New Shaw speeds

[Tom]

I consistently hit between 9.7MB/s and 12.5MB/s (ran the test 12 times).  It was either right by the lower amount or right by the upper amount.

You mean 9.7mb/s and 12.5mb/s right? even with speed boost getting 12.5MB/s is rather impossible. The most I've ever seen is 3-4MB/s and 4MB/s is like 32mb/s.

Thanks for the correction, too bad you weren't quite right.  No, I did not mean megabytes per second (MB/s), I meant megabits per second (Mb/s).  I definitely was not talking about millibits per second (mb/s). See?  http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Milli  <-- lower-case "m" is milli.

I guess what I'm saying is that if you're going to be pedantic, at least be right.

lol. I suppose I deserve that. I just didn't feel like being THAT pedantic.

If you want to continue, what I meant by mb really is Megabits, and MB should have been MiB/s Since M means 1,000,000 bytes, and I meant 1,048,576 bytes, which has been standardized by SI to be MiB.

[Thorin]

Speedtest.net reports in kbps (aka kb/s), which is kilobits per second.  Thus I moved the decimal three spaces and referred to Mb/s, megabits per second (but mistakenly capitalized the "b").  I assumed Speedtest.net was speaking in powers of ten, not powers of two.

If you want to continue, what I meant by mb really is Megabits, and MB should have been MiB/s Since M means 1,000,000 bytes, and I meant 1,048,576 bytes, which has been standardized by SI to be MiB.

No, Kibi (Ki), Mebi (Mi), etc are not SI units.  They are prefixes for binary units defined by the International Electrotechnical Commission (IEC) in standard 60027 amendment 2 revision 2005 (about to be replaced with a combination of ISO standard 80000 and IEC standard 80000, which will maintain the same definition of these prefixes).

In fact, the old KB, kB, MB, kb, mb, etc, aren't SI units either.  The base unit of these "measurements" are "B" and "b" or bytes and bits, neither of which appear in any official SI base unit or derived unit list.  Just as one could say the dealership has a kilocar sitting on its lot, one can say that a program uses a kilobyte on a drive.  Both statements use prefixes from the SI system to make a new term that is not an official standard but is understood by consumers.  In fact, in SI "B" means Bel, a unit of measurement most commonly used in it's one-tenth form "deciBel" or "dB".

If I remember correctly, "bit" is officially defined by an IEEE standard, but "byte" still isn't.  We accept that a byte is eight bits because that's what everyone uses it as, but at this point you could make a system with seven or nine bits per byte and not be wrong according to any published international standard.  It should be noted that the IEEE recommends "b" for bit and "B" for byte, while the IEC recommends "bit" for bit and "B" for byte.

And if a dealership has a kilocar sitting on its lot, I hope they're selling more than a decacar a day or it'll take 'em over three months to clear the lot...

[Darren Dirt]

Welcome to Pedantic City, population 2.

[Tom]

Funny I didn't see Thorin's reply sooner. This forum software is weird. If a browser window closes, the unread posts link will clear the posts at random.

[Melbosa]

This forum software is weird. If a browser window closes, the unread posts link will clear the posts at random.

LOL for the life of me I can't reproduce these "bugs". I've tried, really!  I can't fix it if I can't troubleshoot it

[Mr. Analog]

This forum software is weird. If a browser window closes, the unread posts link will clear the posts at random.

LOL for the life of me I can't reproduce these "bugs". I've tried, really!  I can't fix it if I can't troubleshoot it

I often get "bad gateway" errors too. Not sure what that's all about but I only get it on RW... :-?

[Melbosa]

This forum software is weird. If a browser window closes, the unread posts link will clear the posts at random.

LOL for the life of me I can't reproduce these "bugs". I've tried, really!  I can't fix it if I can't troubleshoot it

I often get "bad gateway" errors too. Not sure what that's all about but I only get it on RW... :-?

That one I am aware of and trying to fix.  I know the cause of it.

[Thorin]

Welcome to Pedantic City, population 2.

But daddy, he started it!

I'm just interested to see if Tom will actually say, "Yes, that is the absolute correct truth, I was not completely correct."  Most Internet technical-jargon-nazis that I've exchanged words with lack the humility to admit mistakes, which bugs me.  I mean, if you're going to pick on someone else's mistake, make sure you're ready to admit your own.

This forum software is weird. If a browser window closes, the unread posts link will clear the posts at random.

LOL for the life of me I can't reproduce these "bugs". I've tried, really!  I can't fix it if I can't troubleshoot it

Yeah, Mel, I've been trying to make sure I get a list of steps to reproduce a problem...  One of the things I reported was the (to me at least) weirdness of marking a post "new" without showing it in the "new posts" page.  But we had that discussion before.  The other thing I've noticed is that if a thread has new posts and you go to the "new posts" page and click the "new" button, and the oldest post that you haven't read yet is not on the last page, there's no indication that there are more posts on more pages other than the page numbers at the bottom.

So, for example, I check the "new posts" page.  It tells me there's a new post in thread xyz.  Now, thread xyz has 20 posts, 7 of which are new posts since I last read the thread, the last 5 of which are on page 2.  When I click the "new" button next to the thread name, I get taken to page 1 post 14 (the oldest new post), and unless I look carefully to see if there are more pages in the thread, I won't know that there are 5 more posts on page 2.

It'd be nice if posts not shown on the current page are not flagged as read - that'd take care of missing posts on newer pages.

[Lazybones]

2.0 of the forum software is comming soon, maybe it will fix that issue.

[Melbosa]

2.0 of the forum software is comming soon, maybe it will fix that issue.

We can only hope!

[Darren Dirt]

I'm just interested to see if Tom will actually say, "Yes, that is the absolute correct truth, I was not completely correct."  Most Internet technical-jargon-nazis---

Warning: thread civility metric nearing zero.




j/k, I know what you're saying.

[Thorin]

Yeah, I meant that term in the same general sense as the term Grammar Nazi.  I was not attempting to derail the thread by comparing subject matter being debated to Nazis or the Holocaust, thus I did not consider myself engaging in Reductio ad Nazium.  I suppose I would've been better off finding synonyms for pedantry.

2.0 of the forum software is comming soon, maybe it will fix that issue.

We can only hope!

Would be nice.  I wonder if anyone's reported it as a bug?  I imagine it won't get changed if no one's complained about it...

And Tom?  In case I've gotten under your skin or pissed you off, sorry.

[Tom]

Yeah, I meant that term in the same general sense as the term Grammar Nazi.  I was not attempting to derail the thread by comparing subject matter being debated to Nazis or the Holocaust, thus I did not consider myself engaging in Reductio ad Nazium.  I suppose I would've been better off finding synonyms for pedantry.

2.0 of the forum software is comming soon, maybe it will fix that issue.

We can only hope!

Would be nice.  I wonder if anyone's reported it as a bug?  I imagine it won't get changed if no one's complained about it...

And Tom?  In case I've gotten under your skin or pissed you off, sorry.

I thought we were having some good fun, sorry if I pissed you off

[Darren Dirt]

^ cue that 3-note "feel good, family moment" musical piece from the Family Guy episode...

[Mr. Analog]

You know what else is great? Porn.