Comments on: MediaFire: Way Better Than RapidShare For Sharing Files

By: mahesh varma

mahesh varma — Tue, 20 Oct 2009 14:40:59 +0000

hey i have a blog and i used to post mp3 songs which can be download

for that i used both media fire and rapid share

yes as many of you said media fire is better than rapid share but what happenend

is out of the total files uploded to media fire and rapid share are almost similar songs ,many of my files which were downloaded are only from RS ,

i can’t understand why people are showing more interest on downloading a file from RS than media fire

By: lex

lex — Fri, 04 Sep 2009 14:05:31 +0000

On Sep 4 2009 I’m getting 120KB/sec DL from Rapidshare. I only rarely use it, yet today I got the “free user limit” message. If I was on a fixed IP address or didn’t know how to use proxies I’d be screwed.
I look forward to more folks using MediaFire and other free distribution sites. We need to let people know alternative sites exist.

By: Anonymous

Anonymous — Sat, 30 May 2009 15:38:48 +0000

yeap I just HATE RapidShare it make me wait like 300 sec. after I download 1 file.
but, no more for Media Fire

By: kenny1999

kenny1999 — Fri, 26 Sep 2008 13:22:49 +0000

hello

i have tried mediafire after your introduction to it , but i can conclude that rapidshare has its reasons of success over mediafire, its average speed of upload is just around 300kb/s while I can have an average of 1000kb/s of upload to rapidshare using their uploading program, the test was carried out under the same computer & the same isp in peak hours, by the way, i don’t think 60 sec or 90sec ( i am not sure about the exact seconds) for rapidshare free user to wait is a long time to go but the attention paid in between caused much more trouble (esp when you download files with lots of splitted small files), however, such problem can be readily solved by using some programs like CryptLoad which could make you do one time and let everything go on itself.

But mediafire has an easy signup procedure (just email and password) , and an account for the user to login to easily manage the files he had uploaded, this is the advantage over rapidshare.

By: a.han

a.han — Fri, 01 Aug 2008 00:52:04 +0000

Anonymous wrote:

They’ll either shut down after a few months, or start enforcing restrictions like rapidshare, bandwidth isn’t cheap.

That comment was written on October 30th, 2006 at 8:08 pm and I guess it has been a "few" months now and MF is still up and running and has received so many awards from top computer magazines.

By: Anonymous

Anonymous — Mon, 21 Jul 2008 22:44:55 +0000

rapid share is good pay the member fee dosent cost that much i can download 1g in 20 mins tried all the rest now where as good

By: anonymous19

anonymous19 — Tue, 12 Jun 2007 04:12:55 +0000

heheh Ryan you are right…it seems like SO many people use those rapidshar links and i’m like…oh boy, here we go again…(on the so-called rapidshare nightmare). funniest thing is that, rapidshare is not even rapid! It’s slower than mediafire!

By: Ryan

Ryan — Mon, 11 Jun 2007 23:36:39 +0000

Yeah, I definitely hate rapidshare as well. I crunge every time I see a rapidshare download link.

By: ihaterapidshare

ihaterapidshare — Mon, 11 Jun 2007 04:32:48 +0000

uh huh…divshare is ok, its sort of like mediafire in a way – its kind of similar. i use mediafire more though, as to the earlier remark about MediaFire self-destructing itself, apparently, it has been here for about 3/4 of a year, and it’s still well and strong. i don’t know about you, but i HATE rapidshare and this is a much better alternative – also 100mb limit, but it wont delete inactive files, and there is no stupid inhibiting limits if you are not some premium member or whatever. i love this service!

By: Ryan

Ryan — Sun, 11 Feb 2007 07:13:40 +0000

Actually, our newest favorite is now Divshare…and if you haven’t tried them out I highly recommend that you do.