CA3LE

There was something in the DNS records that needed correcting. (may have delayed notifications in some cases). I corrected this but it may take up to 48 hours to fully propagate. Thanks for bringing that to my attention.

Hey Larka, welcome to TMN! First, read this explanation of bits vs bytes. I have a link to this on the results page that says "Understanding the Results", you may have missed it. Right now, I think you've done what you can do to get the most out of your connection. Your score here of 1.4Mbps is right on par with what you should expect from your 1.5Mbps connection. The reason why your file transfers are closer to the second number is because they are the second number. The numbers reported by your operating system when you download a file are in kB/s not Kbps. Again, a difference between binary transfer speed and connection speed... if you read the explanation above thoroughly it should help you understand the difference between the two. Hopefully I've explained it so that everyone can understand what I'm trying to lay down. I believe that the numbers you're getting from your file transfers falling in line with your results here reinforce the fact that you've chosen an accurate speed test... I'm sure that others agree. Good luck with your upgrade, I'm sure you'll be back to test it and make sure the speed is being delivered as promised. I personally use Cox Communications at home and love their service. They dominate speeds in the markets they compete in... that's true for most cable providers actually. Cox is also well known for delivering more than they promise so don't be surprised if you see upwards of 20Mbps from that connection. Let us know what you get after your upgrade. I also double checked my mailserver and the queue isn't backed up or anything. I'll setup a test account to make sure there isn't a delay. Thanks for visiting and being patient with the registration process. There are lots of spammers out there that ruin it for all the good guys. I really wish I could just have you sign up and that be that but I have to verify that you're a real person to keep the forums clean.

Is the time the only thing effected or are all the cmos settings getting defaulted?

... Mac has superior hardware. Not to say that you can't get great hardware otherwise. Hell, in many cases you can get more powerful hardware cheaper if you build a PC or get a top end brand. But you're going to to start getting up into the price of a Mac... so why not get a superior OS along with it. Apple makes great decisions in the hardware they use... there is no low end. This one of the reasons why when they choose something, they stick with it for a long time... they make the right choice up front and stick with it for a while. Towards the end of the production life of a given technology they end up making more money too because they're producing the same thing... which brings their cost down. I used to build all my own computers, always with the bleeding edge hardware available. But I've found that Apple really does have a strong formula for stability. These days, I'll sacrifice bleeding edge technology for more stability. Even my Mac mini is overpowered for my personal needs, my iMac is just ridiculous. Having said that... Macs can TOTALLY get viruses. It's a computer... even if an operating system were to run on millions of users computers for years on end without and exploit doesn't mean that there is no exploit. Something that is written by one man can be exploited by another. Macs do however have a lot working in their favor. First, it's a unix base. There is a reason why it's the chosen operating system for the most secure applications on the planet. I have ALWAYS run unix base here at TMN, I've been exploited but never through the operating system itself. I get between 10-500 hacking attempts every day on this server alone. Any security holes were due to 3rd party software running on the machine... not the operating system. RHE since day one btw. Second, which I believe will eventually change... security by minority... most people are using Windows so most people writing viruses are gearing them towards Windows machines. Most people that write viruses want to target the majority and they're also adept to IBM based machines. When more people are on Macs that will change... but Apple is going to make it much harder on them... so they stick to the easy money so to speak. Third, security by obscurity... if the hackers don't fully understand the command set of the hardware it's a lot harder to program viruses to exploit it. Apple is secretive in many aspects which keeps the hackers in the dark. Put a blindfold on a programmer and it's pretty hard for them to even begin to understand how to hurt you... information can however get leaked... but can also patched just as quickly. To be honest... I'm not wasting my system resources with antivirus software on my Macs either... but don't EVER think that you're safe just because you're on a Mac. There is no such thing. I don't care who says so... everything digital has a weakness, even the most cryptic can be exploited if you know the key to how it works. Even, in the future, if there is 1 in a Googolplex chance of it happening... there is still a chance. Like I said.. if it was made by a man... there is a man that can break it. (or woman, damn feminists... you know what I mean!) ... personally, I take the chance. I also took the chance on my PCs for the most part. I'm a strong believer in that you... for the most part... often infect yourself by being stupid. If you know what to look for, you can avoid a large majority of viruses. For me, I didn't care if everything got messed up... I reformatted nearly every month or so anyways. I'd rather have my resources free for myself ... A/V is a waste of computing power. Since I switched over to Mac the only time I've formatted a system drive was because I was upgrading the drive. I must say it's very nice not having to set all my stuff up every few months. .... and if I did, TIME MACHINE! BAM! Back to how it was. ... and for all you Mac haters... STFU and try one, stop talking sh*t on stuff you know nothing about. If you knew... you wouldn't talk sh*t... plain and simple. This is all coming from a former die hard Mac hater. Funny thing is, first computer I ever touched was Unix based (my Mom brought it home as surplus from the hospital she worked at... well still works at) then I grew up on Macs at school... loved them. They taught me to love computing. They lost their way in the early 90's but you know what... Steve Jobs returned to Apple in 1997 and set them back on the right path. Then they went to Intel... opening up development to more software manufactures. Now with their architecture and mindset there is NO excuse to hate them at this point other than ignorance. If you don't already, use a Mac for 1 month... then I dare you to go back. If you do as much on the computer as I do you'll feel like someone cut off your arms. It's the Microsoft way of thinking that's actually backwards, people have just been conditioned otherwise.

It's funny you say that... this forum is actually a couple years old (I need to remove the "new" in the title)... yet it only has a few topics. Less people use them but there are far less issues. I switched in 2010... I still have never seen a virus or any spyware or adware... the OS doesn't bog and degrade over time like windows. It just does its job. My girlfriends 2006 MacBook is better now than the day she bought it.. granted, I put an SSD and more RAM in it but it's still a workhorse. I couldn't say that about any 2006 windows based machines... because I don't know of any still working. If the price is keeping you from getting one... get a used Mac. Or a Mac mini... my first was a mini and I will never get rid of it... that thing cold boots in 8 seconds. And just works! Gets the job done without any BS or clutter. Apple refurbished Macs can be found on Apples website much cheaper than new... my mini was a refurbished and I never had a single problem... http://store.apple.com/us/browse/home/specialdeals/mac

That was a fun little adventure! I added images to the main post

Hi Alan, This is because a setting on the server was recently misconfigured. This was only for a short period of time (a few hours) but you may have visited during the time it was misconfigured. The setting told your browser to cache certain pages when it shouldn't have. On pages with highly dynamic content like the database results this is obviously not ideal. I quickly realized the error but by that time thousands of people had visited. To correct the issue simply clear your browser cache... once the page has been reloaded and it has the correct instructions the issue will be resolved. The images with the MAX and AVG on your stats page may also have a similar issue... which is also resolved. Just clear your cache... problem solved. If you still have an issue try clearing history, cache and cookies. Let me know how this works for you. Sorry for any inconvenience. - Thank you for your continued patronage, - Damon

I see that you're mostly testing off the Seattle server, maybe their routing to that area of the country is having an issue. You were getting good speeds the other day but things can change in an instant. Lines can be cut or attacked forcing the provider to route around the issue... resulting in more congestion than normal along the good lines. There really are endless scenarios that can cause routing issues. Try also testing off the main server and DC server. Comparing results between the servers can help nail down that there is a routing issue and not a problem with your personal settings, router or modem. You should be able to have a variation of >~20% between the servers. For instance, if the Seattle server is closest to you and you get 10 Mbps you should still be able to pull at least ~8 Mbps to the main TX server... if it's worse than that your provider may have a routing issue alone the route to the server that you got the lowest scores on. ... in which case you can breath easier knowing that they'll most likely resolve it and it has nothing to do with your setup. >~20% is a good place to start but keep in mind that what you're truly looking for is major, noticeable differences... if you're looking at exactly 20% difference there is a chance that's normal for your specific situation. There are a lot of variables in this. The best way to know for sure is to have baseline tests logged from all the servers on a regular basis. Then you can see the variation in comparison to your previous scores. Major deviations from the norm will obviously mean there is an issue. And if you see the deviation on all the servers... well... then you know it's not just routing, it's an issue closer to home.

Try clearing your cookies... Although I don't think it would make a difference I moved a little code around. I moved the portion of the code that increases the count outside of an else if statement. Small chance that this made a difference but if there was a problem with that I would have expected it to not work before... not just have an intermittent issue. The count is stored in a cookie, when you restart the test the cookie is supposed to be reset to zero before it can move forward. Try clearing all your cookies, this may fix the issue. Thank you for taking the time to report this, hopefully this resolves your problem.

They're so big they look like they hurt.. lol

Hi Danneauxs, welcome! My next round of programming improvements will enable the test to pick up where it left off if that happens and it will report to you that it happened. Currently there is no way to resolve this. The fact that this is happening is a major indication that you have an issue... If I were you I would contact my provider and tell them that my connection is dropping. Stick with me... I have a lot of work on my plate before I get on that but I work fast.

Oh it says sTack.. that could have been embarrassing...

So I take it your display ports are all used up? ... Do you have more monitors lying around or something? Are you insinuating hooking up a 3rd external monitor? I know what you mean with multiple desktops. I prefer using more monitors or larger displays over extra desktops. I'm always out of space no matter what. As I type this I hit command+tab and 13 applications are running. I personally get around by using that often, command tab to the application with my keyboard, command+shift+tab to move backwards in the list. Just became second nature. Part of my display is taken up by 4 SSH windows that I always have on top so I can at a glance monitor all my servers. So about a hand width of my display on the left side is used up... I'm about to hook up my other monitor and use it just for those windows and pandora... and other crap that I'm not really working with. Then leave my main monitor for what I'm focused on. I've had up to three monitors running before but being different models it pissed me off that the whiteness and contract didn't match exactly. My OCD kicked in and it bugged the sh*t out of me. The just need to come out with mind displays already! So the image is visualized in your head, that would be siiiiiiick. Screw input devices too, they only slow us down. I think if you made some adjustments to the way you get around you'll find that you can make it work the way that you're setup right now... maybe you already work that way.

Even just visiting the site is good enough for me

No problem! Thank YOU for all your fine visiting. It's because it seems that your speed has recently increased. See the sharp climb at the end... you're definitely performing better than you were. It will force you to use SmarTest if your connection is too fast, even if you select a size manually. This is to help weed out bursted speeds that happen with certain providers. What must be happening is you're bursting that 12MB test to the point that the test thinks it's best to up the size... it's not what you originally selected... but it's more accurate that way. Sometimes it will do that... sometimes it won't. Depends on a lot of variables actually. There's an assessment that's made when you hit the results page... if it thinks that a larger size is beneficial to the accuracy it will calculate what it thinks you need and forward you past the results and right back into the test. Usually it will get it right the first time when you start with a large file like that... but if not it will try a maximum of 4 times before figuring, "that's the best I can do."

Werd! Hopefully it's not just a fluke

Welcome Lee! Your speeds look pretty good for your package. I hope you like TMN and help spread the word. Being a speed freak I hope you take the time to share your knowledge in our forums.

Hi Olivia, My data isn't skewed. Your provider may provide 1Gbit speed but that doesn't mean that you're going to pull those speeds everywhere. Especially crossing the Atlantic where speeds are often limited due to oversold bandwidth. There also can be restrictions on those links in place by the providers your ISP peers with. Your connection is only as fast as the slowest link between you and the server you're testing from. My servers are multi-gigabit uplinked in locations that are directly on some of the most powerful trunk lines on the Internet. Users overseas often email me about this but there are people overseas that are able to pull 200+ Mbps despite the distance. Although they are usually connected through commercial connections not residential. My aim is to bring light to these issues in hopes of getting people connected better... providers are in large part misrepresenting the connections they sell. Sure your connection might pull 1Gbit near your home but the further you go out on the Internet the worse it gets. It really doesn't have to if everyone is delivering what they promise. Having said that, it might not be their fault... it may be the people they peer through... or even the people those people peer through. International routing is way oversold right now and providers always point the finger at the other guy. But the truth is... they choose who they peer through. If they used hosts that were less congested... you wouldn't have as much of an issue. If you visit a lot of websites in the United States then trust me... you're receiving a fair assessment at TestMy.net. The truth hurts sometimes but no matter what TMN is going to call it how it sees it. TMN is not a best case scenario speed test. There are other speed tests that offer servers closer to you but that's not how the Internet works. When you visit websites they are rarely near you. In my opinion a better assessment of your connection is by testing far away to locations where the websites you visit are hosted. It might not produce the numbers you want to see but at least you're being real with yourself. I also offer testing to a servers in Washington D.C. and Seattle Washington ... D.C. being closer to you should provide a bit higher result but you're still crossing the Atlantic which is where you're most likely losing most of your speed. - Cheers, - Damon Mueller

Embarrassing for any website.. but even more so for Google. As long as humans are in the equation errors will happen.

Sure does

Nice... I'm going to have to play with that.

People like him keep me on my toes... but as I said before, I can debug for days on end and it's never as good as the bug checking that putting it into production does. My users are awesome. I'm glad that people take time out of their day to report issues when the arise. ...and there's no getting around bugs... it's the nature of software development. I've even seen Google bug out many times over the years... I even saw a 404 error on Google a couple weeks ago. That just proves that nobody is perfect.

I put it up for fun... some people said they preferred it so I threw it up. But it only gets about 1/30th of the traffic of the main site so I guess people realized that more had changed since than they thought... and they now continue to use the new site. ... very cool that it helped catch a bug though.

I have a bunch of these awesome iGoGreen rechargeable alkaline batteries... but I need to get more. The good thing about those is they're 1.5v not 1.2v so for my wireless headphones they are especially good and help deliver more bass... but many other devices benefit from the full 1.5v too. I highly recommend that brand, they've been working great for me for the past 8 months or so... I intend to buy more from them.

No problem... thank you for visiting. I hope you help spread the word. -D