CA3LE

What about this one... Do you think it cached... or was it just a quick burst?

Congrats on the baby bro!

The stats you see for wildblue here are for wildblue as a whole. ... I really would have to be on wildblue's payroll to be able to detect that. But that would be cool, if I could do that I'd for sure make sure that my users would know Sorry about your isp troubles, sharing information like this with our community may help someone else make a more informed decision. I'm sure that future visitors to this post will appreciate it.

Unfortunately all I hear is bad stuff about wildblue... but that's the case with all satellite and wireless providers. I think it's about time for some new technology for attaining high speed in rural locations.

Sorry about that... that's not supposed to come up... I just uncommented (it's a programming term) a line about an hour ago on accident. ... I've fixed the issue, you're all set - CA3LE

Here's the frequencies.. 2.4GHz b/g/n 5GHz a/n

... and back to normal :::.. CA3LE's Download Test Results ..::: Download Connection is:: 55451 Kbps about 55.5 Mbps (tested with 50 MB) Download Speed is:: 6931 kB/s or 6.9 MB/s Tested From:: https://testmy.net/ (Dallas, TX USA) Validation Link:: https://testmy.net/db/L7GZ63NVY Test Time:: 2011-01-31 00:53:09 GMT -7 1MB Download in 0.15 Seconds - 1GB Download in ~3 Minutes - 967X faster than 56K Tested from a 50 MB file and took 7.564 seconds to complete Running at 433% of hosts average (Cox.net) User Agent:: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; U; Intel Mac OS X 10.6; en-US; rv:1.9.2.13) Gecko/20101203 Firefox/3.6.13 [!] :::.. CA3LE's Upload Test Results ..::: Upload Connection is:: 5196 Kbps about 5.2 Mbps (tested with 17.5 MB) Upload Speed is:: 650 kB/s Tested From:: https://testmy.net/ (Dallas, TX USA) Validation Link:: https://testmy.net/db/D465B8UAT Test Time:: 2011-01-31 00:54:32 GMT -7 1MB Upload in 1.58 Seconds - 1GB Upload in ~27 Minutes - 91X faster than 56K Tested from a 18 MB file and took 28.301 seconds to complete Running at 195% of hosts average (Cox.net) User Agent:: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; U; Intel Mac OS X 10_6_6; en-US) AppleWebKit/534.10 (KHTML, like Gecko) Chrome/8.0.552.237 Safari/534.10 [!]

<a href="http://www.giganews.com/?a=testmy" rel="nofollow"><img align="right" src="http://www.giganews.com/banners/testmy/300x250a.jpg" alt="Giganews Newsgroups"></a> Not like it's just the route to TestMy.net either because this is a download off Usenet... 20 threads. (using giganews) --- I have to open 50 threads before can get my connection going to speed.... + ... not normal.

I sure have Only for very short periods and during peak hours. And only for the past few days. Cox is very good about correcting routing issues like that though, it should be worked out soon. ... Also had my service go out for 10 minutes late at night twice in the past week. ... Oh and that timed out hop in your traceroute is normal on my end. As long as the subsequent hops don't time out that's normal. The problem is most likely congestion on one of their trunks they route through. Not all Cox users are having a problem, your in Phoenix, right? Couple examples others got at around the same time as our tests.

Welcome to the site!

The device is told in multiple ways to not cache any information from the test but I can't really guarantee that's always the case. Sometimes it can depend on your setup. Certain software can force the browser to ignore what I tell it to do from my end. But, for most people, nearly everyone... no, you are not cluttering your computer what-so-ever when you test here. Only cookies, CSS and images should remain in your cache... just like any other website you visit. Good Question... Happy Testing! - CA3LE

That's actually based on everyones score in the past 30 minutes. On the test results pages there are little 'info' bubbles now that you can mouse over that explain each section of your results.

Cable providers usually perform best with an MTU of 1500 -- PPPoE providers usually perform better a little lower MTU. I also recommend trying the TCP Optimizer from SpeedGuide.net

Currently you can't change that. BUT, I should have that fixed very soon. So, for now, make the change in your settings and as soon as that's fixed you'll start seeing the corrected time. Thanks for your patronage. - CA3LE

Last night I put together a program that displays updated information about your tests taken here. First, an image that's drawn on the fly that displays your most recent test results. ... And another image, also drawn on the fly that displays your 30 day test average. To use these images simply go to 'Your Stats' and copy the address below the image of your choice. Use these URLs as you would with any image on the internet... the only difference is that the information shown in the image is updated every time the image is requested. This is a useful addition to use for signatures, websites and blogs Enjoy! - CA3LE

Hi Martha, sorry you haven't got a reply on this yet. To be honest with you I don't have first hand experience improving wireless internet speed. Hopefully someone that has more experience with WiMAX reads this thread and provide some insite. Just wanted to let you know that your post isn't being ignored... we're just waiting for someone to respond to this thread that that knows more about residential wireless than I do. What's your quoted speed by the way? Your ISP must be leasing a connection from Qwest.net... because my site is detecting your ISP as Qwest.net meaning that the hostname attached to your IP address originates from Qwest... They must be a fairly small provider, no?

Do you have any acceleration software? Anything that may cause caching?

Damn, you're definitely insanely fast. You should give the 200MB test a try -- I'm curious what you'd get. Here's what I just got... ...I'm on Cox.net though so it's irrelevant to this post

Actually, you're not in bad shape in my opinion. If your package is 256 Kbps and you're getting 229 Kbps you're only off by 27 Kbps or 3.3 kB/sec. You're also in Lithuania, dropping only 27 Kbps over that distance isn't bad. Now you said... That number 30 is kB/sec NOT Kbps. The difference is in bits vs bytes, and it's a big difference... and it confuses allot of people. ... Hopefully I can explain this without losing you. A bit is the smallest amount of information that a computer can store or manipulate. The word kilo means 1000. So if you put those together you have, kilobit or "One Thousand Bits". Metric meaning for Mega is 1,000,000 and Giga is 1,000,000,000. So when you hear, "1 Megabit" it means "One Million Bits" ... "1 Gigabit" means "One Billion Bits" -- the "s" in bps, Kbps, Mbps and Gbps stand for "per second". Now, bytes are a collection or bunch of bits. An octet or 8 bits to each byte. Bytes are usually used to express binary transfer rates. Now, there are 1024 bytes to 1 Kilbyte so the real conversion is (bits * 8.192). The reason we show our results in bits AND bytes is simply because different people want their information given to them differently... Some people use this site to see if they get what their ISP says they're supposed to.... and they usually like it shown in bits. Then, others use the site to calculate their maximum transfer rates (like for bit torrent)... and hence, they like the information displayed in the bytes system. So, when talking about the connection speed of a line... use bits or bps, Kilobits or Kbps, Megabits or Mbps and Gigabits Gbps When talking about the speed of a file transfer use bytes or B/s, Kilobytes or kB/s (the lowercase k is really just a personal preference of mine, KB/s is fine too), Megabytes or MB/s and Gigabytes or GB/s

Fixed! Thanks for pointing that out.

Actually, you did find a bug. Those are supposed to say 97kB. I've resolved this issue. As for the SmarTest deal... there's nothing inaccurate about your results. It's stopping at 97kB because it's taking over 5 seconds. Satellite connections often take time to build up to their max speed... However, I did make some changes that should resolve that issue with SmarTest and satellite connections, by starting with a larger initial test size of 386kB (up) 512kB (down)... Let me know how it works for you. Thank you for your patronage, - CA3LE

First, thank you for the kind words. Second, thank you for reporting this issue. I was easily able to see exactly what you're talking about and have resolved the problem. Although, you may have to refresh or clear your browser cache to see the changes... Here's what the print out looks like... CA3LE\'s Speed Test Stats.pdf - Thanks Again, - CA3LE

I mean that they are routing too much traffic through that router. It's possible that they haven't even noticed... it's also possible that they are working on a solution right now. I would contact them and show them that traceroute. Article on The Internet's Growing Pains, dated Jan '08 but still relevant today.

Ultimate Tier!

No problem... Hop 4 in the route TestMy.net looks congested to me. There is no reason why a bounce that close to you should have a 200+ ms response time. That is a router that Insight directly controls. (by the way... ignore hop 12 on my end, it's supposed to time out) The trace to Google however looks good, but that's because traffic to Google is being routed through a different router. ... Looks to me like Insight is pushing too much through that router. - CA3LE