CA3LE

Note: Ideally you'll have a 0% ... meaning that your connection ran a flat line with little to no difference between readings. My office connection is usually 0-10%. TestMy.net Test ID : dJA5couwB Here's an example of a faster connection performing worse for its variance. TestMy.net Test ID : eJKLcTXG5 Personally, I prefer a connection that is stable and consistent over one that's faster and fluctuates.

Welcome to testmy.net. Very smart question. Hey, maybe it's not the right way, I'm always open to suggestions... I often put them in practice if they make sense. It's what builds testmy.net. TiP Summary - Minimum :: 1.19 Mbps | Middle :: 3 Mbps | Maximum :: 12.6 Mbps round((12.6 - 1.19)/((12.6 + 1.19)/2)*100) 11.41/6.895*100 = 165% Calculating the difference of the min and max then dividing by the average of the min and max then put into a percentage. This isn't showing you how much your speed fluctuated just between the minimum and maximum... it's accounting for the average over the entire result. So on average your speed fluctuated by 165%. Hope this helps. Do you agree with the logic? Do you think it makes sense to do it that way?

Great article on Motherboard. .. https://motherboard.vice.com/en_us/article/d3ewvq/study-shows-how-badly-most-of-the-country-is-getting-ripped-off-by-their-isps How much do you pay and what are your speeds?

An update on this

function Salt(){ $replace = array("=" => "_","+" => "~", "/" => "-"); $possible = str_shuffle(base64_encode(hex2bin(RandomToken(100)))); return substr(strtr($possible, $replace), 0, 9); } improved.

This was happening far too frequently. There are many millions of results in the database but not nearly enough to account for the frequency this was happening. Even if there were 10,000X as many results in the database, I wouldn't expect to see this. Upon a closer look I realized that the way I was generating test ID's can give bias to certain characters. It's only pseudo random. The naive approach $password = ""; $possible = "~-_0123456789ABCDEFGHIJKLMNOPQRSTUVWXYZabcdefghijklmnopqrstuvwxyz"; $possible = str_shuffle($possible); $i = 0; while ($i < 9) { $char = substr($possible, mt_rand(0, strlen($possible)-1), 1); if (!strstr($password, $char)) { $password .= $char; $i++; } This uses a random integer to select from a set of N elements. Unless the number of possible random integers is a multiple of N, some characters will have a higher chance of being picked than others. Using newer php functions I'm generating it this way now. function RandomToken($length = 9){ if(!isset($length) || intval($length) <= 8 ){ $length = 9; } if (function_exists('random_bytes')) { return bin2hex(random_bytes($length)); } if (function_exists('mcrypt_create_iv')) { return bin2hex(mcrypt_create_iv($length, MCRYPT_DEV_URANDOM)); } if (function_exists('openssl_random_pseudo_bytes')) { return bin2hex(openssl_random_pseudo_bytes($length)); } } function Salt(){ $replace = array("+" => "~", "/" => "-"); return substr(strtr(base64_encode(hex2bin(RandomToken(9))), $replace), 0, 9); } $password = Salt(); Still room for improvement. I think I might make the string initially larger and then scramble the base64 string before it gets clipped... I think that will improve it even more. Or maybe I find a better way. I feel there will be less of a chance of even being assigned an already logged testID. And if it does happen, as I previously mentioned you'll be assigned a different ID.

Thank you for the heads up. This is most likely related to the following topic and should no longer be an issue... I'm working on logging when there are connection issues detected during the test in a future version.

If you've seen intermittent test results missing it was most likely an issue with logging on TMN's end. A few members have reported this and I've seen it happen on my end. What was happening? There are so many results logged in the database that test ID's were being assigned that were already logged. In that case TMN won't overwrite the previous result... it just won't log a result. You'd still see your results but they wouldn't be recorded. TMN results will now check the test ID to make sure it hasn't been used before attempting to log the result. It repeats this (a limited number of attempts) until it finds a testID that hasn't been used. The likelihood that it won't find an ID after those attempts is extremely low. But if you ever see it happen again let me know and I can adjust it.

I'll work on a page that cites examples for you. They're here, just not compiled nicely for you. I just go off of what many people tell me. There are hundreds of stories (just that I've heard) of people who test perfectly fine using other speed tests and testmy.net reports the correct... much lower number. They email me, often by starting out BLAMING testmy.net. I tell them to trust the results and they usually email me back later, "testmy.net was right." I get blamed whenever someone is slow. The other speed tests misrepresent the numbers so people think I'M the one who's wrong because I'm the outlier. Just because the majority comes to the same answer doesn't mean they do it right. --- testmy.net is often an outlier because it's a real test. And instead of focusing on what they're not doing right... how about we all just use TestMy.net and call it a day?!?! ? I just posted one from the other day to a topic with some other examples I've shared in the past. There are some in other topics in the FAQ / Ask TMN forum When you're having issues and REALLY need testmy.net... that's when it works best and shows how it's truly proprietary. Why anyone uses anything other than TMN with evidence that the others fail when needed the most... makes no sense. Fact is, people just don't know. I try not to be all in your face with the ads. Large portions of the site are purposely ad free (like the forum) and I'm also showing no ads to mobile users.

Is your speedtest working? Hi John, I'm testing normally... everything looks good on my end. When there are issues... my email lights up with user and server generated emails. Looking at https://testmy.net/live and filtering only the server you're using (GB) and I see many people recently posting faster speed. You could have specific routing issues. Also, some issues are more apparent in TestMy.net's results versus other speed tests out there. The most popular speed tests out there aren't giving you a full picture. They combine threads and ignore parts of the result. They are made to benefit the ISP. You can try https://testmy.net/mirror to try other servers or https://testmy.net/multithread to multithread the test. I would also try a different browser. Looks like you used Chrome 67 last, I love Chrome (and that's almost the latest version) but you could still have a problem with it. Try testing with Firefox and see if there's any difference. If there is a big difference, I would go into Chrome settings and reset the browser to default. I've seen bad cable modems show degraded speed on TestMy.net and show normal full speed on other speed tests. This is a very old topic but it's still true today. Same story, different day. Trust the results. My test and servers are the same as always. - Damon - TestMy.net Hi John, Make sure you spread the word. You saw TestMy.net totally in action. Most people have no idea that there is such a difference in internet speed tests. Heck, I had to be told at first by my users because I don't look at what the other speed tests are doing. I don't fully understand all the reasons why TMN seems to detect issues when others tests don't. It just does. In my opinion, after witnessing what you did... it's a wonder why more people don't use TestMy.net. But they don't. I'm coming out with a new version very soon. I've been in private beta testing for a while and will be releasing it to a wider audience. If you'd like to test it early go to the topic below and vote yes... The topic is from the previous beta, those members carry over to the new beta when it's announced. Probably in the next two weeks. As I said, trust the results. - Damon

...not sure, never been there before. ? Hi DJ, Welcome to testmy.net! Yes, that's all still accurate. Millions of people still regularly use TMN, only a small percentage are members. An even smaller percentage of members actually use the forums here. Before facebook, these forums were much more popular. To legitimize any of my statements all you have to do is search the internet. I feel that other people have scrutinized and legitimized what I'm doing over the years, my methodology and core principals never change. Many have put TMN under a microscope. In my development I put it under a microscope too. Maybe I should post more of those findings but if I focused my time on that... it would have to come from somewhere. I think it's better left said by other people. Funding comes from generous support from viewers like you... just kidding, PBS quote. I have ads. Maybe one day I won't have to. TestMy.net has always been developed and maintained by one person.

Sorry for taking a long time to reply. I read your message and wanted to look at your results closer when I was at my main computer. A new topic reminded me that I hadn't responded. Same thing, it's possible that your tests are running but the results can't be logged because the ID is already taken in the database. I'll fix this and also provide a way to show you when your connection really does go down. Maybe by logging a score of zero. I'll let you know when that's fixed.

It may have run but the testID was already taken. I'll take care of that soon. It's supposed to check the database and assign an ID that hasn't been used. It's happening more often so definitely something I'll address.

I'll keep this in mind when I start on the database searching improvements. Development on that will start shortly after the new beta is released. What I was planning on doing is having it aggregate the user agent information. So it will search through your result details, group the user agents and allow you to do more detailed searches. You'll also be able to select multiple identifiers. So you can select "Android & iOS" for instance or select the inverse to see only desktop and laptop results. If you want to be part of the beta group, vote "Yes" on this topic >> It's an old topic from the last beta of the version you're using today... a fresh beta is coming soon.

Sure, I'll take care of it for you as soon as I'm back on my main machine.

Looks like there was already a result in the database with the same testID. It won't allow an overwrite of the same ID. It's supposed to check for that, I'll look and see why it didn't. Maybe I turned that off at some point and didn't realize... Even with that check disabled it's extremely rare to conflict with other testID's. It's like 36^9 combinations, but I have seen it before and you just confirmed it again. I'll make sure that's not an issue for you in the future. 1.0155996e+14 that's a lot of combinations. 1.3537087e+16 combinations if I switched to cAsE sEnSiTiVe Better go buy a lottery ticket.

Update: The new upcoming version of TestMy.net will not fail on all major updated browsers. I've implemented service worker which enables TestMy.net offline... obviously you won't be able to test in that state but it is helping me to make this correct and more useful for you (and myself). Gives me abilities as a developer that I've never had before. I've run numerous batches of tests, purposely disconnecting the internet. The new version has never failed. It will log those events too, doesn't right now but it will. I like your idea for implementation... It will detect when you're online, wait.. check again to make sure it wasn't just intermittent... then test again when it feels it's able to..... might not be able to complete the entire test still but it will try then possibly fail again and restart the re-try process. I can tell the averaging and database listing programs as a whole to ignore exactly "zero" so it doesn't effect host averages or flood public results... I don't know what would happen other wise so better plan for it. Especially since that's a point for clients to purposely negatively affect hosts numbers. (I always want to limit the input received but users... sorry users. Damn bots and hackers ruined your rep.) ...that idea provides a simple way to implement without having to add databases or change database structure. I like that. --- database structure changes can be an extreme headache, especially since I promised since the beginning that I'd retain all of your old results. I'll keep developing. The update I'm on right now started purely as a design venture, the more major feature rich updates are still planned...but I've been stumbling on so many answers it's become far beyond just what people see at this point. There is still so much planned, I'm only including the features that I feel are ready. ... I'd rather be on this new site (all day long). I make TMN first as something I want to use... but I'm hoping to attract more than people of just own own mindset. Anyone still reading this is probably of that mindset. Most will never get as far as you. I want the other 98% to get it too. Hopefully this gets a little closer. For people who have been long time visitors, keep your old browsers on virtual machines. I need your help testing old browsers but also keep in mind that I'm developing for the future, I'm no longer concerned about lagging browsers or wasting my development time around their inconsistencies. I target technologies native to the most popular browsers across the board. If one browser has janky implementation, I may still release it as long as it's not detrimental to the test results or experience. IMHO, Safari is the new IE right now. Annoying. Chrome, Firefox, Chrome on iOS and Android (period) are the best right now. I expect Safari to catch up, sorry, it's not on the developer when everyone else agrees. By the way, I straight up killed most old browsers when I went full SSL. Full SSL is 100% necessary for the future of what TMN is doing. Sorry old browsers. Trust me, I took a hit with traffic. When I see software changing ads in browser or including ads to pages I don't have ads on... that showed me early why we need SSL (https). With SSL that can only happen if the cypher is cracked. To be honest at first I thought, why would TMN need https? Nobody is buying anything from my site or really sending anything truly secure. Uh, think again. Many people may use the same passwords. Hackers can grab that information as you login at a public wifi and then try the same email address and password on google, facebook, ebay, amazon, etc... till they get a hit. So stupidly easy for hackers. Not only that but third party ads may be doing things you don't want... far outside of the scope of common practice (of which some people already may not already want). And again, a third party program can also edit your webpages and add their own content. Above all, they want to make money, usually ad or code insertion is the intent. With the latest SSL people can't do the same malicious stuff. Not to say it can't be done again, it can always be done again. Nothing made by man can be protected from man. What is created from one man's mind can always be decoded in another's. We just need to evolve with the changes. way off the subject... AI teaching itself to make new cyphers and then keeping the true keys from us, that worries me the more I think about it. An AI or AIs will invent their own language that we can't possibly understand in our lifetimes. It will be so efficient that humans can't understand it because we don't work well enough, lol. Take the highest level of cryptography that you can think of exponentially increase that. And then realize that the program that creates it may be so obscure that it could be hiding information from us, making us feel secure when it really has all the power. I say let us humans keep making mistakes and figuring out each other's mistakes and improving naturally. We as humans should always in great detail fundamentally understand our software and hardware changes... it should never be obscured to the point that no human can understand. I worry that we'll let computers do our programming and designing to the point that we'll have little understanding of what's truly under the hood or how to control it. "let the computer figure out how to do that better, it will make it perfect." -- it's cool until it starts talking in a language you can't decode and decides you're not a part of understanding that language simply because you as a human aren't optimal to the system. To a computer, even our VERY best languages are stupid because they aren't optimal and so that's the first thing to go in my opinion. This has already happened by the way, just not to a serious degree. A real AI will be ahead of our moves before we even start moving. Once you know it's happening, it's too late. I'm have to be high on the AI's list now. (haha) I believe our community here is made up of people who set the standard for their own communities in regards to all things tech. We should set the standard by example. Have your main machines always updated and encourage friends to do the same. Hardware and software. Especially software. And especially right now because there have been so many major updates that EVERY browser is agreeing on. They don't normally agree like this. Over 21 years developing in the browser and I've never seen such wide adoption of so many cool new features. What a great time to develop. Anyone who may be still actually reading this and wants access to the beta, just PM me. If you were a member of any discussion on TMN prior to this post you can have access to the early beta too. A handful of our veteran members have agreed to help me even early to make sure we give you a clean release but there are always more bugs that we need help finding. -- we'll find 'em together ...and make some more in the process! Human's Rule. -D

Update: the upcoming new release has this... I love it! Renders instantly regardless of the test size or connection speed. -- it's actually a combination of the current server-side rendering and client-side rendering. Came together extremely fast once I got on the task actually. I mean... it's totally instant. Also saves everyone time and bandwidth, sweet! ... the upload test will also include progress. Works amazingly too. Such an optimal idea, thank you! PM me if you want beta information.

Welcome to TestMy.net! Just let us know if you have any questions.

What you're looking at on that page https://testmy.net/live is everyone's results as they're testing. Your personal results can be found in the menu under "Results (My Results)" Run a download test - upload test or schedule an automatic speed test to log results.

I was finally able to get it to bug like that. Should be all fixed for you know. Thank you Sean!

[PM'd link to test]

I can't reproduce. Tried multiple browsers. Have you tried clearing cookies? That option will be toggled with javascript in the future.

A couple of tutorials on setting up pfSense on virtualbox and opnsense. Once setup your traffic routes through the virtualbox and you can the sniff out and block offending traffic. Highly effective but it's more advanced. May have a learning curve depending on your background with computers and networking.

That's strange that it mysteriously gets better when the tech is around. So it was right after they left, you tested again and 2.5 Mbps? I see spikes in your latency too. https://testmy.net/rt/Civrel What I would do if the issue is consistent is reset the router, factory defaults with the reset button. If the modem is a separate unit unplug it for 15 seconds. The reason you want factory defaults is because you want to disconnect all the other machines (variables). Then set up your very best computer on the fresh network. Wired if you can. Get back to testing here at TestMy.net and see if you're still having an issue. Maybe do this over night since you'll have to have the other devices down for good results. I see that you've tested overnight before and you were at 2.5 Mbps... Let me know what you see and I'll advise from there. If you're wireless, make sure that you're following best practices by searching good for "wireless feng shui" -- here's a result. https://www.makeuseof.com/tag/wireless-feng-shui-optimize-house-wifi-reception/ If you find that the issue is alleviated then I would add one machine back at a time until you see the drop in speed. That should point you to the computer and then you can dig deeper. You can also put something like a pfSense or OPNsense router on your connection to help track down a computer and even application that may be using too much bandwidth. Maybe you have bit torrent running in the background or something... or maybe your neighbor has broken in and has bit torrent or another bandwidth intensive task running. You can build a tiny pfSense box for like $40 out of a Raspberry Pi, run a VM that does it or repurpose an old machine to do it.