Pgoodwin1

Typing fast on an iPad makes for broken English. Typingnfast on anbiPad makes for broken english

Just presenting a mean and a std dev of a measurement would be an indicator that a user could gauge against an ISP "guaranteed" lower speed limit. This would tell you the variation (the user could pick a sigma level). Calculating Cpk would require the user to enter the target speed min they guarantee, and that seems to be beyond the scope of this site. Based on my experience looking at measurements here and comparing to my ISP's 10 Mbps min "guarantee", I'd say my Cpk would always be something like 1/1,000,000 haha, and everyone elses would probably not be much better. I've only seen my TWC min speed guarantee exceeded a couple of times in hundreds of measurements. It would be interesting if there was a "see details" button that would pull up the mean, std dev, number of complete dropouts, and number of samples used.

And Larka, you will find that under some conditions of degraded signals coming into your house, they will show then speed as being good on your ISP's tools. Also, I don't know what their algorithms are, but you can watch their analog meter during times of signal interrupts (with signals valid or degraded) drop down tomzeronduring the test then display the result as the ending meter value, so they are throwing out the data that makes them look bad. I have no idea whatbtheirnrationale for that is since the tools are supposedly there to help a customer troubleshoot. Interrupts on this site result in a lower throughput reading after the test. There must be either poorly written or perhaps no regulations written that they conform to. I don't know how they get away with advertising the rates they are claiming. On average they never meet them. On my best days my speeds are 20% lower than what my ISP has promised as a minimum,Man's download speeds measured on TMN are typically 1/3 of what their tools says I'm getting. Look at you numbers relative to your prior test results, and compare your results to your local ISPs speeds on this site, and to the ISPs average performance nationally. Once you've established what "good" is, it's easy to spot when there's an issue. my typical numbers are significantly lower than the national averages for Time Warner but usually 5-10% higher than my local average speeds on TMN.

Yeah. I understand not putting the button all over so people will navigate through the site more. Like I said it's not a big deal anyway. It's actually faster to do a retest now on the mobile device because you don't have to be so careful hitting the test link. And good timing on the change-with the release of the new iPhone.

I like the new look. Putting the download and upload tests on separate tabs at the top actually helps on the iPad, and probably even more so on an iPhone, as with the old version, the test choices were on one pull down with multiple links to the tests. It was hard to hit the link you wanted with your finger without stretching the display. The only down side to that change was that the Combined Test now appears only on the Home page as TestMy Bandwidth Now!. When you get to the post test results, you have to go back to the home page to rerun the Combined Test. Not really a big deal though. The benefit on a mobile device of having the separated test tabs at the top is an overriding benefit to that inconvenience, as now you don't actually hit the worng test link. Maybe in the future you could put a copy of the TestMy Bandwidth Now! button on the test results pages. I haven't checked anything else out yet. So far it's looking good though.

Welcome Henry.

I just looked on Apple's website and that MBP is $1199 - so that would be 749 British pound sterling 13-inch: 2.5 GHz 2.5GHz dual-core Intel Core i5 Turbo Boost up to 3.1GHz 4GB 1600MHz memory 500GB 5400-rpm hard drive Intel HD Graphics 4000 Built-in battery (7 hours) In Stock Free Shipping $1,199.00 And my wife's 2006 MacBook Pro is still going strong. All I've done to it is to max out the RAM and swapped the hard drive for. 500 GB 7200 rpm one. It's only a 1.83 GHz Core Duo but it still does everything we need it to pretty quickly. Stuck at OS 10.6.8 but that was a great OS. It's a little slow editing movies but runs web pages, email, Word, Excel, audio, etc plenty fast enough. And I still have her old 1988 Mac SE ($3250), and her 1994 PowerBook 540c (about the same price). They're fun to look at, and still run. I haven't had a virus on a Mac since about 1992. I quit buying anti-virus software about 1995.

How 'bout a high def projector and a very white wall. Hah. I don't really have a good suggestion. Seems like anything USB (even of the price comes down) would eat up a lot of your processor throughput handling high def video. FireWire would be better, but I took a quick look and didn't see anything.

Speaking of human error I had an engineering prof that once gave our class a test where only the answer mattered; no credit for showing the work and though process. He said "Someday you'll have to get the right answer or you could kill somebody". Hahaha the class average on that test was 39%.

Yeah. That does suck if it oops past the local addresses. For sure you should post feedback. http://www.apple.com...t/feedback.html There's some very knowledgeable guys in the forums that usually answer back rational technical questions. https://discussions....y/mac_os/safari There's also 10,000 idiots in there posting - My grandpa messed up my computer. LOL but the tech guys seem to latch on to the real challenges and questions pretty quickly. They like beating the other geeks to the punch. Haha. I've gotten some good help from some pretty sharp guys in there though.

The Safari search thing drove me nuts the first day too. Mine works with a static IP address. Hit the clear button, it'll get rid of the http.....then type the IP address in. I only tried my router login IP address though, so I don't know what it'll do with others. I haven't mastered searching yet; don't yet understand it's logic. Sometimes you get a Google search page, sometimes it goes right to the page you want.

Hi nvptx, I can't get to very much of what Suddenlink has for documentation because they don't service my zipcode. Does Suddenlink have a link on their site to a speed measurement? If so which one is it? I did see this: Suddenlink Network Management Practices. To help mitigate potential network congestion, we are in the process of applying bandwidth usage allowances to residential Internet accounts, with incremental bandwidth automatically provided for a nominal, incremental fee. Only in the relatively few cable systems listed and only through the means described in this document, we may limit the bandwidth available to individuals whose usage materially exceeds the typical customer usage in those cable systems. I didn't check the TestMy database for average speeds from Suddenlink (if there is any data). You could see what their averages are on TestMy. Look at yours relative to those averages (don't worry about the absolute numbers). The bar charts here when the tests finish tell you how you are doing compared to others on your ISP. The percentages are useful in seeing how you are doing compared to the others. Since I couldn't get to a lot of their website info (It wouldn't allow me to get to their support site or detailed plan info), I don't know what they are really offering. You are getting about 5x the bandwidth I see on TestMy on Time Warner's RoadRunner, and I think we pay about $45/mo. Unfortunately for you, it seems that your speeds are somewhat lower since their "upgrade". I don't know whether this is due to some of their load balancing in their network management practices or not. I can tell you this, that the Time Warner RoadRunner I have "guarantees 10 Mbps download and 1 Mbps Upload. My TestMy results average about 20% lower on both up and down from these numbers. The SpeedTest tool that Time Warner has a link to typically reads 3x higher on download, and the upload they show is usually 20% higher. I don't know what you are paying compared to what I'm paying but my $45/month gets me about 8Mbps down and 0.8 Mbps up. The it's a matter of whether you think your monthly fees are in line with what you are getting. I don't know what regulations there are for ISPs meeting their advertised speeds. But virtually all of them use similar optimistic questionable speed measuring tools. And very likely none of them meet their advertised speeds when measured more realistically via TestMy. I haven't researched whether there are any class action lawsuits agains any of the major ISPs for false advertising, but the whole thing seems pretty loose to me.

I never noticed the link to the old TMN test site until the upload issue postings. Good that it's there as a reference.

Oh, and your test results thing didn't cause me any real trouble. I was kind of just waiting to see if the upload speed ever got better after Time Warner fixed the signal level problem, and there wasn't any noticeable difference in performance from what it had been in the past at 0.8Mbps. I was a little worried that a new Gigabit Ethernet switch (that I put in just prior to this issue) had gone flakey on me, but again, everything seems to be working right, so I kind of just ignored it. I didn't have a good feel about how much upload speed affects web performance when no really huge files are involved. Obviously the effect is around an order of magnitude smaller than the effect of download speed since, since the download is roughly an order of magnitude faster than the upload speeds at many ISPs. I had forgotten what a Greek Sophist was and had to go look it up. Hopefully I can help on another day. I'm a retired engineer so I'm always looking for interesting tech stuff.

Thanks so much. I'm both surprised and honored. Yes, you are right, a true bug in one means that there's a bug in all. And as for it being a scary time to fly, amazingly, the reliability and safety of the aircraft is way better than in the old analog days. Mostly because the size and weight of those old systems wouldn't allow you to put redundancy everywhere you needed it. Now the probability of a catastrphic failure due to electronics or software failure is extremely low because with a redundant system, the probability is the product of the failure rates. So if one channel has a probability of catastrophic failure of 1.0 E-06 per flight hour, then the probability of having both channels go out is 1.0 E-12. These numbers are really small, but with thousands of aircraft flying all the time, they are racking up millions of hours a month, so the numbers have to be incredibly small or there'd be planes falling out of the sky regularly. The safety critical flight control systems on the planes are usually triple channel redundant. Engine systems are dual redundant because there are two engines. So as for is there too much redundancy, economics keeps it to a minimum, but as the number of aircraft flying increases, better safety numbers are always being sought. As for the weight of that redundancy, it's all about gas mileage (making money). The aircraft design weight is set by competition amongs the plane manufacturers; each one wanting to earn more money with better mileage and lower ticket costs to steal sales away from the other guy. So in order to get the weight down with the added redundancy, smaller lighter electronics and new stronger lighter hardware in the control systems is required. It's usually more expensive. So redundancy usually only goes into the real safety critical systems. It's getting to be the same in cars. Well enough rambling about the aircraft world. Thanks again for the promotion. I do test regularly using your tools, and check in the forums every week or two.

Interesting. Glad you found it. When I look in my test results, I can see exactly when the fix went in. I was a bit puzzled when the upload speed showed low but I didn't notice any performance hit. Because of that, I didn't push it with Time Warner. Their fix of the download speed wild variation due to the signal level made the performance right again. Software bugs are tough. Before I retired I worked at GE Aircraft Engines in Evendale OH. I was an electronic engine control circuit designer. In the 1980s we transitioned from purely analog controls to digital controls. Each engine control had two independent channels of hardware running the same OS and AS. In those days there weren't very good software design and validation tools and standards. We were always terrified of the subtle software bugs that could lock up the Software and cause an engine shutdown. Commercial airlines always have a minimum of two engines and the ability to fly with one engine out. But both engines (4 control channels) run the same software. So there was always that small probability of a bug that would take out all of the engines at the same time. Miraculously (due to a lot of SW engineers checking code) it never happened. We had a couple of control channel shutdowns due to subtle software errors or hardwarevfailures over the years, but never a common mode one that took everything down. Back then the software was a lot simpler, and the engine controls had hydro mechanical backups. These days, there are no hydromechanical backups because they are very heavy, and the software is orders of magnitude more complex. But the design and validation process tools are also orders of magnitude more sophisticated. But every time there is a new set of requirements that result in a software change, there's always the potential for something to slip by. Thankfully, a simple core of hardware and software safety nets that were developed that could be ported to new processors, memory, and control chips, and the wheel didn't have to be reinvented. Subtle software glitches are very tough to catch. On Sun Aug 19 2012 @ 1:10:48 pm the world was right again.

Even after Time Warner came out and fixed the signal level problem, after they left, I was still only getting about 0.4 Mbps upload speed per TMN tests. Then about a week later, all of a sudden, it went back up to about 0.8 Mbps where it normally is. Their speed tests showed the same 1Mbps at a real 0.4 AND at 0.8. How worthless.

I was getting intermittent web page loads. What bothers me is that when you test the connection with their SpeedTest.ohio.rr test, you can watch the analog meter wander around between 0.4 and 1 Mbps upload during the speed test, and even when the need stabilizes at about 0.5 Mbps for the last 1/2 of the test or so, the digital readout at the end indicates 0.97 Mbps. There should be a class action lawsuit against them for that BS. The TMN upload test was presenting a reasonable result showing about 0.4 and at time much worse than that. I tried 3 other speed test sites, and the only one that displayed the Upload speed being low was SpeedTest.org (showed about 0.5 Mbps). All the rest of them showed some distorted result that made the system appear good at 1Mbps. Thanks TMN for having a good test system. You can close this thread. Or if I can, how do I close it?

I just talked to Time Warner Roadrunner support and they detect a signal power out of range low problem, so forget this post

That sounds pretty bad. If you call the problem in to them (ISP) several times, they might actually put you on a more serious list. Time Warner does that; they'll finally escalate a problem.

My ISP (Time Warner Roadrunner) is very inconsistent with bandwidth too. Mine's usually very fast in the morning and slower at night during prime viewing times. Also, I think the video source (Netflix, Vudu etc) servers often get "surprised" with high volume demands and they display that they are adjusting to your network speeds when it's really a speed problem at their end. I believe that since we're still fairly early in the streaming HD video technology curve, the whole system is marginal. Heck, I still have the same cable modem that Time Warner gave me about 6 years ago, and their baseline Roadrunner Internet package only "guarantees" 10 Mbps download and 1 Mbps Upload. Their SpeedTest always shows green, when my truer speeds here on TMN are mor like 8 and 0.8. Their pricing for the faster service is ludicrous

My test results lately for Upload speeds have consistently been about 1/2 of what they were July 15th and earlier. The Download speeds show about the same as they were before that date. I was curious if there were any changes to the calculation or test method. I get about 1/2 the Upload speeds of previous tests on all my devices. When I check the speeds using Time Warner's SpeedTest, the results are about what they used to be. Their upload test shows me getting about 0.9 Mbps and TMN tests used to show about 0.8. Now it's consistently about 0.4.

MudMan. Thanks. I will check that out. Doing it on a schedule (middle of the night) would be the way to go.

thanks TriRan. The 192.168.100.1 page brought up a multiple button select tool for the modem and included a modem reset button.

Thanks everyone. What software would I use to do a soft reset of the cable modem. I have a separate Router that I communicate with (the D-link) in the diagram I put a link to above. But I don't know how to reset the modem other than unplugging it. I'll take a look at at Warner's RoadRunner support info tomsee if I can find anything. MudMan..when you run Automator, how do you communicate with your modem? My cable modem is outboard of my router. TriRan-it's the Motorola Surfboard SB5101 model referenced above. I have a network diagram link in my original post showing how everything is hooked up. Time Warner swapped my cable modem a few months ago while troubleshooting a performance problem. Same model. Only the old one would run for many many months without ever having to be reset. The old modem had nothing wrong with it; the performance issue was related to signal levels, but they swapped it anyway.