24 replies to this topic

[CA3LE6UY]

Quote

Still running great here in central kansas.

:::.. Download Stats ..:::
Connection is:: 10184 Kbps about 10.2 Mbps (tested with 12160 kB)
Download Speed is:: 1243 kB/s
Tested From:: http://testmy.net  (main)
Test Time:: 2006/03/07 - 4:03am
Bottom Line:: 182X faster than 56K 1MB Download in 0.82 sec
Diagnosis: Awesome! 20% + : 135.69 % faster than the average for host (Cox.net)
Validation Link:: http://testmy.net/stats/id-B7C8KOVPH


:::.. Upload Stats ..:::
Connection is:: 1148 Kbps about 1.1 Mbps (tested with 2992 kB)
Upload Speed is:: 140 kB/s
Tested From:: http://testmy.net  (main)
Test Time:: 2006/03/07 - 4:07am
Bottom Line:: 21X faster than 56K 1MB Upload in 7.31 sec
Diagnosis: Awesome! 20% + : 96.24 % faster than the average for host (Cox.net)
Validation Link:: http://testmy.net/stats/id-KUTWDOMH5

nice speeds  -- I got a little higher than my last post

:::.. Download Stats ..:::
Connection is:: 9092 Kbps about 9.09 Mbps (tested with 5983 kB)
Download Speed is:: 1110 kB/s
Tested From:: http://testmy.net  (Server 1)
Test Time:: 2006/05/28 - 11:55pm
Bottom Line:: 159X faster than 56K 1MB Download in 0.92 sec
Tested from a 5983 kB file and took 5.391 seconds to complete
Mozilla/4.0 (compatible; MSIE 6.0; Windows NT 5.1; SV1; Alexa Toolbar)
Diagnosis: Awesome! 20% + : 106.4 % faster than the average for host (cox.net)
Validation Link:: http://testmy.net/stats/id-PX8BHQE9N

:::.. Upload Stats ..:::
Connection is:: 1046 Kbps about 1.05 Mbps (tested with 1496 kB)
Upload Speed is:: 128 kB/s
Tested From:: http://testmy.net  (Server 1)
Test Time:: 2006/05/28 - 11:56pm
Bottom Line:: 18X faster than 56K 1MB Upload in 8 sec
Tested from a 1496 kB file and took 11.71488 seconds to complete
Mozilla/4.0 (compatible; MSIE 6.0; Windows NT 5.1; SV1; Alexa Toolbar)
Diagnosis: Awesome! 20% + : 77.89 % faster than the average for host (cox.net)
Validation Link:: http://testmy.net/stats/id-U3MBXDQJG

[Tippin]

cox in mesa is pretty bomb too lol   20/2

[SlikLizrd]

CA3LE, on 17 June 2005 - 02:35 AM, said:

running great as usual

:::.. Download Stats ..:::
Connection is:: 8757 Kbps about 8.8 Mbps (tested with 12160 kB)
Download Speed is:: 1069 kB/s
Tested From:: http://testmy.net/ (server1)
Test Time:: Fri Jun 17 2005 02:26:49 GMT-0700 (US Mountain Standard Time)
Bottom Line:: 156X faster than 56K 1MB download in 0.96 sec
Diagnosis: Awesome! 20% + : 176.07 % faster than the average for host (cox.net)
Validation Link:: http://testmy.net/stats/id-MGZWRFV8C

:::.. Download Stats ..:::
Connection is:: 8929 Kbps about 8.9 Mbps (tested with 12160 kB)
Download Speed is:: 1090 kB/s
Tested From:: http://testmy.net/ (server2)
Test Time:: Fri Jun 17 2005 02:37:20 GMT-0700 (US Mountain Standard Time)
Bottom Line:: 159X faster than 56K 1MB download in 0.94 sec
Diagnosis: Awesome! 20% + : 181.49 % faster than the average for host (cox.net)
Validation Link:: http://testmy.net/stats/id-NM5HECY3P

Personal best since the upgrade was 9030 Kbps http://testmy.net/stats/id-HO3C94SAB
Anyone else have 9Mbps in Phoenix?  ~~~ Anyone have 9Mbps elsewhere?

[SlikLizrd]

SlikLizrd, on 20 April 2010 - 06:48 AM, said:

Just got an e-mail that says this site was improved, so I came over to see what's new.
Different cosmetics, but the same slow speeds and snarky remarks by seemingly arrogant administrators is STILL the modus operandi. Oh, well.
Don't know why, but this testing site is VERY slow.
The Motorola DOCSIS 3.0 Cable Modem (SB6120) lets me pull an occaisional 130 mbps -- with a 10-test average of nearly 100 mbps (down) and 6.5 mbps (up).
I'm on a 20-meg tier, but am able to get MUCH higher speeds through most sites -- but can't post my numbers here. Whenever I've tried, some jerk keeps posting "read the rules!" in bright red letters (what ever happened to "Please" ??).
I wonder if it ever occurred to the cretins that repeating a snarky command to "read the rules" is pretty ignorant, especially when we consider that the wording of ANY list of rules and/or regulations is subject to the interpretation of the ruler AND the ruled. Any required EXPLANATIONS are the responsibility of the RULE MAKER !!
Perhaps someone doesn't understand just how really, really stupid it is to repeat "read the rules" over and over without explaining which of the "rules" was "violated", and in what manner --
Picture this:
A Highway Patrolman pulls you over while you're on your way to work -- you have NO IDEA what you've done wrong, but you get a ticket, anyways. When asked, the Officer snaps back "read the rules!" as he takes off to harrass the next un-suspecting S.O.B.
Get it !!??? I sure hope so.
Could it be that the Big Boss here won't let us post our scores/ratings from other sites due to fear that we might notice the glaring differences in connection speeds between this site and others -- and go elsewhere !!???
If you're looking for CONSTRUCTIVE criticism , I think you're out of luck -- at least until you dispense some of your own. A red-lettered command to "read the rules!" DOESN'T qualify !!!
Thanks for reading.

[iforgot]

[tdawnaz]

SlikLizrd, on 20 April 2010 - 08:25 AM, said:

Just got an e-mail that says this site was improved, so I came over to see what's new.
Different cosmetics, but the same slow speeds and snarky remarks by seemingly arrogant administrators is STILL the modus operandi. Oh, well.
Don't know why, but this testing site is VERY slow.
The Motorola DOCSIS 3.0 Cable Modem (SB6120) lets me pull an occaisional 130 mbps -- with a 10-test average of nearly 100 mbps (down) and 6.5 mbps (up).
I'm on a 20-meg tier, but am able to get MUCH higher speeds through most sites -- but can't post my numbers here. Whenever I've tried, some jerk keeps posting "read the rules!" in bright red letters (what ever happened to "Please" ??).
I wonder if it ever occurred to the cretins that repeating a snarky command to "read the rules" is pretty ignorant, especially when we consider that the wording of ANY list of rules and/or regulations is subject to the interpretation of the ruler AND the ruled. Any required EXPLANATIONS are the responsibility of the RULE MAKER !!
Perhaps someone doesn't understand just how really, really stupid it is to repeat "read the rules" over and over without explaining which of the "rules" was "violated", and in what manner --
Picture this:
A Highway Patrolman pulls you over while you're on your way to work -- you have NO IDEA what you've done wrong, but you get a ticket, anyways. When asked, the Officer snaps back "read the rules!" as he takes off to harrass the next un-suspecting S.O.B.
Get it !!??? I sure hope so.
Could it be that the Big Boss here won't let us post our scores/ratings from other sites due to fear that we might notice the glaring differences in connection speeds between this site and others -- and go elsewhere !!???
If you're looking for CONSTRUCTIVE criticism , I think you're out of luck -- at least until you dispense some of your own. A red-lettered command to "read the rules!" DOESN'T qualify !!!
Thanks for reading.

I forgot to read the RULES and a Moderator edited my post!

well if you read the rules it will be obvious which one was you were in violation of...if the problem was you couldn't find them...you'll notice that your last post in this topic contains a link for you...

as for competing sites...only one will get you the "read the rules" message that you've received and only because they send people over here to advertise their inflated test scores, oh so mesmerizing to some...if you like those numbers then that's where you should test...if you aren't afraid of the truth then test here and post it up

we usually try not to shame our members by assuming they can't read through a whole list of simple rules...so we just say...read the rules...simple enough...if your sig was removed then...well... fill in the blanks