JohnH,
Thanks, I like how they give you the up speed as well. I've been using
the one through CNET and the download speed is pretty much the same. I'm
getting around 2774 up. I like how the site lets you search out others
in your zip and see their speeds. One fellow is getting 6000 from the
same server.
Paul


JohnH wrote:
On Sun, 30 Jan 2005 15:15:48 -0500, Paul Schilter
wrote:


JohnH,
What speed test did you use?
Paul


JohnH wrote:

On Sun, 30 Jan 2005 17:10:52 GMT, Jim wrote:



Larry Hill wrote:


I'm ignorant about computer stuff.So how did you switch from aol to
Google?...Please keep it simple...Thanks,
Larry Hill

By far the best answer is to disengage yourself from AOL. There are far
better choices for internet access.

I've always liked Earthlink.

My opinion.


I use Cox. Great service, few outages, very fast.

Here's the results of a speed test about two minutes ago:

2005-01-30 12:43:15 EST: 4398 / 506
Your download speed : 4503694 bps, or 4398 kbps.
A 549.7 KB/sec transfer rate.
Your upload speed : 518224 bps, or 506 kbps.

Can't complain about that.



This one:

http://chi.speakeasy.net/

Just click the 'Start' button under 'Test your broadband'. I didn't
register or anything.

John H

On the 'PocoLoco' out of Deale, MD,
on the beautiful Chesapeake Bay!

"Divide each difficulty into as many parts as is feasible and necessary to resolve it."
Rene Descartes

On Sun, 30 Jan 2005 18:11:21 -0500, Paul Schilter
wrote:

JohnH,
Thanks, I like how they give you the up speed as well. I've been using
the one through CNET and the download speed is pretty much the same. I'm
getting around 2774 up. I like how the site lets you search out others
in your zip and see their speeds. One fellow is getting 6000 from the
same server.
Paul


snipped

Do the test a few times in succession. My speed was in the 2700 range
once, and two minutes later it was in the 47-4800 range.

John H

On the 'PocoLoco' out of Deale, MD,
on the beautiful Chesapeake Bay!

"Divide each difficulty into as many parts as is feasible and necessary to resolve it."
Rene Descartes

JohnH,
I just upgraded to 6M for an extra $10 a month. One computer sees
5800Kb but this one still sees 2800Kb. Something else to tinker with. :-)
Paul


JohnH wrote:
On Sun, 30 Jan 2005 18:11:21 -0500, Paul Schilter
wrote:


JohnH,
Thanks, I like how they give you the up speed as well. I've been using
the one through CNET and the download speed is pretty much the same. I'm
getting around 2774 up. I like how the site lets you search out others
in your zip and see their speeds. One fellow is getting 6000 from the
same server.
Paul



snipped

Do the test a few times in succession. My speed was in the 2700 range
once, and two minutes later it was in the 47-4800 range.

John H

On the 'PocoLoco' out of Deale, MD,
on the beautiful Chesapeake Bay!

"Divide each difficulty into as many parts as is feasible and necessary to resolve it."
Rene Descartes

On Mon, 31 Jan 2005 18:06:40 -0500, Paul Schilter
wrote:

JohnH,
I just upgraded to 6M for an extra $10 a month. One computer sees
5800Kb but this one still sees 2800Kb. Something else to tinker with. :-)
Paul


That's weird. Did you do the test several times in succession? Could
the RAM be an issue? Try connecting the slow computer to the cable now
connected to the fast one. Hell, I don't know. Are you going through a
router with both machines?

John H

On the 'PocoLoco' out of Deale, MD,
on the beautiful Chesapeake Bay!

"Divide each difficulty into as many parts as is feasible and necessary to resolve it."
Rene Descartes

JohnH,
Actually while I had Comcast tech on the line I did see a download of
close to 6M on this machine so I thought all was well. Only when I went
back to try it with a different reporting site did it show the original
2.8M. I then went back to the first site and it also now showed 2.8M.
I've subsequently tried my wireless laptop which showed 3.8M an
improvement over its original 2.7M. The third computer (wife's)showed
5.8M. Haven't tried the fourth computer (older HP). Only the laptop is
wireless the other three are cat5 wired. I doubt it's a ram issue as
this machine has 1G and in all other respects is fast as hell.
Paul


JohnH wrote:
On Mon, 31 Jan 2005 18:06:40 -0500, Paul Schilter
wrote:


JohnH,
I just upgraded to 6M for an extra $10 a month. One computer sees
5800Kb but this one still sees 2800Kb. Something else to tinker with. :-)
Paul



That's weird. Did you do the test several times in succession? Could
the RAM be an issue? Try connecting the slow computer to the cable now
connected to the fast one. Hell, I don't know. Are you going through a
router with both machines?

John H

On the 'PocoLoco' out of Deale, MD,
on the beautiful Chesapeake Bay!

"Divide each difficulty into as many parts as is feasible and necessary to resolve it."
Rene Descartes

On Tue, 01 Feb 2005 14:30:22 -0500, Paul Schilter
wrote:

JohnH,
Actually while I had Comcast tech on the line I did see a download of
close to 6M on this machine so I thought all was well. Only when I went
back to try it with a different reporting site did it show the original
2.8M. I then went back to the first site and it also now showed 2.8M.
I've subsequently tried my wireless laptop which showed 3.8M an
improvement over its original 2.7M. The third computer (wife's)showed
5.8M. Haven't tried the fourth computer (older HP). Only the laptop is
wireless the other three are cat5 wired. I doubt it's a ram issue as
this machine has 1G and in all other respects is fast as hell.
Paul


JohnH wrote:
On Mon, 31 Jan 2005 18:06:40 -0500, Paul Schilter
wrote:



JohnH,
I just upgraded to 6M for an extra $10 a month. One computer sees
5800Kb but this one still sees 2800Kb. Something else to tinker with. :-)
Paul



That's weird. Did you do the test several times in succession? Could
the RAM be an issue? Try connecting the slow computer to the cable now
connected to the fast one. Hell, I don't know. Are you going through a
router with both machines?

John H

On the 'PocoLoco' out of Deale, MD,
on the beautiful Chesapeake Bay!

"Divide each difficulty into as many parts as is feasible and necessary to resolve it."
Rene Descartes

Don't know what the problem could be, but I do know that my brother,
who also has Comcast, is always complaining about his slow speeds.
He's out in the Seattle area. He has a hard time believing the speeds
I'm getting with Cox.

Here's the latest, about 30 seconds ago:

2005-02-01 14:53:13 EST: 4329 / 506
Your download speed : 4432988 bps, or 4329 kbps.
A 541.1 KB/sec transfer rate.
Your upload speed : 518896 bps, or 506 kbps.

I'm not paying for the upgrade that Cox is offering, up to 5mb for $5
a month more. Hell, I'm pretty satisfied with what I'm getting.


John H

On the 'PocoLoco' out of Deale, MD,
on the beautiful Chesapeake Bay!

"Divide each difficulty into as many parts as is feasible and necessary to resolve it."
Rene Descartes

Harry,
I use http://reviews.cnet.com/7004-7254_7-0.html &
http://chi.speakeasy.net/ to do these tests. CNET only gives download
speeds but Speakeasy also shows upload speeds. Comcast was supposed to
do a free upgrade to 4M download but I chose to up it to 6M for an extra
$10.
Paul


Harry Krause wrote:
Paul Schilter wrote:

JohnH,
Actually while I had Comcast tech on the line I did see a download
of close to 6M on this machine so I thought all was well. Only when I
went back to try it with a different reporting site did it show the
original 2.8M. I then went back to the first site and it also now
showed 2.8M. I've subsequently tried my wireless laptop which showed
3.8M an improvement over its original 2.7M. The third computer
(wife's)showed 5.8M. Haven't tried the fourth computer (older HP).
Only the laptop is wireless the other three are cat5 wired. I doubt
it's a ram issue as this machine has 1G and in all other respects is
fast as hell.
Paul


JohnH wrote:

On Mon, 31 Jan 2005 18:06:40 -0500, Paul Schilter
wrote:


JohnH,
I just upgraded to 6M for an extra $10 a month. One computer
sees 5800Kb but this one still sees 2800Kb. Something else to tinker
with. :-)
Paul



That's weird. Did you do the test several times in succession? Could
the RAM be an issue? Try connecting the slow computer to the cable now
connected to the fast one. Hell, I don't know. Are you going through a
router with both machines?

John H

On the 'PocoLoco' out of Deale, MD, on the beautiful Chesapeake Bay!

"Divide each difficulty into as many parts as is feasible and
necessary to resolve it." Rene Descartes



I get about 3 megabits when connecting to speed test servers on the west
coast in the middle of the day.

Harry,
Well look at it this way, the **** just comes at you faster! :-)
Paul

Harry Krause wrote:
snipped
Yeah, I read about that. Didn't see any reason to pay a nickel more for
the same bad content.