CA3LE

Many more posts on the Three forum... but are the two companies the same size? Who's more popular?

What city are you in? What are your contract terms? I got out of a contract with CenturyLink once, fairly easily. First I made sure that I knew an address that they didn't service. I then called them and told them I was moving and wanted to check to see what they offered in my "new area". Gave them the bunk address and she said, "I'm sorry, we don't offer service at that address." --- "Oh well, then I guess I'm going to have to get service with someone else. You'll let me out of my contract, right?" --- they have no choice really. They can't hold you to a service contract if they can't deliver the service to your "new address". -- after they've let you out, and they will, they may want to forward the final bill to that address. Tell them that you're not exactly sure when you'll be in there and you're just having the post office forward your mail, you don't want your final bill sent to someone else... but really, if you did... who cares. May make the story more believable. In my case I had them send my final bill to a friend in California outside their area. The problem is that AT&T is pretty much everywhere that there's phone service. If you have a hard time finding an address that they don't service you may also be able to get them on a technicality if you give them an address that they have service at... but doesn't offer comparable levels of service to what you have now. (or in your case, what they SAY you have). For instance, if you have a 10 Mbps package and the area you're "moving to" only has 1.5 Mbps offered you can tell them that you want to seek comparable service with someone else. They have to let you out of your contract if they can't deliver comparable levels of service at the new address... even if they service the address. Look to rural areas, in the mountains and forests. Use their own website to check the serviceability. Next time you get service with anyone... don't go with a company that has a contract. Unless you're a business you should never be under contract for Internet service. The companies who want to lock you into a contract are usually the weaker choices in terms of speed. If you have cable in your area... you usually can't go wrong. Cable is almost always the best choice in any area. They don't have to put you in a contract because they know that they're the best. Let me put it this way... In my area, if I wanted something comparable to what I have with cable, I'd need to get at least 5 of the fastest DSL connections offered by CenturyLink and combine them. Even if they were both at the same level of speed... cable is superior technology and makes for a more stable connection.

Been watching that topic... I like your quote, I bet they just want you to leave now... because you're asking too many questions. Disturbing the status quo. Or are they helping you in PM? I'd hope they would have responded since Friday. "Oh no Boss, they have a way to test and prove that we're ripping them off now!"

Hi cncdude5x! Welcome to TMN. Check out this post >> WIFI Is slow and sometime not there... Frustrated There's a link at the end entitled "Wireless Fung Shui" - read that too if you have time. It may help you think of a better placement strategy for your router. Being right next to the router, believe it or not, isn't always ideal. Especially if you have interference in the area... could be other wireless devices or it could be a fan sitting next to the router. Seriously. Having said that, if your router is right next to the computer and you can wire it... then wire it. You can get comparable speeds on some AC routers but wired is almost always the best choice. If you have other devices on wifi I'd definitely address the wifi issue first... make sure that your other devices aren't getting degraded speed as well. Then, after wifi has a clean bill of health, if the router is still placed near the computer I'd do ethernet to that computer. I wouldn't even think about it if the option is there. Thanks for the kind words, I've worked very hard to build this site and it means a lot to hear positive feedback. I especially like the insinuation that you hadn't really tested your speed until you came here. I'm glad you found us too. If you like what we're doing help by directing your friends here.

I just wanted to make sure your numbers were comparable between the two tests. Slightly higher one way or another is okay. It raises an alarm if one is much faster than the other. Yours looks great.

Sweet! Glad it's working for you. Curious, what do you get in single thread?

Not really. Our tests work totally different.

nice!

So check this out... https://testmy.net/db/-SMrztfuy See all of the locations you're testing against. uk, de, cn and au are bringing your speed down for sure because of the distance and international routing involved. Your multithread results before looked like... https://testmy.net/db/Aa1YNWoSI If it just says testmy.net then it gave you a mix of Dallas TX (4 servers), San Jose CA and Washington DC. (outside of the US the mix changes) I think that if you change to more favorable options your speed will pick back up. Try some tests with multithread disabled too.

That's a dramatic increase! Wow, I had no idea this was happening out there.

Thanks for catching that, it's displaying properly now. Although, I'm not allowing it to multithread over https. It shows https in your browser but the test is actually pulling the data over http. The problem is if you haven't previously authenticated each sub domain it will ignore that portion of the test. For me, I had authenticated all but a couple of the servers... multithread test against all of the servers showed an instant progress of 20% just loading the page... because if they aren't authenticated the test thinks the information has been loaded. It will need further development to avoid those issues from affecting the results. So for right now the multithread test remains http only.

Fixed. When you have results, please share them.

You shouldn't get the warnings anymore, as long as you've accepted the cert on both testmy.net and the server you've selected. You can now visit https://testmy.net and it will work with all servers. Let me know if you have any problems. Later I'll make a way to differentiate the tests taken with ssl (https) in the database.

Alright, it's only on one server right now and you have to manually call upon it with a URL. I'll make sure this becomes an option everyone can easily use. https://co.testmy.net/SmarTest/down - https://co.testmy.net/SmarTest/up (or add https to any of the common test URLs e.g. https://co.testmy.net/SmarTest/combinedAuto - https://co.testmy.net/dl-1MB and https://co.testmy.net/ul-1MB) I'll let you know when I duplicate this across the network. Thanks for the suggestion.

Not right now but I've been thinking about adding additional time functions. The time is stored with UTC, and then offset to your local time. It would be easy to add an option where you can set the offset yourself. It will also reference the users timezone and let you know what the local time was for the person who was testing. Right now it just adjusts the time to the timezone of the person viewing the page. Thank you for the suggestions, good to know that people want this. I'll work on it for you.

Would be nice if it was Google's problem and they fixed it...

I'll work on this for you.

I know what you're talking about, unrelated issue. That was an issue with apache. Seems to be all good now, let me know if you have any more problems.

Do they offer any packages faster than 12/1.5 in your area?

:)

I don't have any specific IPv6 tests online right now but I can work on that for you.

Have you tested against any other routes? Try ny.testmy.net, co.testmy.net and east.testmy.net and see what you come up with.

I'm running it on a late 2014 5K iMac, 2 late 2013 rMBP's and a mid 2011 iMac. I'll upgrade my 2008 Mac mini soon and let you know how it goes on one that old... from what I've seen I'd bet it's smooth. Every computer I'm running it on is super stable and all havn't rebooted since they were upgraded a couple weeks ago. examples... Damons-MacBook-Pro:~ CA3LE$ uptime 8:51 up 14 days, 13:23, 4 users, load averages: 1.09 1.22 1.23 Damons-5K-iMac:~ CA3LE$ uptime 8:50 up 12 days, 20:36, 3 users, load averages: 1.73 1.59 1.55 IMO, this upgrade is one of the best I've seen. It addressed some annoyances without being all in your face with changes. Felt like a reboot... accept on the laptops where I REALLY notice speed increases in terms of waking up and getting online. Some browser tabs in Yosemite would take a long time to respond when I'd come back to the computer after leaving for a while... even when the power management was set to an always on state. It would do this especially with Google Analytics and AdSense but google.com and testmy.net would load quickly. It would take up to a few minutes before reloading the tab would have any affect, otherwise it just sits there loading until it timed out. Just on the Macbook's, I never saw that on my iMacs. Using Chrome or Firefox helped but it still would sometimes take 30+ seconds to get on the wifi. After the El Capitan update the first thing I noticed is if it's coming back from sleep it takes only a second to get back on the network. And the tabs that gave me issues load up instantly now. It's saving me time right there... possibly up to 1 frustrating, finger tapping hour a month.

Hi Loren, In your case I'd say no, it's not affecting your performance. Hop 2 is what I'm sure you're talking about, the "???" with 100% packet loss. You're not really losing packets there, your request is just being ignored by that particular router. It's fairly common and doesn't affect your performance. Sometimes a certain point in the route will do this because ICMP (which is what traceroute uses to work) is low priority... some routers choose to ignore it all together for security reasons. The < 5% losses later down the route are more likely to affect your results.

Sweet. Do you have a Motorola Surfboard SB 6183 by chance?