Filesharing links and how people react to them

[Moldarin]

Hi,

Is this a good way of adding support for downloaidng via filesharing networks or not? Will it confuse the end user or not? How can it be improved?

Download Filename.png (http://location.server/Filename.png) (Magnet (magnet:HASH), eD2k (ed2k:HASHES), BitTorrent (http://location.server/Filename.torrent))
Download Filename.png (http://location.server/Filename.png)
or over Magnet (magnet:HASH)
or over eD2k (ed2k:HASHES)
or over BitTorrent (http://location.server/Filename.torrent)
Any toughts?

[Stephen Philbin]

Definitely the second one I say. I'd rephrease the other one though, to say "Also available via the ???? network" or something like that. That way, it makes it totally obvious it's the same thing but obtained from some other method that would be instantly recogniseable by name to those that use them, and those that do not use them would probably not recognise it and just ignore it because they know they can get the same thing via the traditional link.

Making the links for obtaining the files via other networks look like a distinct group from the standard one would help too I think. Colour, weight, italicizing, font and so on.

[Moldarin]

Download Filename.png (http://location.server/Filename.png) (or via Magnet (magnet:HASH) or eD2k (ed2k:HASHES), BitTorrent (http://location.server/Filename.torrent))
I have been thinking of that one as well...

[Stephen Philbin]

I like the third one better than the first, but I think the second one is best of all. It makes them look like a distict group in every respect.

[bmass]

I would defineatly go with the third one. the first is the most visually attractive, but the second is most practical (mostly because I didn't really get the idea with the first one), however the third one combines both good aspects of the two.