The 'proof' shown that aspera is 200x faster shows an ETA of 2:15 compared to 00:09. First of all, this is 15x faster, not 200. I tried downloading the file u

The 'proof' shown that aspera is 200x faster shows an ETA of 2:15 compared to 00:09. First of all, this is 15x faster, not 200. I tried downloading the file using axel -n 32, and it took 1:28, which is only 9x slower. Curious though, when it started out with all threads running it was transferring data at 29594.2KB/s and hit 50% after only a few seconds, but by the end with only a few threads left running it was only doing 5625.8KB/s. It looks like the performance varies a lot, possibly due to multiple interfaces or wan links being used.. or issues with their server. Using axel -n 64 over http I was able to fetch it in 50s, which is only 5x slower, and most of that time was spent from 98 to 100% as the last few connections finally finished. A smarter client that more aggressively re-fetched chunks being downloaded over slow connections would likely match the same performance.