It does when the server you are testing from is on the same network as the user!
While these speed tests are fun and all, they may not be a true reflection of throughput for your particular connection.
When I want to test throughput, I DL the Mac OS 9.2.1 update from Apple's site. The file is 82MB in size. I time the DL.
The fastest that I have DL'ed it was using my friend's FTTH connection. It took 7 seconds -- and that was quite a few years ago here in Japan.
So for those who really want to see how fast your DL time is, you can DL the file mentioned above and time the DL. If you do, please post the actual time in minutes/seconds to DL the file.
While these speed tests are fun and all, they may not be a true reflection of throughput for your particular connection.
When I want to test throughput, I DL the Mac OS 9.2.1 update from Apple's site. The file is 82MB in size. I time the DL.
The fastest that I have DL'ed it was using my friend's FTTH connection. It took 7 seconds -- and that was quite a few years ago here in Japan.
So for those who really want to see how fast your DL time is, you can DL the file mentioned above and time the DL. If you do, please post the actual time in minutes/seconds to DL the file.
Okay, so if I understand you correctly, it took you about 75 seconds to DL the Mac OS 9.2.1 update. And it took you about 2 seconds to DL the QT package. Quite a difference in DL speeds (8.8 Mbps vs 288.8 Mbps).I downloaded the 9.2.1 update at 1.1 MB/s. I downloaded the 72.2 MB Quicktime package in no more than 2 seconds.
Cool.Well in my case, my results were accurate. I use bitorrent to re-download ubuntu or openoffice to test throughput.
im sorry but that is one of the most pathetically stupid differences ive ever seen! but still.. im jealous haha
Quite a drop from the before mentioned 424Mbps when you go off campus outside of Atlanta.