JDownloader 2 has been released

Martin Brinkmann
May 26, 2016
Updated • May 27, 2016

JDownloader 2 is a new version of the popular cross-platform, Java-based download application supporting thousands of Internet sites.

The new version of the program is already listed for download on the official website, but the changelog has not been updated yet to reflect the changes of the new JDownloader version.

Note: JDownloader 2's main installer ships with third-party offers. You can avoid those by using clean installers instead which you find listed on the official forum. If you download the official installer, your anti-virus solution may flag it as malicious or problematic because of the integrated adware in the installer. Also, JDownloader 2 requires Java but it appears to ship with a version so that Java does not have to be installed on the device to use the application.

JDownloader 2 has been designed to make the downloading of files from the Internet easier. The program supports file hosting services and other sites, premium accounts, a link grabber that monitors the clipboard of the device for links, extensions that add more functionality such as archive extraction or download scheduling, and even automatic captcha solving.

JDownloader 2

JDownloader 2 ships with a list of important changes including better plugin update handling, an improved user interface and improved performance.

As far as plugin handling is concerned, it is happening in the background now and should be more reliable than before.

JDownloader uses plugins to add download support for various services. The newest version of the download program ships with support for 3248 websites including many file hosting services but also media hosting sites and others.

Plugins may need to be updated frequently if websites and services change download processes.

Another new feature of JDownloader is the new My JDownloader remote interface that you can enable.

It enables you to control downloads via  web interface after you register an account at the site. Also, you will get access to mobile applications that you can download after signing in to the account on the official site.

Existing JDownloader users may know the remote interface already as it has been revealed years ago by the team.

You can check out the official bug tracker for a full rundown on the changes and improvements that went into JDownloader 2.

Now You: Have you used JDownloader in the past?

software image
Author Rating
2.5 based on 17 votes
Software Name
Software Category
Landing Page

Tutorials & Tips

Previous Post: «
Next Post: «


  1. Anonymous said on March 12, 2017 at 1:51 am
    1. Martin Brinkmann said on March 12, 2017 at 6:46 am

      This is not malware.

  2. buddzie1018 said on March 1, 2017 at 11:44 pm

    I am a novice when it comes to computers, lol. I have been downloading some files off a website. Thge downloader (which is free but limited to 1 GB per day) they use takes 2-3 hours for a file that is about 3 MB or less. It often crashes when you get about 10 mins to the end. I tried 3 times today and have reached my limit for being free and got squat! Grrrr..

    Is this jdownloader2 able to download this? If so how do I do it as when I want to download I have 2 icons (downloaders icons) to choose from. How would I get the link to work on jdownloader2? Would a copy and paste work? If so how do I put the file on there to download it.

    I am so confused, please someone help me.

    1. Martin Brinkmann said on March 2, 2017 at 7:15 am

      It depends on whether JDownloader supports that site. It may be worth a try.

  3. smaragdus said on June 1, 2016 at 2:22 am

    As someone mentioned above FreeRapid Downloader (it also requires Java) is far better and clean.
    JDownloader- no offline installer- no download for me.

  4. Khidreal said on May 28, 2016 at 12:42 am

    I’ve been using this dead application by vpnscount called ninja download manager… even being a dead project, I can’t find such browser integration as this one… I mean, after Internet Download Manager, which is paid, ninja download manager has almost a perfect integration with my firefox and I would not trade this dead project for JD unless it would give me browser integration, which the devs never gave on the version 1 afaik… the only “browser integration” JD has is a javascript code used by some websites do add downloads to JD, otherwise you just have to use JD own browser if I am not mistaken and that for me is like smashing my head against a wall…

  5. Mick said on May 27, 2016 at 6:10 pm

    I prefer MiPony. It is lightweight, does not require Java and it can even be used portable. It does come with 3rd party offers though, so one should not rush through the install too quickly. While JDownloader has better integration with Firefox, links detection from clipboard works fine with MiPony, and this is all I need.

  6. CHEF-KOCH said on May 27, 2016 at 1:39 pm

    Java runtime is not more or less vulnerable as any other language too. MS redist also gets updates here and there. The Heimdal guide is more referring to the ‘well known’ Java Plugin, which anyway get’s soon officially removed. java per se is not more or less vulnerable then other programming languages.

    For me JDownloader use (when downloading) around 500 Mb I think that’s okay for the mass of plugins, addons and other gimmicks it offers. I see other programs like !Load which are native C/C#/C++ apps and they using with wide less functions around 130 MB so overall it’s okay, of course not perfect but memory consumption is something which will always a problem. Look at ‘private bytes’ not the virtual memory.

    About FreeRapid, last change is from 2014:
    http://wordrider.net/download/changes.txt I think it’s not better in any way but it is maybe an alternative.

  7. city_zen said on May 27, 2016 at 11:06 am

    I used JDownloader for a couple of years, until I discovered FreeRapid Downloader (http://wordrider.net/freerapid/), which I consider to be better.

  8. IDeezMutz said on May 27, 2016 at 7:47 am

    Internet Download Manager all day everyday

    1. Gabriel said on May 27, 2016 at 1:35 pm

      It ain’t free though.

  9. beerpatzer said on May 26, 2016 at 11:43 pm

    It’s a marginally good downloader which can outfox some sites but is SLOOOW as hell, even on my i7 machine

  10. Travis said on May 26, 2016 at 9:46 pm

    > Also, JDownloader 2 requires a copy of Java installed on the system.

    This is false, insofar as you do NOT need to have a separate Java install, at least for Windows systems. Java is bundled with the installer and gets unpacked in the same directory as JDownloader. Interestingly, when running JDownloader only a single executable is spawned and there’s no sign of a Java process so something fancy must be going on…

    1. awrf said on May 27, 2016 at 2:55 pm

      on the other hand. it can’t be a good thing to have an iffy piece of software like java provided by some fourth party. it’s like having some program install flash for you. just no. how updated would it be? can you trust it to be clean? (not saying they do anything malicious, but someone else certainly could.)

      i can’t remember what game it was (on steam) that came with java. it was many versions behind.

    2. CHEF-KOCH said on May 27, 2016 at 11:31 am

      This is correct JDownloader comes with it’s own binary in case someone want to use it the ‘portable’way. :)

      1. WWW said on May 29, 2016 at 3:20 am

        I’ve never seen a portable version of JDownloader. I know they were working on one a few years back but they seemed to have dropped it. Probably couldn’t get it to work properly.

    3. Martin Brinkmann said on May 26, 2016 at 10:13 pm

      Thanks Travis, have corrected this.

  11. Bruh said on May 26, 2016 at 9:29 pm

    Java + Adware… shitware recommended here as usual…

  12. Henk van Setten said on May 26, 2016 at 9:14 pm

    This program requires you install Java on your PC. For that reason alone, I wouldn’t touch it with a barge pole.

    10 months ago (July 22nd, 2015) security firm Heimdal Security published a well-documented, well-referenced article about the continuing risks of Java. By the way, they even happened to mention Martin Brinkmann’s (Ghacks author) own experiment to ditch Java plugins.

    Quote from the article: “In 2015 alone,” [in view of the article’s publication date this means the first half of 2015] “we’ve already deployed 105925 patches for Java Runtime Environment for our clients.”

    Quote from their conclusion: “As the numbers show, Java is still one of the 8 most vulnerable software apps exposing your computer to cyber attacks.”

    Link to the full article at Heimdal: https://heimdalsecurity.com/blog/java-biggest-security-hole-your-computer/

    I myself completely removed Java (and therefore, any Java-based apps) from my computer about three years ago. To anyone who is concerned about security risks and who wants to avoid unnecessary vulnerabilities, I would really most strongly advise to do the same. Urgently.

    With everything we do know today, installing a Java app on a home PC is a dangerous choice that makes no sense at all. It’s like keeping a live Jurassic Park dinosaur as a pet in your back garden. But of course, it’s your own choice!

    1. sfd said on May 27, 2016 at 11:44 am

      virtualbox. linux.

    2. Joey Spinosa said on May 27, 2016 at 12:06 am

      I have to agree. I wasn’t going to comment, but since Mr. Van Setten let the cat out of the bag I’ll harmonize. Java = Malware. I don’t have the exact numbers, but I can tell you for certain that of all the known and cataloged malware, in any anti-virus database, JavaScript accounts for a very large percentage.
      We’re Java free on all our machines here, have been for at least two years, and haven’t noticed anything we could not do because it required Java.
      Mr. Joey

      1. Yuri Sokolov said on August 3, 2016 at 8:46 am

        @Joey Spinosa
        Kids these days start tinkering with computers before they are even taught proper mathematics in school. Just because you have 35 years of experience in a field that keeps changing and advancing doesn’t mean you have relevant knowledge outside your own specialization. Some core technologies haven’t really changed much since you started, but a lot of things around them have.

        I’ve seen it happen multiple times how these kids go to companies run by people with “35 years of experience” and the “experience experts” are forced to change almost everything because these young computer age kids just know how to do things more efficiently. I wouldn’t snark at these young ones, one day both of us will be replaced by them.

      2. Joey Spinosa said on May 27, 2016 at 8:50 am

        You are quite right. Java and JavaScript are different animals. There are some similarities between the two (library naming conventions, a good deal of syntax, and some JavaScript objects are taken directly from Java classes) but JavaScript was designed differently than Java from the get-go.
        They are more dissimilar than similar, I agree.
        I just wanted to point out that both Java AND JavaScript are insecure environments. I composed my comment quickly, after following and reading the links concerning Java, and my point was unclear.
        Thanks for the clarification.
        As far as the spreading of misinformation, or having no idea what I’m talking about, I don’t mind. I started in Information Technology in 1979. Been in this mess for 35 years. I’m accustomed to folks who haven’t even been alive for 35 years telling me how I’ve got it all wrong. It never bothers me… Youngsters make me smile.
        Mr. Joey

      3. Tony said on May 27, 2016 at 1:10 am

        You do understand that Java and JavaScript are COMPLETELY different things, right?

        So much misinformation spread by so many misinformed people.

        (Note that I’m not saying anything about Java security, I’m just pointing out that you clearly have no idea what you’re talking about.)

    3. Jon Wold said on May 26, 2016 at 11:08 pm

      However, you can run this without the Java Plugins, only the Java Runtime is required.

  13. Travis said on May 26, 2016 at 9:08 pm

    I wish JDownloader wasn’t so absolutely massive in memory. Certainly Java incurs plenty of overhead, but does it have to be this bad?

  14. Sophist said on May 26, 2016 at 8:52 pm

    Version 2 has been in “beta” for years and it has been working fine… I wonder what changed.

    1. WWW said on May 27, 2016 at 7:29 am

      Looks like they finally dropped the word “beta” from the name, that’s all.

      It’s been in “beta” for the last 3 or 4 years if you can believe that.

    2. anon said on May 27, 2016 at 1:47 am

      probably nothing.

      i mean, what is there to change?

  15. CHEF-KOCH said on May 26, 2016 at 8:03 pm

    Still the best. use it since years without much troubles, some hoster may be broken here and there sometimes but it’s depending on needs, the bigger ones mostly working just fine. Didn’t know it’s final, saw the v2 tag since over 1 year or so, but seems I was on beta.

    Whatever great tool if you often work with one-click hoster.

    Pro tip:
    In the advance option search for ‘donate’ or ‘donation’ and you can disable the donation tab and the ads on the right. :)

Leave a Reply

Check the box to consent to your data being stored in line with the guidelines set out in our privacy policy

We love comments and welcome thoughtful and civilized discussion. Rudeness and personal attacks will not be tolerated. Please stay on-topic.
Please note that your comment may not appear immediately after you post it.