CA3LE

Hey Buntz.. give the Cali Mirror a try Here's mine I just ran :::.. testmy.net test results ..::: Download Connection is:: 29131 Kbps about 29.13 Mbps (tested with 25600 kB) Download Speed is:: 3556 kB/s or 3.6 MB/s Upload Connection is:: 11024 Kbps about 11 Mbps (tested with 17950 kB) Upload Speed is:: 1346 kB/s or 1.3 MB/s Tested From:: https://testmy.net (Dallas, TX USA) Test Time:: 2010-09-28 16:44:18 GMT D-Validation Link:: https://testmy.net/db/KG31YA62V U-Validation Link:: https://testmy.net/db/2HPDX8KSO User Agent:: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; U; Intel Mac OS X 10.6; en-US; rv:1.9.2.10) Gecko/20100914 Firefox/3.6.10 [!]

That just meant that your connection wasn't fast enough to be forwarded to what I had setup. But I just added a 15MB test in there to bridge that gap. You'll still hit a few, but they will jump up faster now. Like for me, it goes 96, 512, 4MB then now jumps to 25MB... and depending on how that test goes sometimes it will jump for me to 50MB. Tests selected under 6MB download and 1.5MB upload require autoforwarding for the exact reason that dlewis23 stated.

Good idea... I may have to work that in

Are you experiencing slow speeds all over the internet? Is your router a router/modem combo? There are so many things that could be the issue. But we'll try to help you narrow it down. I also recommend posting something in the help section >> https://testmy.net/ipb/forum/7-general-help/ -- sounds like you may have a more serious issue and that's not what this thread is about.

Please let me know (in this thread) if you experience any problems with the forwarding of the tests. Sorry if anyone experienced any issues while I was working. They should be resolved. I've hit it with a bunch of scenarios and seems to check out on my end. The tests now forward more intelligently. If you have a super fast connection the SmarTest feature will save you more time than it used to by skipping over what the program believes to be unnecessary sizes for your assumed connection type. The tests now offer even larger files sizes. Added an aprox. 18MB Upload Test. And opened up forwarding for the download tests up to 200MB. If your connection requires files this large to get more accurate results the system will make sure that you get them. I also finally figured out the bug that was causing errors with the larger upload tests in Andriod. Still working on the bug with Andriod upload test on WiFi. It works perfectly fine on 3G but it seems that there may be browser limitations on WiFi... and if you have an insane connection it wigs out. I have looked deep into the problem, hopefully with the Android 2.2 update the problem will go away. Verizon promised me it was going to be out along time ago... still haven't seen my update. Damn liar salesmen! I haven't been posting change logs on most of the stuff I've been doing lately. I figure that you guys have eyeballs. But this needed to be posted to let you all know that there is a possibility of anomalies with this type of change. Just let me know if you see anything weird in this thread and I'll look into it. - CA3LE

Re-test guys... I had a misconfiguration. Thanks fro helping me dial in this new server by the way.

I have to guess now.... Fairmont? Does everyone in Minnesota have lake front property? I flew through there once and it tripped me out. Here in AZ you get shot if you water your lawn on the wrong day. Give us some of your water!

Thank you

It's not my server dude... I very closely monitor my server performance. Here's a test I literally just took. :::.. Download Stats ..::: Download Connection is:: 35353 Kbps about 35.4 Mbps (tested with 51195 kB) Download Speed is:: 4316 kB/s or 4.3 MB/s Tested From:: https://testmy.net/ (Dallas, TX USA) Test Time:: 2010-09-27 04:19:48 GMT Bottom Line:: 617X faster than 56K 1MB Download in 0.24 sec Tested from a 51195 kB file and took 11.863 seconds to complete Download Diagnosis:: Running at 1099% of hosts average (Qwest.net) D-Validation Link:: https://testmy.net/db/HW57BLCDM User Agent:: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; U; Intel Mac OS X 10.6; en-US; rv:1.9.2.10) Gecko/20100914 Firefox/3.6.10 [!] There wasn't even a single transmit pause during the test. On my end. Paste up a traceroute.

Generally you can look at the series number (36xx) and go from that manual. Manual for Canon Pixima iP3600 should very closely resemble the Canon Pixima iP3680 (if not be exactly the same) ... sometimes (and I'm not positive in this case) manufactures give special model numbers to certain vendors ... for instance, Walmart may have iP3680 and Target will have iP3670. It's entirely possible that this is why it's been so elusive. Here ya go dude... I'm pretty sure this is what you were looking for. iP3600_(Getting-Started)_EN-US_V1.pdf Drivers can also be found at http://www.usa.canon.com/cusa/support/consumer/printers_multifunction/pixma_ip_series/pixma_ip3600#DriversAndSoftware Can you remember where you bought it? I'm curious if I'm right, let me know if that works out for you.

That's not an easy one to find. But generally you can look at the series number (19x) and go from that manual. Manual for Canon Pixima MP190 should very closely resemble the Canon MP198 (if not be exactly the same) ... sometimes (and I'm not positive in this case) manufactures give special model numbers to certain vendors ... for instance, Walmart may have MP198 and Target will have MP197. It's entirely possible that this is why it's been so elusive. Here ya go buddy... MP190_(Easy-Setup-Instructions)_EN-US_V1.pdf MP190_(Users-Guide)_EN-US_V1.pdf MP190.pdf Drivers can also be found at http://www.usa.canon.com/cusa/support/consumer/printers_multifunction/pixma_mp_series/pixma_mp180#DriversAndSoftware Can you remember where you bought it? I'm curious if I'm right, let me know if that works out for you.

Read this >> about Satellite

I loved Hogan's Heros... hilarious.

I've heard allot of people complain about Wildblue and Direcway. Satellite really isn't the best way to serve an internet connection. The problem is when you factor the distances involved that the data has to travel to get to you. I believe that their satellites are in a geosynchronous orbit or geostationary orbit... so that information travels 22,300 (to 22,500) miles to get to you... then factor in that there is a round-trip for uploading data. Now the Earth's circumference is about 24902 miles... so your information basically has to go around the earth! Your information travels at 186,000 miles per second (the speed of light)... that's fast, but it does add a significant delay to the transaction when you factor in the sheer distances involved. So.... let's see here... 186,000 miles per second is 670616629 mph I think the right math is (((670616629 / 22300) / 60) / 60 )) = 8.35 seconds ... damn, is that really correct?! Start over... time = distance/rate (36210240 meters / (3.00E8) meters/sec) = 0.1207008 seconds OKAY, I'm absolutely positive about that. I didn't graduate highschool, but I am insane... Anyways, adding 121ms each direction, effectively 240ms... and that's given 100% perfect conditions (which never happens)... also, before it gets to the satellite it has to go through your provider first... that's even more distance traveled (can be over 10,000 more miles depending where the server is). ... it's totally not the right way to serve that kind of communication (IMO). But then again, most people that have satellite don't have any other better choices... sorry dude. You have to at least admit that it is better than dial-up I have heard of many people getting more out of their satellite connections... search around the site. I hope you find what you need. And if you do figure out a solution please post it here (even if it's already been posted, little differences in your scenario may help people find the information easier when they search), other people who are in your shoes in the future will appreciate it. Good luck. - CA3LE

Webuser... don't be afraid to post your compID. It reveils nothing personal about your computer Oh and those numbers where your hostname should be... just means that I had a hard time detecting your host... working to resolve that, it's not always as easy as it seems.

interesting...

Well thanks zeddlar... very kind words Yum, yum yum Thanks to you also... I missed this when you posted it

Still recovering from a crash of the forum structure... it's been a big rebuild. There is still heavy traffic to the site but most of it is on the testing side. It takes time to rebuild after such a major incident. But I believe that everything happens for a reason. The forums here are now built on a much stronger structure. Also, social networking sites have killed forums around the entire internet. But, I'm hoping with the deeper integrations that we now have with such sites more people will start using the forums again. Times change... the internet changes. And with me being the only programmer for the site it can take time to adjust to those changes. It's literally taken me a year to get this new forum tuned in... to completely convert over such a major building block of the site was no easy task. Plus, I had to learn a completely different system. I knew SMF like the back of my hand, deep into it's programming core. But IPB is a completely different beast but I'm now very comfortable with it, I can't wait till more of our users are too.... it's a thousand times better. On top of all that... I'm rebuilding the other side of the site as well. I've been working 12-16 hour days and nearly 7 days a week. Seriously. Thank you for your continued patronage... start some threads -- many people are just being shy... I can see them reading stuff though. - CA3LE P.S. When that happened I could have easily reverted to a backup... but I got so frustrated I said, "SCREW IT!" -- SMF had let me down in the past... hackers messed with it more than a few times and I figured it was time to rebuild anyways. It more than served its purpose for the site but it got to a point where it was holding me back. I have some unorthodox approaches sometimes but hey... if I did things like everyone else then this site wouldn't be unique now would it.

Because of the unique methods that testmy.net employs benchmarking of browsers is possible. This is not the case with most other speed testing sites. Flash and java based speed tests have it all wrong IMO. Here are download tests that were taken moments apart and you can see the difference of how each specific browser has handled the test. There are many contributing factors that lead to the discrepancy. But, what this shows you is that testing here can really lead you to the fastest browsing solution. Safari :::.. Download Stats ..::: Download Connection is:: 34975 Kbps about 35 Mbps (tested with 51195 kB) Download Speed is:: 4269 kB/s or 4.3 MB/s Tested From:: https://testmy.net/ (Dallas, TX USA) Test Time:: 2010-09-25 16:52:48 GMT Bottom Line:: 610X faster than 56K 1MB Download in 0.24 sec Tested from a 51195 kB file and took 11.991 seconds to complete Download Diagnosis:: Running at 1090% of hosts average (Qwest.net) D-Validation Link:: https://testmy.net/db/VRGT619Z7 User Agent:: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; U; Intel Mac OS X 10_6_4; en-us) AppleWebKit/533.17.8 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/5.0.1 Safari/533.17.8 [!] Firefox :::.. Download Stats ..::: Download Connection is:: 33002 Kbps about 33 Mbps (tested with 51195 kB) Download Speed is:: 4029 kB/s or 4 MB/s Tested From:: https://testmy.net/ (Dallas, TX USA) Test Time:: 2010-09-25 16:51:53 GMT Bottom Line:: 576X faster than 56K 1MB Download in 0.25 sec Tested from a 51195 kB file and took 12.708 seconds to complete Download Diagnosis:: Running at 1029% of hosts average (Qwest.net) D-Validation Link:: https://testmy.net/db/R90W3FBA2 User Agent:: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; U; Intel Mac OS X 10.6; en-US; rv:1.9.2. Gecko/20100722 Firefox/3.6.8 [!] Chrome :::.. Download Stats ..::: Download Connection is:: 29011 Kbps about 29 Mbps (tested with 51195 kB) Download Speed is:: 3541 kB/s or 3.5 MB/s Tested From:: https://testmy.net/ (Dallas, TX USA) Test Time:: 2010-09-25 16:52:22 GMT Bottom Line:: 506X faster than 56K 1MB Download in 0.29 sec Tested from a 51195 kB file and took 14.456 seconds to complete Download Diagnosis:: Running at 904% of hosts average (Qwest.net) D-Validation Link:: https://testmy.net/db/9GSZXOI0U User Agent:: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; U; Intel Mac OS X 10_6_4; en-US) AppleWebKit/534.3 (KHTML, like Gecko) Chrome/6.0.472.63 Safari/534.3 [!] These were all tested on my girlfriends Macbook (it's like a 2006 model and it performs that well) Normally Chrome performs better for me... but recently there has been bobbles... may need a fresh install Post your browser comparisons here

First, give this test a try >> https://testmy.net/california-speed-test.php (do like a 25 or 50 MB test) [it's a mirror in California]... this will make sure that you're not just getting a bad route to the main server. Also, where are you located? And after you upgraded your package... did you reset your modem. You may still have your old config in your modem if you haven't taken that major step If you are still getting similar results you may want to start a thread in the 'Make it Faster' section >> https://testmy.net/ipb/forum/8-make-it-faster/ --- this isn't really a troubleshooting thread, more of a sharing thread.

:::.. Download Stats ..::: Download Connection is:: 36273 Kbps about 36.3 Mbps (tested with 204805 kB) Download Speed is:: 4428 kB/s or 4.4 MB/s Tested From:: https://testmy.net/ (Dallas, TX USA) Test Time:: 2010-09-24 20:15:13 GMT Bottom Line:: 633X faster than 56K 1MB Download in 0.23 sec Tested from a 204805 kB file and took 46.254 seconds to complete Download Diagnosis:: Running at 1132% of hosts average (Qwest.net) D-Validation Link:: https://testmy.net/db/WFX3100RS User Agent:: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; U; Intel Mac OS X 10.6; en-US; rv:1.9.2.10) Gecko/20100914 Firefox/3.6.10 [!]

I mostly use Verbatim or Ridata. Out of the last 300-400 CD's and DVD's I've burnt with them I've only had ONE coaster. (coaster is a term for a bad burn for anyone that doesn't know... basically means that it's only good for putting your drink on at that point) Back in the day coasters were so common that my friend Jay wallpapered his entire bedroom in bad burns and still had hundreds extra... haha. Imagine an entire room covered in CDs, it was cool and tacky at the same time.

Hey Naru... can you do me a favor and re-test for me and post your results. (last post deleted... posted under my test account on accident) .. oh, and also try the new California mirror >> https://testmy.net/california-speed-test.php

So if you try with a different brand of DVD it works?

moved to guides