CA3LE

No worries, you're a beta tester again and I linked up your old content. It's not showing on your profile yet but under the topics you've posted to they're correctly linked to your new account. I even changed the date you joined back to 2009.

Hey supplier_t .. I fixed your account. You had an extra issue because it wouldn't let you register names with an underscore. I fixed that too. Anyone else this may have happened to just re-register your old name and it will automatically connect your old stats. I'm really sorry about the inconvenience. Deleting mass amounts of spam accounts and apparently a few legit members were swept up in it. I deleted 40-50k accounts based on certain criteria... at one point I mis-entered something and in that moment I had a feeling that at least a few real accounts were mixed in there. But the command was entered. To reverse it would have taken hours... and I was unsure if it even happened. I don't think very many real people were in there. Oh well, it's an easy fix. For anyone else this may have happened to, if for any reason you can't get your old account registered make a random username, PM me with your old name and I'll fix it like I did here. Happy Testing!

Glad that worked. I did the combined and it determined the size starting with the smallest... I did express and it automatically selected the size based on my last 5 results for each test type. Repeated a few times and same results. Works great on my end. After some recent updates results processing cycles much faster. Sometimes so fast that it seems to be the express option. I've done double takes myself because it seemed to be skipping steps. ... but it's working correctly and serving good test sizes for the various connection speeds it encounters. Just doing it more efficiently than before. There's always a better way.

speedtest.net, as you know it now, was only started in 2006. source: wikipedia speedtest.net Wonder why their results favor the ISPs... One has to assume cronyism. ...they weren't chosen for accuracy. So you see... the speedtest.net you saw in the 90's was someone totally different. It was bought and converted in 2006, almost instantly was used by every ISP. ... even though it was common knowledge among computer nerds/geeks/dudes that it was complete BS. Wayback machine only goes back to 2000. Here's a funny screenshot. But yes, even the version before ookla stepped in required plugins to work. I've never required plugins.

Go to https://testmy.net/settings and select the "Email & Password" tab on the left. Also under the "Forum" menu >> "Edit Profile & Settings" hope this helps, happy testing!

Welcome! CCNA you say. What a coincidence https://testmy.net/ipb/topic/32186-secret-manta-things/- 7 hours prior to your post. Your students, "You gotta lead by example, teach. That's like... rule number one of being a teacher." (oh yeah, your supposed to read that in a stereotypical surfer voice... and flip your hair after the first sentence. I know your in Indiana and it doesn't make sense, just play along!)

Here's what I got from that source. :::.. Download Speed Test Result Details ..::: Download Connection Speed:: 25587 Kbps or 25.6 Mbps Download Speed Test Size:: 100.9 MB or 103321 kB or 105801144 bytes Download Binary File Transfer Speed:: 3198 kB/s or 3.2 MB/s Tested At:: http://TestMy.net Version 14 Validation:: https://testmy.net/db/sixSBJA Client Stats:: https://testmy.net/quickstats/CA3LEhttps://testmy.net/compID/4602014672148 Test Time:: 2014-12-14 20:45:41 Local Time Client Location:: Pike Ntl Forest, CO US https://testmy.net/city/pike_ntl_forest_c Target:: s1.dlnws.com https://testmy.net/mX/39qS4 Client Host:: Comcast Cable https://testmy.net/hoststats/comcast_cable Compare:: 76% slower than client avg, 6% faster than host avg, 72% slower than city avg, 41% faster than country avg, 144% faster than world index 1MB Download in 0.32 Seconds - 1GB Download in ~5 Minutes - 457X faster than 56K This test of exactly 103321 kB took 33.093 seconds to complete User Agent:: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10_10_1) AppleWebKit/600.2.5 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/8.0.2 Safari/600.2.5 [!] You're running a max of 6 Mbps so it's not as noticeable for you but anyone faster than ~ 20 Mbps would probably suffer testing against that address... at least using the route I took. Different clients using different routes may produce better or worse results.

from s1.dlnws.com (the domain hosting the image you entered) to your computer. Your testing your speed vs the source hosting the image that you enter.

Right click your mouse on the image Once copied paste into Mercury (the example wouldn't work because the image is too small. 200 kB is a great size but any image over 50 kB will work.) Chromebook copy and paste may help too ... I think two finger click is your right click. (MacBooks are like this too)

Give me an example of the site you're trying to use and I'll provide screenshots. In the first version of Mercury I'm just trying to get things laid out... I have no idea yet how I'm truly going to layout and display the information yet... needed to gather information first. To gather information people need to use it... for people to use it they need something to use. Catch 22. So I'm sorry if it's not very user friendly, early stages.

My revenue sheds a tear. lol -- it balances out in the end. Since there have been ads, there has been ways to block them. A percentage of revenue is lost to blocking but in my opinion it's smaller than the revenue of a normal user, could be 10X less, or more. Because the user with the mentality to block ads probably wasn't going to click the ad anyways. I block junk ads across the site when I see them, constantly reviewing but there's no way I can keep up. Ads here are served through Google AdSense, I have over 100,000 ads to review. To truly review them I need to look into each one. Hmm, review ads all day long or build my site... decisions decisions. I can only review the highest impression ads. For those of you not blocking ads if you ever see any ad here for anything that you think is malicious or dangerous in ANY way report it to me immediately. Take a screenshot and copy the address the ad lands on and shoot me a PM letting me know why you think it should be blocked. I need more eyes out there. Keep in mind my ads are reviewed by Google before they hit the site. I've never personally seen or heard of any malicious ads from AdSense. I've blocked in the past mostly for the content of the site or the software they offer. If everyone blocked all of my ads... I'd have to charge. I feel like TMN is relatively low on the ads served. Especially right now. I look at some of my competition and it makes me want to throw up. Pull it back a little you greedy f**ks! (folks?) The Internet should be free. Always. Ads keep the engine running and the lights on to almost all of the free sites you love. Something to keep in mind when you're browsing from a non-adblocked computer.

thanks dude Your post gives me an idea. I'm going to make the auto test do a new trick... it will take me a little time to hash out but it will be a useful addition.

You can test https sites with Mercury -- right click a large image from the source you want to test, 'copy image url'... paste it in Mercury and test away. Some of my favorite Mercury tests that I perform best on are https. So it's not always slow. e.g. lh4.googleusercontent.com (all of a sudden this one slowed down for me, to like 1/10 of normal - lol - usually a consistent performer), secure.netflix.com, lh3.googleusercontent.com Since you mentioned this I made it so you can see the URI scheme when you hover. That's useful information. People in some countries will notice that they're automatically defaulted to servers closer to them than the Dallas server. I still believe that there is more value in a test at distance, these servers are regional. If you're very close to the server, say >10ms, you should definitely test out further to see what you're really getting. (EB I know that you know this, I'm explaining this for others. )

Firefox has worked best for me. But this BS may be so new and may require an update to fix. Don't always blame the site your visiting either. Some adware can insert itself into other sites once you're infected. I was using my mother-in-laws laptop once, visited TMN forum and there were ads. I was like "WHHHHAAAAT!" ... and that instance was on a Mac. Reset Safari fixed it. Some plugin she must have accepted, scary because the same permissions could have granted someone access to spy on her. So annoying, I thought the pop-up days were over. It's a wild web out there, put on your boots and watch for ratt-lers!

Your result at speedtest.net is only 4ms from the server. TestMy.net is routing you across the Internet to locations where real websites are hosted. Not on the edge of your providers network. Of course your faster if you don't really go out to the Internet. It's like downloading from within your own network. That's NOT your Internet speed. We should call that your ultimately ideal situation speed. The multithread test is designed to be harder. Just now I ran a normal download test and CPU maxed at 100% (one of my cores). I ran a multithread test and hit 275% (nearly 3 cores). But I've found that it's not the same case for Mercury tests (which are also multithread). A Mercury test vs netflix.com I saw a peak of 110%. So you can multithread with Mercury and it's not quite as CPU intensive. Always keep in mind that TestMy.net isn't just an Internet test, it's also a test of the client computer and in the case of Mercury it's also a test of the server. I give you many different ways to test because your Internet can be delivered in many different ways. You don't win popularity contests by telling people they have food in their teeth. But they usually appreciate it in the end. Trust the results, they have to be affected by something... results are only low here for good reason. Having said that... you're pulling >100 Mbps consistently, that's pretty sweet. How much do you pay and what do you expect for that price? .. what are they quoting your speed at?

No, actually there was a bug. Well, not really a bug... a setting on the server was defaulted to the wrong setting. This has been corrected. This was only an issue for the largest test sizes and was affecting all the new servers I just put online. No longer an issue. Sorry about the inconvenience.

good to know, thanks for the follow up.

That's odd. It's pretty failsafe... maybe a setting in your browser is preventing pages from loading automatically like they need to. Try another browser, defaulted. Looks like you use firefox... try chrome, just to test and see if it makes a difference. It will help us understand if it's an issue with the browsers settings or something without resetting your settings unnecessarily.

I was supposed to have ping included in the last version but I didn't get to it. I'm hoping to put that up front and center in the next release. Keep visiting to watch it develop before your eyes. --- I'm far from finished.

Are you blocking css in any way? That's what the site would look like if the stylesheets didn't load.

Yes... and no. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/USB_3.0#Backward_compatibility I didn't know that...

Can you post a screenshot. I have no idea what you're talking about. Looks normal to me.

Start another topic about this, we'll try to help.

You can trust the results here. ... I can tell you that a thousand times, it means nothing coming from me. Testing it yourself like you just did is the best way to really drive the point home. Not enough people take the time to question it, they blindly trust the other tests thinking that their provider knows what they're doing. Yeah, they know what they're doing alright. Too bad more people don't know. Help by spreading the word.

Happy Thanksgiving everyone! Let us know what you're thankful for. I'll start. I'm thankful for my kids and my family. I'm thankful for good health. I'm thankful for the Internet and my TMN family. I count my blessings every day and I always lose count... for that I am thankful.