PureBasic Forums - English

Since a national broadband plan is being worked, there has been a lot of attention so far. ARS has an interesting article here > http://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/news ... t-week.ars

Seems the ISP's in the U.S. have not been very forthcoming with data concerning internet connection quality and has been feeding the FCC a lot of BS data on the subject...so...the FCC has decided to test on their own to gather data. Test your connection quality here and see if your ISP has been lying to you or not > http://www.broadband.gov/qualitytest/about/

I know AT&T DSL has... they want to make you pay MORE for a faster connection and bandwidth... they speed limit you unless you pay more!

Another MBA empty suit nickle and dime you to death idea!!!

That is soooo wrong!!!

DL - 625kbps
UL - 325kbps
LA - 25kbps
J - 1kbps

I'm outside US so my Latency is bad with this server, otherwise I guess I satisfied.

This is what I get for 9.90 €/month

My Results :
Download 15228 kbps
Upload 1906 kbps
Latency 50 ms
Jitter 7ms

Well now I could head in to the office and hit the T1 or T3 nodes as well...

What service gives you them numbers??? Do you have tiered service plans?

Quanto pay???

I'm in the UK with Virgin Media and am signed up to a 1Mb Link, so these results will be a bit skewed:
DL: 10144
UL: 343
LY: 105
J: 140

DL:1315
UL:700
LY:113
J:1

This one was mine this morning, taken under active and heavy congestion conditions:



Of course it varies. This test wasn't supposed to give reliable indications for those outside the U.S. as it was tailored for those inside the U.S. from my understanding, but it seems to give fairly reliable indications for those outside the U.S. anyway.

Rook Zimbabwe wrote:I know AT&T DSL has... they want to make you pay MORE for a faster connection and bandwidth... they speed limit you unless you pay more!

That is soooo wrong!!!

Why is it so wrong? Or do you say the same thing about CPUs? That faster CPUs should be the same price as slower ones?

Why should someone who's only interested in e-mail and on-line shopping and so can get by with the slowest speed pay the same amount as someone streams movies, plays games, downloads music, etc. and so needs the faster speeds?

I think it's a logical way to do it, the heaviest users bear the brunt of the costs by paying higher fees.

If it bothers you so much tn be asked to pay more for faster speeds, switch to NetZero where everyone pays only $9.95 a month regardless of what speed they connect at.

Mohawk70 wrote:My Results :
Download 15228 kbps
Upload 1906 kbps
Latency 50 ms
Jitter 7ms

Updated Results : 2/8/2011 10:39:31 AM


My Results ( ISP = Cox Communications [Cable Modem] )
Download = 22123 kbps
Upload = 1892 kbps
Latency = 26 ms
Jitter = 5 ms

I have a crappy connection in the state of Vermont. Damn mountains blocking my fiber optics with their hugeness!

Damn mountains blocking my fiber optics with their hugeness!

Is that American sarcasm? (Which I don't understand very well). Fibre Optics being blocked by mountains is a new one on me. Damn near made me fall out of my chair with shock!

Fangbeast wrote:

Damn mountains blocking my fiber optics with their hugeness!

Is that American sarcasm? (Which I don't understand very well). Fibre Optics being blocked by mountains is a new one on me. Damn near made me fall out of my chair with shock!

In a way it is, but it isn't either. Vermont is full of tree hugging hippies that think these fibre optic cables will cause some bee's and butterflies to get confused and fly north for the winter or something. So nearly the entire state is stuck to DSL / Dialup. It's also the reason we have one or two cell phone towers in the entire state.

Also, I personally live on top of a mountain which prevents some high speed services(the reason I wrote what I did in my earlier post).

In a way it is, but it isn't either. Vermont is full of tree hugging hippies that think these fibre optic cables will cause some bee's and butterflies to get confused and fly north for the winter or something. So nearly the entire state is stuck to DSL / Dialup. It's also the reason we have one or two cell phone towers in the entire state.

Most tree huggers are on drugs I think. I keep seeing ads from people calling themselves nature lovers..they drink alcohol, smoke strange rubbish, put holes and bits of metal in their bodies and don't wash..what's natural about that??

Put lovely fibre optic cables undergound and we will have so much less impact on the environment than the coppers cables that cause huge magnetic fields that interfere in so many things and need a lot more power.

I'd stick fibre in everywhere, fast, quiet, clean and low power. Dump DSL into the slow bin!

What we really need is a floating batallion of self-powered blimps sitting up in the atmosphere/stratosphere somewhere, connected via an optical laser network.



Oh yeah

Download: 12370Kbps (1.5MB/s)
Upload: 1958Kbps (244KB/s)
Latency: 86ms
Jitter : 1ms

That's not bad considering I'm also connected through an L2TP/IPsec 256-bit VPN. I actually just changed to that from PPToP since my Usenet provider finally offered the more secure option. It's great, not only is Usenet encrypted, but so is everything else I do, plus I run my own DNS Server with Treewalk, so My ISP has no real clue where I am going, what sites I visit, what I google. Only what ports I am using.

I haven't tested it extensively, but I know if I'm not on the VPN I could easily pull 3MByte/sec Download and around 300KByte/sec upload.