Trivial Discussion Time: Upload or Download?

As a 'pooter scientist, I am often annoyed by the improper use of the term "download" in the digital photography world.

Just to clarify...if you connect your camera / card reader to your computer and transfer images, the computer is the server in that relationship and the memory card (actually, the device containing the memory card) is the client. Since the data is transferring from client to server, it is properly called "uploading". Furthermore, in context, one would say one is "uploading to" the computer (as opposed to the linguistically cursed "downloading to").

On the other hand, if I copy images from my computer to my camera, or if I transfer files from some other computer on the web to mine, in both cases the device receiving the images is the client. This is properly called "downloading," and in context one would say one is "downloading from" the source of the data.

Trivial? Sure. Pedantic? You bet. Does this discussion matter in the least? No way.

So weigh in! What do you think of this controversial issue that has torn families asunder, pitting brother against brother and son against father? (Like the time my dad and I had a mild disagreement about it once for a short time, and then most likely got distracted by something else and that's how come it's not resolved. )

As another "puter" guy (IT consultant).

To say you are uploading OR downloading from a memory card or connected camera is innactuated IMO.

When I upload, say to an FTP site, my computer (the client) is pushing the files up to the server. To use the same with say a CF card would imply somehow that the card is pushing the file to my computer. This is not the case however as I am actually pulling the files, as a CF card is dumb storage.

In this example I would argue the only "correct" terminoligy would be "copying to" or "copying from". If you have multiple hard drives in your computer you don't say "I'm downloading files from my second hard drive"? Even the computer (both PC and Mac BTW) call this function "copying"

Now with a connected camera, especially in the early days of digital, you needed software to access the files. Similarily to an FTP you were still pulling the files from the camera (the camera was not smart enough to push them to you) in which case you would be downloading the files from your camera, which is where the usage I believe originally came from.

How is that for anal?

-D

For us non-puter guys, I have to wonder if this is just a regional thing.

Here on the west coast if a bunch of people are lined up waiting to get into a movie or something, we call it in-line, but on the east coast it's on-line. I always thought those east-coasters where a bunch of idiots for saying it that way, it's not like their really standing On a line.

How's that for anal?
--
http://www.pbase.com/jim_mckinlock

Jimboz28 said:

For us non-puter guys, I have to wonder if this is just a regional
thing.
Here on the west coast if a bunch of people are lined up waiting to
get into a movie or something, we call it in-line, but on the east
coast it's on-line. I always thought those east-coasters where a
bunch of idiots for saying it that way, it's not like their really
standing On a line.

Click to expand...

What??!?? You don't have those lines painted at the movie theater to stand on? Man those west coast folks are weird.

Don't forget the folks across the pond. Some call it a queue line I believe. gasp

-D

It seems to me that whether the server or client initiates the transfer is a mere detail of implementation. In all the negotiation of a complex protocol, who's to say which machine tipped the balance that actually starts the cascade of bits? What if I substitute whatever protocol we use today to reverse the final pieces of the conversation? No--I prefer to think of the sum of these details simply as an agreement to initiate the transfer.

What is not so ephemeral is the definition of client and server. The server is the thing that sits endlessly spinning, waiting to fork a connection. The client is the thing that initiates the session by contacting the server at a well-defined location. Data transfer within the session, from the beginning of the session onward, can be initiated by either side, purely based on the expectations laid down by the protocol governing the conversation.

If the data flows toward the server, it's going upstream. If data flows toward the client, it's going downstream. Hence the corresponding terms upload and download.

Think about it this way: in the old days of UNIX dumb terms, those terminals were not capable of anything save booting and connecting to the server--much like a card reader today. Yet, back then, no one had any confusion about when to use the term "upload" vs. "download".

Jimboz28 said:

For us non-puter guys, I have to wonder if this is just a regional
thing.
Here on the west coast if a bunch of people are lined up waiting to
get into a movie or something, we call it in-line, but on the east
coast it's on-line. I always thought those east-coasters where a
bunch of idiots for saying it that way, it's not like their really
standing On a line.

Click to expand...

East coasters say "on line"? Are you sure they're not just early adopters of iPhones, Blackberries, and other such devices with which they could be online while whiling away the minutes spent in line?

I don't get this east coast lingo at all. How can one be "on" a line of which one comprises a part? If the line is made of people, and you're a person, then you're in that line. Unless you're on someone's shoulders or something. Then maybe you could be "on" it.

danh said:

Don't forget the folks across the pond. Some call it a queue line I
believe. gasp

Click to expand...

Actually I think Europeans would just call it a queue.

Which sits well with us pooter folks. "Line" is too general. That could be a stack, a list, a graphical vector element, etc. Now a good ol' FIFO "queue"--no room for confusion there!

OP has it right - client to server is "uploading". Server to client is "downloading".

Also, if you grab it, that's a "pull". If they send it, that's a "push".

As for in-line vs on-line? How can you be standing "on-line"? Doesn't make sense to me (but then, I'm not a colonial from the the other side of the pond )

Have a Happy Christmas time

Alan

If you plug in your memory card into a card reader it comes up as a drive. There is no "client" or "server" in this case It is just drive A and drive B. In this case I have never termed the transfer as an Upload or download. It is simply a copy.

Did people ever use the phrase "I'm downloading files from my floppy disk"? I would think not. The command wasn't even download, it was copy, or cp back in the unix days.

So I "copy" files from my memory cards plugged into my computer. Both the term "upload" and "download" are incorrect.

I have generally heard the terms "upload" and "download" typically used for the transfer of data of dissimilar systems. Let's take FTP for example.

If I have an FTP client and I am getting a file to put on my computer I am downloading it.

Similarily, if I have a camera "client" that handles the transfer of pictures from my camera, I would consider that when I am getting the file from my camera I am also downloading it.

-D

Alan Sh said:

OP has it right - client to server is "uploading". Server to client
is "downloading".

Click to expand...

Correct. But the confusion comes into play in what you call the "client" and the "server"

If I were using the camera software, would that not be the camera "client" software? I have never seen the software referred to as camera "server" software. In which case using this software i would be "downloading" the pictures.

Alan Sh said:

Also, if you grab it, that's a "pull". If they send it, that's a "push".

Click to expand...

Or probably in more common computer terms it would be a "get" or a "put"

-D

The terms uploading & downloading are relative to the user, specifically the device being operated by the user to perform the data transfer.
You download 'to', and upload 'from' the device you are operating.

In the case of a camera / computer connection you are operating the computer, so the common usage of 'downloading' from the camera 'to' the computer is correct.

In a client / server model the client contains the user interface and the server performs some backend / remote storage / calculation / database function. When you are transferring files from your camera the camera is really only a dumb storage device - all the user interface and smarts are running on the computer. At best you might consider the camera to be a pseudo server; but even that's a stretch.

Regards,
Phil.

--
http://www.pbase.com/phil_a_mitchell

IT guys tend to think about the machines as being in charge.

The human is (still) in control and is the one who initiates the data transfer. So, if somebody sits at their computer and initiates a transfer from the camera/card reader it would be correct for them to refer to the process as "download". If the process is automated and starts as soon as the device is connected then I would think both "upload" and "download" could be correct depending on the perception of the user (which device he or she is currently operating, is closer etc.).

Regards,

Rado

danh said:

If you plug in your memory card into a card reader it comes up as a
drive. There is no "client" or "server" in this case It is just
drive A and drive B. In this case I have never termed the transfer
as an Upload or download. It is simply a copy.

Did people ever use the phrase "I'm downloading files from my floppy
disk"? I would think not. The command wasn't even download, it was
copy, or cp back in the unix days.

So I "copy" files from my memory cards plugged into my computer.
Both the term "upload" and "download" are incorrect.

I have generally heard the terms "upload" and "download" typically
used for the transfer of data of dissimilar systems. Let's take FTP
for example.

If I have an FTP client and I am getting a file to put on my computer
I am downloading it.

Similarily, if I have a camera "client" that handles the transfer of
pictures from my camera, I would consider that when I am getting the
file from my camera I am also downloading it.

Click to expand...

Actually, you're right. I did miss your point. If you look at it this way, I agree--I'm not against using the term "copy". I think it might be going a tad too far, though, to disallow use of "upload" and "download" altogether. At the very least, we can confine our discussion to when the camera is connected directly to the computer with a memory card in it.

In this case, the memory card still shows up as a drive, and to me, again the particular view presented to the user by the OS is an implementation detail. I can imagine an FTP client that does the same with a remote site (in fact, I think you can do this in linux). So it seems this would qualify as dissimilar systems...

(Though, to be honest, the requirement for dissimilar systems doesn't really make much sense to me. If I'm in my house connecting to a remote FTP client--that's two computers. Could be the same systems. On the other hand, it seems that a CF card and a computer are dissimilar systems, meaning to me that by your way of thinking, uploading / downloading would be the proper terminology. From my perspective, as a user I don't necessarily know anything about the remote system, so how can I say if it's dissimilar or not?)

danh said:

Alan Sh said:

OP has it right - client to server is "uploading". Server to client
is "downloading".

Click to expand...

Correct. But the confusion comes into play in what you call the
"client" and the "server"

Click to expand...

I think I covered that...whichever thing is the thing accepting connections is playing the role of server for that particular session.

The thing that often confuses the issue in these discussions is that you must be careful to confine the scope of the definition "client" and "server" to the actual session-in-question. P2P programs like napster can act as either client or server for a particular session.

So, the terms client and server only make sense in the context of a specific session. That which accepts and forks a connection is the server, that which initiates contact is a client.

danh said:

If I were using the camera software, would that not be the camera
"client" software? I have never seen the software referred to as
camera "server" software. In which case using this software i would
be "downloading" the pictures.

Click to expand...

See, this is where the confusion originates. "Software" is too wide a scope for "client" or "server" unless all that particular piece of software can do is play the role of a client (or server) in every session interaction.

danh said:

danh said:

Also, if you grab it, that's a "pull". If they send it, that's a "push".

Click to expand...

Or probably in more common computer terms it would be a "get" or a
"put"

Click to expand...

Get and put is language specific to a protocol like FTP, I believe. Same goes for pull and push. I think "upload" and "download" are intended to be the general terms non-specific to any particular protocol.

PhilM oz said:

The terms uploading & downloading are relative to the user,
specifically the device being operated by the user to perform the
data transfer.

Click to expand...

So what if you're speaking from a third person perspective? Person A transfers files to Person B. Did A upload or download the files?

With my definitions it seems clear how to express this. With yours...I'm at sea.

PhilM oz said:

You download 'to', and upload 'from' the device you are operating.
In the case of a camera / computer connection you are operating the
computer, so the common usage of 'downloading' from the camera 'to'
the computer is correct.

Click to expand...

Actually.........aren't I operating both the camera and the computer for the purpose of moving the files from one place to another? If I choose to operate only one of the devices, then chances are nothing's going to happen without me touching the other one.

PhilM oz said:

In a client / server model the client contains the user interface and
the server performs some backend / remote storage / calculation /
database function. When you are transferring files from your camera
the camera is really only a dumb storage device - all the user
interface and smarts are running on the computer. At best you might
consider the camera to be a pseudo server; but even that's a stretch.

Click to expand...

So any machine that has a user interface is a client? But every computer has some kind of user interface...even if it's only a command line.

And clients can't perform "backend" function? What is the definition of this term "backend"? I'm also not sure what "remote storage" is in this scenario. Remote with respect to which user? If I'm speaking about A and B from a 3p perspective, both are remote to me.

According to your definitions, I admit I'm completely confused by your last few sentences above. If all the "smarts" are running on the computer, wouldn't it be the server? But you're arguing it's the client. Then, if the computer is the client, that would make the camera the server....but then you finish by saying at best it's a "pseudo server; but even that's a stretch".

So...huh?

RadoHx said:

IT guys tend to think about the machines as being in charge.

The human is (still) in control and is the one who initiates the data
transfer. So, if somebody sits at their computer and initiates a
transfer from the camera/card reader it would be correct for them to
refer to the process as "download". If the process is automated and
starts as soon as the device is connected then I would think both
"upload" and "download" could be correct depending on the perception
of the user (which device he or she is currently operating, is closer
etc.).

Click to expand...

So let me get this straight. I have two machines at home, one upstairs and one downstairs. From downstairs, I begin transferring a file to the upstairs machine. Is this an upload or a download? What if I go upstairs? Then I have to start using the other term because I'm sitting at the other machine, even though nothing's changed about the long-running transfer?

What if I'm on the first floor, in between, not at either computer and I'm attempting to describe the action to someone else? (What if I bopped back and forth so much between the two machines to get the transfer working I can't remember which was the last one I was at?)

We ran a BBS back in the '80s. When people would transfer a file to the BBS, the terminology was:

"Person XXX is uploading a file to our BBS." or the "BBS is downloading data from person XXX."

When people would transfer a file from the BBS, the terminology was:

"Person YYY is downloading a file from our BBS." or the "BBS is uploading data to person YYY"

So in your example of the two computers on different floors, yes the terminology DOES in fact change as you change your perspective.

Steven

severoon said:

RadoHx wrote:
So let me get this straight. I have two machines at home, one
upstairs and one downstairs. From downstairs, I begin transferring a
file to the upstairs machine. Is this an upload or a download? What
if I go upstairs? Then I have to start using the other term because
I'm sitting at the other machine, even though nothing's changed about
the long-running transfer?

What if I'm on the first floor, in between, not at either computer
and I'm attempting to describe the action to someone else? (What if I
bopped back and forth so much between the two machines to get the
transfer working I can't remember which was the last one I was at?)

Click to expand...

--
---
Fall 2007:
http://www.pbase.com/snoyes/images_fall_2007_downtown_chicago

2006 White Sands and Bisti Workshop
http://www.pbase.com/snoyes/white_sands_and_bisti

IT guys HATE the term "memory" also. Apparently, it's "data storage capacity," or something like that. Whatever...

--
'Obviously, you're not a golfer.' - the dude

I'm an IT tech guy since the days of the IBM System 360 series of mainframes (not that it matters). I avoid the issue by simply "transferring" images from one device, to another device. That tends to keep everything clear, as most devices involved in the transfer ar neither up, nor down relative to each other. They are usually just next to each other..... .

--
Voyager

In Philly, PA and surrounding region we also say "in line." Never heard anyone around here say "on line."
--
PhillyGirl