Replies Given
|
Your replies to other users's reviews and comments. |
| Type |
Site |
Feedback / Review |
Date |
Reply
1
|
Penthouse
(0)
|
Reply of
jd1961's Reply
No, no, I understood you completely. You were very clear. Like I said, it's cheesy, but really no surprise.
I don't like sites getting my email address for no apparent reason. If I'm actually joining the site, as in paying for it, of course, they're going to need my email.
I may be being a little naive, but I'd rather have Penthouse having my email address rather than many of the other sites out there. The company has been around long enough to know the score. If they email me, I suspect it won't be the same putrid crap that spams everyone.
I did give them my email address, since I have a throwaway one just for this purpose, and I do intend to try the site. They simply sent me my password, and I have received nothing else from them.
|
01-11-09 01:32am
|
Reply
2
|
Digital Desire
(0)
|
Reply of
zachvenice's Reply
As a previous member, I had no problems whatsoever with the zip links. They worked quite nicely with a download manager.
I do agree with some of the comments here about file names. The picture set zip files are named a little cryptically, but they do make sense when you get used to them. The video files, however, are another matter.
Have you ever considered revising your naming scheme? I realize that doing so with all the content currently available would be a rather monumental task and would not be feasible. However, I find that a filename that reflects the date of release (or shoot) and model name, and perhaps even a hint as to the content, is rather useful.
If you want all the current content renamed, I would volunteer to do it for a nominal fee. Aside from a small fee, all that I'd ask is that I be given a laptop in the corner of a room when the photo shoots are made so I can make the name changes. I promise, I won't bother anyone! ;-)
|
01-11-09 01:01am
|
Reply
3
|
Penthouse
(0)
|
Reply of
jd1961's Comment
I will admit it's a little cheesy, but let's be realistic. The company is in the business for money. They don't give their magazine away for free at the news stand, so why would they give their content away for free on the web? No revenue means no money for site upkeep and no money for new content, therefore no site. I don't think the print media is in the shape these days to be subsidizing web content, especially when it comes to adult content, which is far superior on the web, in any case.
I would have preferred a better free tour setup, but I've seen a lot worse from a lot of sites promising much more. Having some sample pictures demonstrating all the available sizes, for instance, would be rather helpful.
|
01-11-09 12:55am
|
Reply
4
|
N/A
|
Reply of
inthecrack's News
"We do not sell videos of a simple picture shoot with the video camera 10 feet away."
I don't think anyone can accuse your site of having distant camera angles. Thanks for a great site!
|
01-11-09 12:47am
|
Reply
5
|
In The Crack
(0)
|
Reply of
ksauz's Reply
I have no issues with the download speeds at this site. The review says the site discourages download manager use. I do not know if that is written anywhere in the site's policy or FAQ, and I simply did not look. I did notice that if I use a manager like DownThemAll!, I have problems. Even downloading one file with four concurrent chunks can sometimes fail. If I download things in a "normal" fashion, I get exceedingly high speeds (as good as any other site I have used) and excellent reliability, with no hung downloads.
What I use for this site is the utility Wget. You can queue as many files as you choose, and it downloads them one at a time, without trying to grab extra chunks or running simultaneous downloads. My speeds with Wget are just as good as a "normal" browser download, and Wget is very robust and reliable. I'm getting 1.17 megabytes per second, not megabits per second, either.
Kudos to the webmaster for paying attention to comments here and offering a first-rate site.
|
01-11-09 12:43am
|
|
