correct me if i am wrong but...........on the maximum 8128k sync speed , this yields a max possible IP profile of 7150 k, which I enjoy with idnet. on the best 10 speedtest results at dslzone, I did a speedtest at 09.09am this morning and I got a very nice reading of 6935k connection speed.
However, the top spot is held by somebody who uses Be as their ISP and it says for a sync speed of 8128k that he got a speed rating of 7322 k. With the max profile on that sync speed being 7150k, how can he get a reading of 7322k ....?
Has he got an unnaturally fast connection or is he living literally across the road from the exchange ? Perhaps somebody could enlighten me.
James
The max possible throughput on a 7150 profile is somewhere around 6950-7000 after overheads, so it looks like the inherient problems of speedtests have struck again!
This may sound a daft question, but why are some speedtests so unreliable? What do they actually do except download and upload, and how could this go ( in some cases) so horribly wrong?
I reckon that the user has used the wrong sync speed box, BE is usually a far higher sync speed.
Quote from: Dont mention Talk Talk !! on Feb 04, 2008, 21:58:13
However, the top spot is held by somebody who uses Be as their ISP and it says for a sync speed of 8128k that he got a speed rating of 7322 k. With the max profile on that sync speed being 7150k, how can he get a reading of 7322k ....?
BE don't use profiles, they let the line run as fast as it can go. Profiles are used by BT to keep the load on their system down. :(
Ah. That would be why then!
No profiles would make a world of difference to the service we get, Lance. Why has Ofcom never picked up on it I wonder??
Because BT have passed enough brown envelopes? :o
You're as cynical as me - which is bad at your age. ;) Curiously, none of the campaigners, eg Watchdog, has ever picked up on the issue either.
It's probably considered too technical for their viewers. >:D
You have a point there, and yet it's a major factor in the speed which these campaigns always bang on about.
Quote from: madasahatter on Feb 05, 2008, 14:48:10
It's probably considered too technical for their viewers. >:D
....and their presenters.. ;)
Quote from: Inactive on Feb 05, 2008, 14:57:41
....and their presenters.. ;)
More than likely ;D
The thing is, while interesting to us, most people would just wonder what the hell it is they were banging on about - plus they wouldn't be able to get their "sexy" camera shots in ;D. I would say that the average Joe on the street justs want to plug it in and get on with it with the minimum of fuss - they are not bothered how it all works.
Must admit that I'm the same with other things in my life - my car for instance - I care not a jot for what goes on under the bonnet as long as it DOES go on!
Though they are bothered, some at least, about the speeds they get - and profiles have a big influence on that.
Totally agree Rik - what we need is Tomorrow's World to come back and do a special on it ;)
Raymond Baxter. :)
I got this result the other day which just goes to show how inaccurate speedtests can be.
(http://www.speedtest.net/result/220282587.png) (http://www.speedtest.net)
Quote from: Rik on Feb 05, 2008, 17:47:48
Raymond Baxter. :)
Yeah - that guy WAS Tomorrow's World. He used to do the Motor Show as well didn't he? And commentate on stuff like the red arrows displays? What a voice!
That's the man. Was a Spitfire pilot in the war, iirc.
Yeah - I remember reading that somewhere. He was a presenter that you felt you could totally trust and believe what he said - not many of those about nowadays >:(
O - there was Frank Bough - comfortable jumpers - the lovely "Uncle/Father" figure from next door who was everybodys friend. Until a certain incident got him thrown off the telly ;)
I think there was a lot to be said for the old journalistic practice of not reporting on people's private lives unless they impacted on their public lives.
Totally agree - I dislike the "cult of the celebrity" that we have now.
To be honest, I don't care if the Beckhams visited a zoo, or some Hollywood actress wore their pyjamas to nip down the corner shop, or a singer was drunk in a club - so what? What difference does it make? It's almost like members of the public have never done any of these things, or that they are so unusual.
Private lives should be kept just that - private. It's nothing to do with any of us - would we like our every moves noted and reported on? certainly not. Why then do some people think that it's right for other people to suffer this treatment?
O my - I'm really in rant mode at the moment - sorry :-[
It's OK, I agree with you totally. Stop telling me about these people, I don't want to know.
Quote from: Rik on Feb 05, 2008, 18:50:10
It's OK, I agree with you totally. Stop telling me about these people, I don't want to know.
:rofl: :rofl: