Looks like the three servers listed are [amusingly] too hammered with traffic to serve requests right now..

Server 1 just said "Too many clients connected.."

Server 2 gave me a wait time of 1251 seconds.

Server 3 didn't respond at all.

So I think, in this case, the connection problem is on their end. ;)

server busy....all the time.... mmmm..r u sure its made by google?

@antoineawwad:

Google has assembled a suite of free tools (developed by researchers, not by Google itself)

I don't think they were ever sure of that..

@ScottRose: Could the ISPs maybe be fooling with them? I'll try in a few days.

Works fine here....waiting for results. I tried to get on this when I first seen it on Lifehacker, but the page would not even load.

I really don't need this test though, comcast sends reset packets constantly on certain days. I know when they've done it, because after the router resets, I can not access Google for about 12-15 minutes.

Speedtest from [www.bandwidthplace.com] is pretty handy. I used it to prove to our previous ISP that we were not even getting close to expected broadband speeds and actually closer to dial up. I called a few times to complain and they dismissed me as being some ignorant luddite who didn't know what they were talking about.

I called back and offered to send them the screen shots of the speed tests right off the cable modem. Suddenly they believed me and scheduled someone to come out. They had supposedly set something that was causing packet collisions in the cable modem. My guess is it was more likely they throttle down new customers and only open up your cable modem if your smart enough to complain. There is a reason they are no longer my provider.

@bohemian: Well at least tell us who your former ISP is so we can avoid them as well.

These tests are useless. The NDT repeatedly responds "Protocol Error". The Glasnost test displays a red "server overload" message.

Surely this isn't the mighty Google at work.

@Xerloq: It's run from servers outside of Google. Google is simply collecting the tools.

Our router has extremely prejudiced traffic shaping so I don't really care what goes on afterwards. I'm not for net neutrality. I want VoIP packets prioritized over porn and bittorrent. I'd be happy if streaming video is also prioritized (below VoIP) over bittorrent.

I think people loose sight that some traffic shaping is helpful when they are suddenly afraid their torrent tracker sources will no longer work. There's a lot of grey area between Traffic Shaping and host blocking.

I can, however, understand the fears that one (the former) is the excuse for the other (the later.)

Our WAN connection prioritizes VoIP, followed by any servers (mostly DMS), then FTP (which we use to upload projects), then miscellaneous web traffic, then near-lowest is HTTP/HTTP-ALT/HTTPS/Flash Media Streaming, then Bittorrent at it's very lowest priority.

I know that know matter what the "linux ISOs" will get here. But I like my calls to be clear.

@dialing_wand: ok.. that last "it's" should be "its" and "I know that know" should be "I know that no matter..."

Sorry grammar police. Mein bads. ;)

@bohemian: I am using Verizon DSL here in New York City. I just tried it and got

497.74kilobits per second

60.76kilobytes per second

33.641seconds

9:24 PM Mon Feb 09, 2009

Obviously, not the greatest thing going. It might change if I do it again. But what I am curious about (besides as CMU_Bueller asked, who is your isp?), is what do you mean you got "screen shots of the speed tests right off the cable modem"? How did you do that and do you think it's possible with my Westell DSL modem?

TIA.

@nybiker: Just to clarify, while the 'google' tests were unavailable, my comment about "just tried it" refers to the [www.bandwidthplace.com] site.

Sorry for any confusion.

@bohemian: You used it to "prove" to them? Are you actually surprised they dismissed you? There is so many variables that can affect those tests, not to mention the speeds aren't guaranteed to begin with. Someone would be right to roll their eyes and dismiss you based on a speed test(s) alone.

I ran Speedtest.net 3 times AND wrote this post in the time Google was waiting for server time.

I'm sure Speakeasy.net is just as good as SpeedTest.

Still waiting for Google.

Sweet. Maybe now I can prove to my idiot roommate that her and her idiot boyfriend are eating up all my precious bandwidth.

@acasto: Well, when your webpages take a minute or two to load and the speed test shows you're running at 50k down I think that's believable, is it not?

M-Lab maybe Google's, but the tools that are used in the back end are absolutely not.

@dialing_wand: Quality of Service and traffic shaping at your router are not the same as net neutrality.

The net neutrality argument is to keep your ISP from charging you, and whoever is on the other end of your VoIP call extra to prioritize it, or even deliver it at all on THEIR network.

bandwidthplace:

1.85megabits per second
225.41kilobytes per second
9.068seconds
10:21 AM Tue Feb 10, 2009

cablevision, Asbury Park, NJ ($30/mo!)
feelin ok bout that...

Comcast stopped throttling bit torrent. Instead, they've decided to treat my home's Blast! (16 MBps down, 2 MBps up) like it has powerboost whenever I try to actually download something big enough that the speed is useful. It reaches the advertised speed, then slowly goes down to zero, then goes back to top speed. Rinse, lather, repeat.

FIOS has more consistent speed, right? They're not in my town yet, but they're advertising at the malls nearby, so I think the writing is on the walls.

@MrGutts: I get the impression they're providing some servers, and the big point behind Google working with this is their expertise at crunching large amounts of data and advocating for ISPs to provide fast, unrestricted internet with their ridiculous amounts of resources.

@dialing_wand:

I agree with SynMonger, you are probably a little bit confused about Network Neutrality.

Network Neutrality is against your ISP charging you an extra $50 a month for "Enhanced VoIP" so your skype calls still work, all the while the ISP offers "Our VoIP works faster and doesn't cost you $50 a month". It's against the idea of artificial trade barriers where you have to pay protection money to a syndicate so you get the service you already paid good money for.

As far as not throttling BT goes, you're not looking at the issue correctly. It isn't about ISOs. Where I am, we don't have Network Neutrality at all. Bell Canada throttles bit torrent files for virtually *ALL* DSL in Ontario and Quebec (including most all DSL provided by other companies, incredible it didn't make consumierst) and therefore people couldn't watch the Canada's Next Great Prime Minister (which our taxes PAID FOR) within a reasonable amount of time because of this.

But to make it worse, at about the same time Bell started this tactic, it opened up an internet VIDEO STORE where they SELL videos. It isn't throttled. WHAT-THE-HELL? Basically, they are saying "Here's the deal: You buy movies from our store, and not any other store because we have goons on the street that will beat you up if you go in them."

I didn't even get into the Rogers (cable internet) and how they throttle non-Rogers VoIP so customers would buy their Rogers VoIP.

And it's all 100% legal. And that's what you want? You are joking/mistaken, right?

Trust me, you do *not* want the USA to become Canada when it comes to communications services. The baggage Bell Canada has saddled our country with would make you sick. It will make you wish for the good old days of AT&T where when you cancelled your phone service, you didn't get a surprise bill for $300 that you have to spend several months fighting. The good old days where when you ordered service you didn't pay for AT&T to lay wire up to your house. The good old days where you didn't pay a special fee for the privilege of calling a dial-around (10-10) number. The good old days where payphones gave change, and calls didn't cost $0.50. The good old days where you didn't have to call the FCC (CRTC here for these) just to get a normal busy tone and demarc installed. The good old days where you could demand $500 for every call or fax after the first from a telemarketer.