>What is the performance if you
>
>(1) Increase the buffer size to 16384
>(2) update the progressbar every mulitple of 16 times in the loop
>
>
>Reason: 16k or 256 k won't make much of a difference - my ( and others ) guess is that it is the updating of the progress bar that eats cpu cycles

In comparism to WS FTP, I get the same performance. So, maybe I could gain a few milliseconds but that will not be visually noticable

But, thanks for the information