Progress pages annoy me personally. I always turn them off.
I know they can be shut off but whats the resolution if my CIO wants them turned on? And if they are shut off do they still scan the file that is being downloaded?
Files will always get scanned. The progress page just replaces the Browser's download dialog with the custom page instead.
I haven't worked out a solution for the MWG7 pages. There are a lot of browser types and a lot of download methods on different sites that resize their own windows and don't let you resize them manually. A page that works on one site might not work on another, so that's why I usually turn them off in the firs place.
The only reason you'd leave them on is so users don't see the browser's dialog screen that reports the download speed. The user sees a low number for the MB/Sec when it downloads,but that is misleading. It is downloading at full speed, but it just trickles to the user until the whole file is received by the proxy. Then the remainder of the file dumps at a very high speed to the desktop. End-to-end, the speed is the same from first click to final save to disk.
Thank you for the explanation. I just needed something to tell them when they ask me why we are able to have download pages on version 6.8* and not on version 7.
It's possible that things have changed in recent times, but I also see the progress page as being a benefit as it gives the user some kind of indication that something is going on. I hear what you say regarding the artificially low download speed being reported. But, historically, I used to install a software-based gateway AV solution for HTTP scanning and in it's original form it too was lacking a download progress indicator.
Users would click on the link to download whatever it was they wanted to download. The browser would (seemingly) do nothing at all they'd click on the download link again, and again, and again. More patient users would maybe wait as long as 10 seconds before repeating the process . They were unware that the gateway device was actually downloading the file for them and would deliver the file, at wire speed, once the download was complete and the file was scanned. Similarly, they were unaware that each time they clicked on the download link, a new instance of the download would start at the gateway. Maybe Web Gateway, being so much more advanced, has the means to deal with this, but returning to the solution of 10 years ago, this issue would result in a number of side-effects.
1. The gateway scanner would begin to struggle under the demand of these downloads - This would vary, depending on the size of the download, but would easily multiply depending on the number of users downloading at that time.
2. Internet performance would suffer (again, in 2010 I concede that Web Gateway may be more intelligent and while it would see multiple requests for the same download, it would only download the file once). Again, this was based on late 1990's internet connections where 64 and 128k connections were common (in the UK, at least)
3. After 'x' minutes when the download has finished the user would get a surprise when their browser suddenly pops-up a window prompting them to select a location to save the file, and this (of course) would then repeat itself depending on how many times they clicked on the original download link.
So, something that notifies the user that their download request has been acknowledged and that the file they have requested is actually being downloaded somewhere else beforehand serves to inform them and (hopefully) stop them from repeatedly trying to download the same thing over and over again.
It would be nice for my users to be able to see sometime of action being performed when they are trying to download a file. Is this going to be fixed in later releases?
@PhilM: I understand your point. Users like the notification that something is happening and get impatient if they don’t get their instant gratification. Data trickling alleviates that somewhat so that the Save As... dialog displays quickly after a chunk of the file has been received, then trickles the file to the desktop to keep-alive the download until the whole file is scanned.
Turning off the progress page is not without its consequences. If the scanning comes upon an illegal file in mid-scan within and archive, the download terminates, but the user things the file is intact. When the file is opened or installed, it's corrupted and cannot be used. With the progress page enabled, that condition is displayed to the user before the file downloads to the desktop with a description of why it's blocked. The other consequence is the user sees a small number on the download speed indicator in the browser and complain that things are slow. This is mostly a matter of user-education.
We could debate the topic all day. All I'm saying is personally I don't want to maintain a list of sites that I have to put exceptions on when the window is too small to click the download link. I'd rather have it work as close to native browser functionality as possible. This method works the best for me.
If you have a real problem with the fundamental functionality of how the progress pages work in general and need something done to the product itself to remediate it, by all means report it to support.
Of course, every time I need to look up a site that behaves strangely and try it myself for investigation, I cannot find one. Anyone have an example of one that's flaking out so I look at it on my side?
Message was edited by: Erik Elsasser on 10/8/10 9:04:04 AM CDT
Ever since I turned progress pages off I have not had any issues downloading. During large file downloads I do see Phils point where a user may think nothing is happening and continue to click on the download now button, at this point in time I am the only one testing the new version. As I gather some users to be in a test group I am sure some more issues may come up, I wont tell them about disabling the progress pages and see if I have any feedback from them.
At this point in time I am trying to resolve any known issues we had with 6.8.6 and trying to get more comfortable with creating the rules and how they work.