Speed tests

[KCB]

Try this one:

http://testvelocidad.eu/

Click on "Empezar".

http://testvelocidad.eu/banner/201206/1zmz6-gfd.jpg

 

[KCB]

Thanks for that info. Where did you find it?

Do you know if they test for bandwidth boosting (and then fallback to
slower speed)? Comcast has their PowerBoost feature. Besides upping
speed for the first 10 MB of a file download, I read the speed boost
lasts maximum of 10 seconds. So the speed site would have to throttle
the file download so that it took longer than 10 seconds (since being
under 10 MB means the file might not normally take more than 10 seconds
to download).

How does the test work?
https://support.speedtest.net/entri...test-itself-work-how-is-the-result-calculated

From what I read here, they try to keep the entire testing to under 10
seconds which means results will be skewed by the speed boosting at the
ISP.

They also say that they use random strings for the download to eliminate
skewed results from cached files for the web browser. So I don't know
how you got specific image files. Maybe that's what you got this time.
Maybe they are named as .jpg file but really contain random data.

They do toss out the flyers (lowest 30% and highest 10% are discarded).

Vanguard, don't take this the wrong way, but (IMHO) you're WAY too
ANALytical about these speed tests offered on the web. Most people use them
to see if they're actually getting what their ISP claims, or to just make
sure that their connection isn't somehow screwed up. They try a few
different sites, to make sure, then move on. There are no claims made as to
the scientific correctness, and all are offered "as is".

 

[VanguardLH]

Vanguard, don't take this the wrong way, but (IMHO) you're WAY too
ANALytical about these speed tests offered on the web. Most people use them
to see if they're actually getting what their ISP claims, or to just make
sure that their connection isn't somehow screwed up. They try a few
different sites, to make sure, then move on. There are no claims made as to
the scientific correctness, and all are offered "as is".

Yeah, I already understood how basic are the measurements. There was
some university (forget which now) that had a test that took into
account the speed boosting that an ISP might employ to show both the
non-boosted and boosted speeds and at what point was the change.

The problem with the speed test sites that I've seen is that they will
exaggerate their results due to the speed boosting at the ISP. It's
almost as if they deliberately keep small their test files or ensure
that they will transfer in under 10 seconds.

Getting measurements that reflect your boosted speed is fine if
everything you do on the Internet involves small files. But if you want
to download videos to watch offline, ISO images of installation CDs
(Microsoft's are often over 768 MB in size), or anything involving large
files or file transfers that exceed 10 seconds in duration, that boost
isn't going to be there for very long.

Say you buy a car that claims you can drive at speeds up to 75 mph. You
get out on that tollway with the 75 mph speed limit, take it up to 75
mph, but then after just 10 seconds the car slows itself down to just 40
mph. You wouldn't be a bit perturbed that the vehicle that said it
could drive 75 mph only does that for a very short time and then slows
down by a huge amount? So what good were the specs claiming the higher
speed if that's not really what you'll get consistently?

You go ahead and believe the bogus numbers. Maybe you believe all that
marketspeak, too. The numbers presented are NOT a sustained speed but
they don't tell you that, do they? They mislead.

 

[Stephen Wolstenholme]

I also like speedtest.net.

But let me point out that although you say "see post lower down,"
what's lower down for you is not necessarily lower down for the rest
of us. The sequence of posts depends on what newsreader you use, and
how you sort the messages.

Microsoft Windows Live Mail does not conform to quoting standards and
so replies just run one without any indenting. Some users of Microsoft
Windows Live Mail manually put the indents in place rather then use a
proper Usenet client!

Steve

 

[KCB]

Yeah, I already understood how basic are the measurements. There was
some university (forget which now) that had a test that took into
account the speed boosting that an ISP might employ to show both the
non-boosted and boosted speeds and at what point was the change.

The problem with the speed test sites that I've seen is that they will
exaggerate their results due to the speed boosting at the ISP. It's
almost as if they deliberately keep small their test files or ensure
that they will transfer in under 10 seconds.

Getting measurements that reflect your boosted speed is fine if
everything you do on the Internet involves small files. But if you want
to download videos to watch offline, ISO images of installation CDs
(Microsoft's are often over 768 MB in size), or anything involving large
files or file transfers that exceed 10 seconds in duration, that boost
isn't going to be there for very long.

Say you buy a car that claims you can drive at speeds up to 75 mph. You
get out on that tollway with the 75 mph speed limit, take it up to 75
mph, but then after just 10 seconds the car slows itself down to just 40
mph. You wouldn't be a bit perturbed that the vehicle that said it
could drive 75 mph only does that for a very short time and then slows
down by a huge amount? So what good were the specs claiming the higher
speed if that's not really what you'll get consistently?

You go ahead and believe the bogus numbers. Maybe you believe all that
marketspeak, too. The numbers presented are NOT a sustained speed but
they don't tell you that, do they? They mislead.

Well, I think ALL the ISPs are guilty of misleading marketing. I was just
bitching about this recently to my wife, because of the 'bundling' situation
with Comcast, and the near impossibility of getting a straight answer
regarding pricing. (Yes, I do find the Vonage commercials funny, but
sometimes feel like one of the drones at the door - lol) With the bogus
numbers, it's not so much believing them as it is accepting them for what
they are, marketing hype. They do all say "...UP TO ??mbps...", and I
understand that.

As far as speed goes, I'm generally happy with mine, but if I need to
download something large, I'll just do something else until it finishes,
whether it's playing a game of Solitaire, cutting the grass, or going for a
ride on my bike. I have other things to do, so it's no big deal to me,
which was the point I was trying to make.

 

[XS11E]

And Alias is the biggest troll we have here. No response to him is
all right. He should either be ignored, or better yet kill-filed
(many of us, including me, have him kill-filed).

I believe I Bozo-binned him in Windows 2000 days or soon after..

And, sorry to sound like a complainer, but one other point: you
are posting with Windows Live Mail 15, which in my view, and that
of many others of us here, is the worst of all available e-mail
programs/newsreaders. What it does the worst is quote the message
you are replying to. It doesn't put the > sign in front of quoted
lines, so it's extremely difficult to tell the difference between
what you are quoting and what you are posting. Especially after a
conversation goes back and forth a couple of time, messages posted
with Windows Live Mail quickly become unintelligible. There are
lots of other better newsreaders/e-mail programs out there, and
many of them are free.

NOTE TO "jbm": Please take note of the above.

If you really like Windows Live Mail (and I can't imagine why???) you
can get an earlier version that DOES quote correctly. If nobody here
can point you to it, Google will find it for you.

 

[XS11E]

Well, I think ALL the ISPs are guilty of misleading marketing. I
was just bitching about this recently to my wife, because of the
'bundling' situation with Comcast, and the near impossibility of
getting a straight answer regarding pricing.

I've run into similar with Dish Network and Direct TV. I've not run
into anyone yet who can figure out what they'll get and for what price.
The websites are designed of obfuscate and do a wonderful job of it!

One friend told me his final solution was to get what he thought might
be the right package and then wait for the bill to see how much it
cost! Since his budget is over 100 times greater than mine, he can do
that, I'm still watching over-the-air TV only.... <sigh>

 

[Gene E. Bloch]

I've run into similar with Dish Network and Direct TV. I've not run
into anyone yet who can figure out what they'll get and for what price.
The websites are designed of obfuscate and do a wonderful job of it!

The obfuscation idea: that is exactly what I think as well.

And it's not limited to ISP and television providers...

One friend told me his final solution was to get what he thought might
be the right package and then wait for the bill to see how much it
cost! Since his budget is over 100 times greater than mine, he can do
that, I'm still watching over-the-air TV only.... <sigh>

My budget is doubtless more like yours...

I'm thinking of some changes, but I don't know how to evaluate the
alternatives I see

 

[J. P. Gilliver (John)]

I'm in Pennsylvania
http://www.mybroadbandspeed.co.uk/results/164914191.png

That's interesting: 2.74 down, 388 up - higher up than I get. Is 2.74
what you normally get using a test site nearer you, or low?

 

[jbm]

"Ken Blake" wrote in message

And, sorry to sound like a complainer, but one other point: you are
posting with Windows Live Mail 15, which in my view, and that of many
others of us here, is the worst of all available e-mail
programs/newsreaders. What it does the worst is quote the message you
are replying to. It doesn't put the > sign in front of quoted lines,
so it's extremely difficult to tell the difference between what you
are quoting and what you are posting. Especially after a conversation
goes back and forth a couple of time, messages posted with Windows
Live Mail quickly become unintelligible. There are lots of other
better newsreaders/e-mail programs out there, and many of them are
free.


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

I've got enough problems with this computer without trying to downdate
programmes, thank you.

1st, I ALWAYS insert a horizontal line before my reply, leaving the quoted
text above said line.

2nd, at least I get rid of previous comments, which no else bothers to,
resulting in posts that have to be scrolled right through to get anything
new. Previous comments are always in the earlier posts, so why keep
repeating them all the time??????

jim

 

[J. P. Gilliver (John)]

"Ken Blake" wrote in message
news:[email protected]...

No, he didn't write this paragraph.

And, sorry to sound like a complainer, but one other point: you are
posting with Windows Live Mail 15, which in my view, and that of many
others of us here, is the worst of all available e-mail
programs/newsreaders. What it does the worst is quote the message you
are replying to. It doesn't put the > sign in front of quoted lines,
so it's extremely difficult to tell the difference between what you
are quoting and what you are posting. Especially after a conversation
goes back and forth a couple of time, messages posted with Windows
Live Mail quickly become unintelligible. There are lots of other
better newsreaders/e-mail programs out there, and many of them are
free.


------------------------------------------------------------------------

You don't have to downdate - there are plenty of other alternatives.

1st, I ALWAYS insert a horizontal line before my reply, leaving the
quoted text above said line.

Which is better than many, granted.

2nd, at least I get rid of previous comments, which no else bothers to,
resulting in posts that have to be scrolled right through to get
anything new. Previous comments are always in the earlier posts, so why
keep repeating them all the time??????

This is a good point. You quote the text you are replying to, and snip
everything else - which IMO does indeed improve readability.
(Unfortunately, either WLM doesn't add, or you snipped, any line saying
who did write the bit you are replying to, so we don't know, without
having to go back to those previous posts.)

jim

--
J. P. Gilliver. UMRA: 1960/<1985 MB++G.5AL-IS-P--Ch++(p)Ar@T0H+Sh0!:`)DNAf

I'm sometimes a bit bewildered by that, really - there are no young people in
it, there's no sex, there's no violence, no car chases and there's no action
and no vampires. - Colin Firth on the success of the film "The King's Speech".
Radio Times 10-16 September 2011

 

[Ken Blake]

"Ken Blake" wrote in message

And, sorry to sound like a complainer, but one other point: you are
posting with Windows Live Mail 15, which in my view, and that of many
others of us here, is the worst of all available e-mail
programs/newsreaders. What it does the worst is quote the message you
are replying to. It doesn't put the > sign in front of quoted lines,
so it's extremely difficult to tell the difference between what you
are quoting and what you are posting. Especially after a conversation
goes back and forth a couple of time, messages posted with Windows
Live Mail quickly become unintelligible. There are lots of other
better newsreaders/e-mail programs out there, and many of them are
free.

I have no idea what you mean by "downdate," but that's OK.

1st, I ALWAYS insert a horizontal line before my reply, leaving the quoted
text above said line.

Good, that makes it much better. But it's not just your reply. When
your messages are quoted by others and a thread goes back and forth a
few times, it quickly becomes impossible to make sense of.

2nd, at least I get rid of previous comments, which no else bothers to,
resulting in posts that have to be scrolled right through to get anything
new. Previous comments are always in the earlier posts, so why keep
repeating them all the time??????

Depends entirely on what the previous comments are, and what it is
that you want to say. Sometimes they aren't needed, sometimes they
are.

Your choice. I'm not trying to tell you what to do, but I will point
out that if you continue to use Windows Live Mail 15, you will find
that many newsgroup participants will find many of your messages
unintelligible and killfile you.

 

[Gene Wirchenko]

[snip]

I've got enough problems with this computer without trying to downdate ^^^^^^^^
programmes, thank you.

"download".

Well, better software might help with some of those computer
problems.

1st, I ALWAYS insert a horizontal line before my reply, leaving the quoted
text above said line.

After quoting happens, that is just not good enough. It confuses
attributions and make it very hard to follow the thread. Some will
not bother. Some will killfile you, and I am close to doing that.
Your behaviour is impolite, you have been informed of this and what to
do about, and you continue with your rude behaviour. What would you
do if someone did this to you in company? I am close to killfiling
you.

2nd, at least I get rid of previous comments, which no else bothers to,

You do, but you are hardly the only one. I do, and it is not
just because you mention it. I have close to twenty years experience
doing so. Your inaccurate statement is not the politest thing that
you could have written.

resulting in posts that have to be scrolled right through to get anything
new. Previous comments are always in the earlier posts, so why keep
repeating them all the time??????

I do not like mass-quoting either. I tend to skip them,
sometimes killfiling. Both you and they are rude. Kindly knock it
off. Please and thank you.

Sincerely,

Gene Wirchenko

 

[J. P. Gilliver (John)]

[snip]

I've got enough problems with this computer without trying to downdate ^^^^^^^^
programmes, thank you.

"download".

No, he used that term deliberately, as an opposite to "update". Some of
us had been recommending that (if he wanted to continue using WLM) he
used a version other than 15, which at present means moving o an earlier
version, since the current version is 15 (point something).
[]

After quoting happens, that is just not good enough. It confuses
attributions and make it very hard to follow the thread. Some will

Agreed, but it is a start!
[]

You do, but you are hardly the only one. I do, and it is not
just because you mention it. I have close to twenty years experience

Again, it is better than many who do not do it though!

doing so. Your inaccurate statement is not the politest thing that
you could have written.

[Nor was that (-:! {and nor is this!}]
[]
--
J. P. Gilliver. UMRA: 1960/<1985 MB++G.5AL-IS-P--Ch++(p)Ar@T0H+Sh0!:`)DNAf

We would rightly be dismayed if the rest of the world saw Britain solely as a
nation of paedophiles and knife-wielding teenagers ruled by a gang of corrupt
politicians who dispatch young men and women to die in foreign battlefields
while old people are perishing from hypothermia in small flats that they can't
afford to heat. But from an African viewpoint, that is precisely the kind of
distortion that the western media ... not that we've told lies, but that, by
omission, we've obscured the truth. Jonathan Dimbleby, in Radio Times 29 May -
4 June 2010

 

[jbm]

"J. P. Gilliver (John)" wrote in message

This is a good point. You quote the text you are replying to, and snip
everything else - which IMO does indeed improve readability.
(Unfortunately, either WLM doesn't add, or you snipped, any line saying
who did write the bit you are replying to, so we don't know, without
having to go back to those previous posts.)

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Oh? So what is the first line of my post? Go back to my post that you
replied to, and look at it again. I'll take criticism, but only when its
warranted.

And to everyone else, have you ever tried to install an earlier version of a
Windows application? IT WON'T LET YOU!!!


jim

 

[Gene Wirchenko]

"J. P. Gilliver (John)" wrote in message

This is a good point. You quote the text you are replying to, and snip
everything else - which IMO does indeed improve readability.
(Unfortunately, either WLM doesn't add, or you snipped, any line saying
who did write the bit you are replying to, so we don't know, without
having to go back to those previous posts.)

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Oh? So what is the first line of my post? Go back to my post that you
replied to, and look at it again. I'll take criticism, but only when its
warranted.

It is warranted. Since he could not see it at a glance, it
obviously was not clear enough. Other people manage to post properly.
Why are you so determined to get it wrong?

And to everyone else, have you ever tried to install an earlier version of a
Windows application? IT WON'T LET YOU!!!

Yup.

Normally, I uninstall the app first and clean up (if needed).
Then, I install the older version.

Sincerely,

Gene Wirchenko