I asked this above already, but how would this feature be useful for you exactly? What would you limit part way that a full block wouldn’t work just as well?
+1 for the feature.
Would like to see such feature as well…
Being able to shape and manipulate traffic is a lot different than just watching it.
A large majority of apps/games/programs that use a substantial amount of data already support this internally.
What would be a real world application of this?
Thanks,
Matt
1 Like
I am not sure if I understand all of the requirements but for many people this sounds very much like QoS to me?
2 Likes
While I agree, I also doubt that many home router users understand QoS and how to manage it. Would that put Glasswire within their purview – I think that’s open to question also.
1 Like
In short: Software Based QoS targeted at non-hardware savvy people who want to multitask on their crap internet connection better.
Which is easier for the uninitiated: Purchasing and setting up a DD-WRT router and implementing custom QOS rules or installing an application and changing numbers in a box next to an application name?
Which is easier to perform/less interruptive on the fly for a power user: opening an application GUI and changing a number in a box, or logging into a router, changes QoS rules and probably restarting it?
Older thread about this: [Feature Request] Application Speed Limiting/Bandwith Management - #4 by Kittens
Sorry for the necropost, almost 3 years later this is still a feature i’d like to see implemented in the free/paid version 
3 Likes
Would you add this feature or never ?
We may add it someday, but it’s not trivial to add unfortunately.
It would be a very useful feature for me too! 
1 Like
If you can limit programs by kb/s, then you can stop certain applications from hogging all of the bandwidth without stopping them entirely. Pretty much any downloader is a good example of this; if I want to update Photoshop, the Adobe application manager will use all available bandwidth for the download. If I want to play online games at the same time, I have to cancel the download. If I could limit the bandwidth of the downloader, I could do other things at the same time without having to manually open/close/block/unblock thing.
3 Likes
The feature sounds like a good idea, but I wonder if that would be a task best served by a firewall?
As mentioned previously, this sounds similar to QoS or traffic shaping in the router. But this request is based on per application, rather than packet type. So agree it doesn’t sound trivial.
1 Like
I will necro this thread to get this feature. I would LOVE an “all in one” solution to my networking needs. Heck, I created this forum account just to make this request.
Edit: I will even go so far as to give reasons why this is an AWESOME feature to have.
Server admin - You want your file server to only put out 4Mbps upload but 20 Mbps download
You ALSO want your media server to have 20 Mbps uploads and 4Mbps downloads
Normal user - You want to play your games while a large download is going on in the background. Well if that game is online you can not get a reliable connection if the download is taking all of your bandwidth. Yes, SOME downloaders like Steam have built-in limiters for this reason but it would just be so much nicer if they were all in one location. And not all programs can be limited like that. (Example: All web browsers (without mods))
Content creators (like Linus since you use his services) - Can upload there content to youtube, twitch, Vimeo, etc. Without slowing down the rest of their network. (Ever try to use a network when all of its uploads are gone?) Even if the uploads are on a different computer.
Common sense - Options are good!!! Even if some people will never use this feature, it is better to have a feature that won’t hurt performance but will still be able to bring in people who otherwise might not want to pay for a subscription.
Now I can’t and won’t even begin to tell you how to run your business, but I will say when you buy something have you ever said, “I wish that thing that I don’t have to use that is not hurting my experience in any way was not there.”
2 Likes
Much of the reasoning above suggests that it is not per app bandwidth limiting that is desired. Instead it sounds like one or more apps should have guaranteed priority or bandwidth to ensure that they are not negatively impacted by all other apps and services.
For example, the priority could be as simple as one online game. But it could also be an online game plus voice chat plus video streaming of game to Internet.
1 Like
That is an inelegent soultion, QOS on most routers can do that in some degree or another. Being able to do this on a per app basis gives the user FAR more control. For example, I want to download a large file form the internet but not in a hurry to get it. I open my trusty web browser and start the download, then go and watch “Video streaming service of choice” and play games. Well… I can’t… If I can set that download to oh 1Mbps then the tab that has “Video streaming service of choice” to 4Mbps This leaves the rest of the system to what I want.
But then you know I need to move a large folder with 1TB of data to my server. Well not my whole NIC is bogged down till that is done. Not with this handy feature! Limit that transfer to 500Mbps (half what most peoples desktops normally have) and all of a sudden I can continue using my computer for generic things again.
There are many reasons to have this. This was just “off the cuff” stuff.
I’m not saying anything against per app limiting. It’s just that some of the examples given can only work by ensuring that no other app starts running and uses the then available bandwidth.
1 Like
Most people who use a service like this (in fact all…) monitor whats being used. As such they know what apps they have that might spike like that. So they can fine tune everything ahead of time. When a new program is installed they can (and will) monitor that one as well.
Another example is people who have metered connections. May not want “Video streaming service of choice” to start buffering that 1080 video before they can change it.
This isn’t very easy or clean to do in an app that only runs on a single computer. Sure you can deal with what is going on for that computer but I have 40+ devices on my network. I deal with them at the switch or router level which gives me most of the control I want. This feature belongs in the router/network, not in a Windows app… sorry…
Download a huge file AND play a game? Get a faster internet connection… We watch 4K video and I play online games all the time without issues. If you have slow internet, sorry, it sucks to be you… Not trying to troll but this just isn’t a feature worth spending the time on.
2 Likes
I have gig up and down. Just because I CAN do the things I mentioned, does not mean others can.
How arrogant can you be here? There are MANY countries that have bandwidth caps, (this is also becoming MUCH more common in the US). Making the user side throttling far more necessary. Not just for speeds but for data caps as well. (Also becoming far more common in the US). This is not including people who don’t live in a 20+Mbps areas in the US. As internet providers rip net neutrality away from us little by little so we don’t notice. Not to mention some people are not always on their own home network. I, for example, travel a LOT for work. On my laptop, this feature would be GREAT to limit some program updating in the background when on a conference call on Hotel (or cellular) internet. Sure in your ONE use case this might not be an issue, but for dozens of other use cases, it is.
Furthermore, most people do not know how to do QoS services on the router end. Again, just because I can does not mean most. This feature request is a testament to the user-friendly atmosphere of GlassWire. They have managed to add most everything else in such a way that most anyone can use. (At least those concerned with network traffic). Sure people can go out and “git gud” at networking, but with how easy this software has made what was also once a hard thing to do, why not add the functionality.
As I said before,
I have given many VALID examples throughout this thread as to why this feature would be valuable to users. This does not by any means mean everyone NEEDS it. Just that for the people that do, GREAT! For the people that don’t, well then don’t use it?
1 Like
can you please add his feature, even if it is for premium users.
1 Like