because you "use the internet a lot" that you know everything about the requirements, hardware, software, and most importantly limitations of every single internet user on (and off!) the planet.
I guess I should at least give you some credit for not having any problems with self-doubt.