CA3LE

Yes, I do make money from Google... though it would be a breach of my agreement with Google to go into details. I pay for the current server, with proceeds from advertising. So in essence, those who support my advertising are paying for the hosting

394 KB/s * 2.6 = 1024.4 --- 1024.4/1024 = aprox 1MB

.s1 -- if you notice, he said he gets those pauses everywhere... not just TestMy.net

I just loaded this in IE.. and showed up just fine on my end.

Yea.. I don't know why it's not working.. I did notice that right after I posted (hence the post of mine that simply says "glow") lemme look into this.. thanks

How would that benefit unless you are running a server?

[glow=red,2,300]glow[/glow]

Only works in IE.. you must be using Mozilla.

nice... I wish I had as much bandwidth at home to deal with as you...

Are you serious?

Just wanted to share this... may help someone out there searching for this As for your site, the way now-a-days to get better engine rankings is to have people link to you and to have lots of content. The reason my ranking with Google for instance keeps growing is because lots of people link to me, lots of websites mention my sites name and I have tens-of-thousands of pages with-in my site. The more content you have the better your site will rank, with most of the good search engines anyway. First, ADD MORE CONTENT. The more content you have the more keywords you have, the more keywords you have the more chances you have for people to find your site. On the same note, the more content a search engine has to spider the higher that search engine will rank you. How the search engine figures it is "If this site has this many pages, this site MUST be a serious site with LOTS of good information." Second, list your site with Yahoo, this is tricky because yahoo is VERY picky. Before submitting a site to Yahoo you want to make sure the site doesn't;t have any dead link and that it looks GREAT. The more unique content the better. Submit at http://search.yahoo.com/info/submit.html --- My site opened in 1999 (under a different name though) it took me until 2001 to get listed on Yahoo. You may have to submit more than once. Some people will pay for a listing on Yahoo... but that still doesn't guarantee listing, it only makes them look at your site faster. More info here >> http://docs.yahoo.com/info/suggest/ Third, add your site to ODP, or Open Directory Project or DMOZ.org. They are almost as hard to get listed on as Yahoo. But once your listed on ODP your URL will be shared with hundreds of websites that use ODP data. Like myself, I run a little known about ODP search engine.at https://testmy.net/dir/ -- if you would like to submit your site to ODP go to http://dmoz.org/add.html Fourth, find other sites in the same genre as your and email the site owners for reciprocal links. First post their link on your site (in a links section) and email them, let them know you have linked to them and ask if they would do the same. You should get about 1 reciprocal link per 3-4 tries... the more links to you the higher your ranking. How the search engines think about it is... "If other people are linking to this site, the site MUST contain good information" One thing to keep in mind is that a lot of search engines on the net are actually HUMAN edited sites. Meaning your first listing is going to be reviewed by an actual person. Do like you would for a job interview... dress your best, have good grammar and act like you REALLY want the job. Here is a list of search engines... some you can submit to. Don't bother with any submission services you may see, a lot of search engines that allow submissions will kick those submissions out. You need to do them ONE-by-ONE http://www.altavista.com/ submit to >> http://www.altavista.com/addurl/default http://www.freefind.com/ (I don't know about this one) http://www.mamma.com (pay-per-click I think) http://search.msn.com (spider built) http://www.google.com (spider built)) http://www.allintheweb.com submit to >> http://www.alltheweb.com/help/webmaster/submit_site http://www.looksmart.com (built on ODP data) http://www.yahoo.com (half built on ODP data, other half is built on Google data) http://www.google.com (partially built on ODP data) http://www.go.com (built on Google data) http://www.aol.com (built on Google data) Some other lesser known, that you can list on to get some more links out there... you most likely won't get ANY hits off these links but you will raise your rank with some of the better known engines. http://www.ottawastart.com/suggest.shtml http://www.tenlinks.com/ABOUT/suggest.htm http://www.entwagon.com/celeb/suggest.html http://www.unixguide.net/addurl.shtml http://www.stamp2.com/suggestsite.asp http://www.canadiancontent.net/corp/suggest.html http://www.ohiobiz.com/listings.htm If you want to find more of these.. use this search.. thousands more to find http://www.google.com/search?q=%22suggest+a+site%22&btnG=Search&hl=en&lr=&safe=off This should be enough info to get you going. Enjoy!

that's how I spelt it --- in fact that's how you spelt it the first time.

Nice that program is just what I need to test my sites accuracy. I installed that and limited it to see what slower connections show... every time. right on the money for instnace... 56K fakie :::.. Download Stats ..::: Connection is:: 56 Kbps about 0.1 Mbps (tested with 97 KB) Download Speed is:: 7 KB/s Tested From:: http://www.testmy.net/ Test Time:: Wed Feb 02 2005 21:33:29 GMT-0700 (US Mountain Standard Time) Bottom Line:: 1X faster than 56K 1MB download in 146.29 sec Validation Link:: https://testmy.net/id-MRV02KG8Z upload test to mimic the upload of 56K @ only 5 KB/s :::.. Upload Stats ..::: Connection is:: 40 Kbps about 0 Mbps (tested with 97 KB) Upload Speed is:: 5 KB/s Tested From:: http://www.testmy.net/ Test Time:: Wed Feb 02 2005 21:40:54 GMT-0700 (US Mountain Standard Time) Bottom Line:: 1X faster than 56K 1MB upload in 204.8 sec Validation Link:: https://testmy.net/id-QXARFVKO9 I also did 128K 256K 512K 768K 1024K 2048K 3000K 4000K and 5000K -- the higher ones started to be off by a little bit, but is was because the speed was higher and there is more things to consider... nice tool, helps me out alot. Basically lets me know what my site is going to look and behave like to someone on a connection that is slower than my own, hard thing to do when you have a 5Mbps+ line.

ehhh. screw it, I don't feel like making it a huge deal.. I lifted the restriction.

Welcome Almost... don't worry, most of us take pride in being geeks. Calling us geeks actually strokes our egos.

I am almost there Adam

Some of you may have noticed the increase in activity on this site in the past 30-45 days... lots more people. That's because there has been about a 40% increase in traffic. This has not yet become a problem... but bandwidth is getting up there. I figured I would work on this soon to be problem before it became a problem. I have made some adjustments to the SmarTest forwarding. Main thing you all will notice is the start size is down to 97KB - This, I have found, is a good start size for the test to determine what file size to send you. Doing this will also relieve a little bit of traffic from the server. The forwarding has also been tweaked a little to try and save bandwidth... not by serving you smaller files necessarily, but by sending you the right file the first time, if you have a fast line you most likely know what I'm talking about... for instance ||| you click SmarTest it starts > 386KB > 2992KB > 5983KB > Results (9361KB to do a 5983KB test!??!!) sometimes even ||| you click SmarTest it starts > 386KB > 1496KB > 2992KB > 5983KB > Results (9361KB to do a 5983KB test!??!!) instead of doing all that to get to the end result of sending you 5983 KB test file... it will now (more of the time) do something like this ||| you click SmarTest it starts > 97KB > 5983KB > Results (6080KB to do a 5983KB test... more like it) In that scenario this would save 3.2MB that saves a lot of bandwidth when you take into consideration the amount of people who frequent this site.. Also, the 12160KB (12 MB) test that was becoming a novelty has been slightly restricted. You can't go directly to the test without the results page suggesting that you use that test. You can still use that test... but you will need to score 9000Kbps in order to use it. Just about everyone can agree that a line slower than that really doesn't need all that test... 6MB is quite big also. I am not in anyway restricting the amount of tests you can perform, I am not restricting the type of tests you can perform. I am simply trimming waste.

Cool I will add those.

that's where it's going to stay... sorry about that everyone. For some reason the time re-set a few times... it should be cool now.

Thanks Micro... got to it before me

Naw... that's a charactor from In Living Color.. that shit is funny -- ya never seen that?

Oh yea