Weird Problem

[Jeffsounds]

This is not Reaper related but I figured I could get an answer here because there are a lot of computer knowledgeable people here.

When I run a video, say on YooToob but it doesn't have to be, when the video is run on a normal page it runs pretty good but as soon as I blow it up to full screen I start getting the endless circle in the middle of the screen as if it is trying to catch up or reload or something. I get no audio and the endless circle. Could this have something to do with my video card? The computer came with the video card already installed and I have no clue what kind it is.

[toleolu]

Is it just internet videos that do that, or does it do the same thing with videos on your computer?

[karbomusic]

Right-click the video > stats for nerds looks for dropped frames et al. Also check the stream resolution in settings (the little gear) since it's remotely possible when you maximize YT is bumping the resolution up and that's choking across your internet connection. In most cases this is a bandwidth issue. Often however, if YT see's the bandwidth/slowness from it's end, it sometimes prompts the user with a little message... "Having trouble???"

You might set the res to something smaller instead of automatic along those same lines - because it may be 720p when not maximized then YT sees it maximized and bumps up to the same as your monitor resolution which will require a lot more bandwidth.

[nait]

Also, if you are using Chrome... in settings for Chrome, go under advanced, and toggle Use Hardware Acceleration. I've had that setting kill videos on some devices.

Option B, try another browser to see if it's related to browser settings.

[serr]

If you have rural American internet (ie 3rd world slow) and it's maxed out... well that's that. Maybe you have a sense of that? Done it before and it always worked? Trying full-screen video for the first time?

If it seems software related - maybe you know the stats and look at the telltales and KNOW it's not your internet...
Are you using Firefox? Because you should be using Firefox.

[karbomusic]

YT offers video up to 5.6k so he could have a good but not great connection and going full screen drop frames like crazy FYI - either way the stats for nerds and checking what the resolution is will provide them most important answers.

[Jeffsounds]

Originally Posted by toleolu

Is it just internet videos that do that, or does it do the same thing with videos on your computer?

I don't know, honestly. I don't really have any videos on my computer.

Originally Posted by karbomusic

Right-click the video > stats for nerds looks for dropped frames et al. Also check the stream resolution in settings (the little gear) since it's remotely possible when you maximize YT is bumping the resolution up and that's choking across your internet connection. In most cases this is a bandwidth issue. Often however, if YT see's the bandwidth/slowness from it's end, it sometimes prompts the user with a little message... "Having trouble???"

I've gotten the "Having trouble" message before but not recently. I clicked the stats for nerds and it shows 85 dropped frames of around 9200. Connection speed is right around 1300Kbps. Every now and then Network activity will jump a bit but it stays at 0KB mostly. Oddly enough this video is playing perfectly now.

Originally Posted by karbomusic

You might set the res to something smaller instead of automatic along those same lines - because it may be 720p when not maximized then YT sees it maximized and bumps up to the same as your monitor resolution which will require a lot more bandwidth.

Originally Posted by nait

Also, if you are using Chrome... in settings for Chrome, go under advanced, and toggle Use Hardware Acceleration. I've had that setting kill videos on some devices.

Option B, try another browser to see if it's related to browser settings.

I don't use Chrome. I use Firefox and Opera. Mostly Opera which is where I'm having this problem. Next time I have this problem I'll run it in Firefox and see what happens. Thanks for the idea!

Originally Posted by serr

If you have rural American internet (ie 3rd world slow) and it's maxed out... well that's that. Maybe you have a sense of that? Done it before and it always worked? Trying full-screen video for the first time?

I have cable and a decent router but it needs to be upgraded.

Originally Posted by serr

If it seems software related - maybe you know the stats and look at the telltales and KNOW it's not your internet...
Are you using Firefox? Because you should be using Firefox.

I used to use Firefox but I haven't been able to get it to work like it used to. Mainly getting Speed Dial to show up whenever I open it. I always have to hit the menu and then tell it to load Speed Dial. Before it just automatically went to Speed Dial. No matter what I put in the settings I get an error.

Originally Posted by karbomusic

YT offers video up to 5.6k so he could have a good but not great connection and going full screen drop frames like crazy FYI - either way the stats for nerds and checking what the resolution is will provide them most important answers.

Viewport/Frames - 1280x720 / 134 dropped of 13461

Current/Optimal Res - 1920x1080@30 / 1920x1080@30

[chip mcdonald]

Go to www.fast.com and see what your download speed is.

If it's ok, then I would suggest your ISP is throttling you.

[karbomusic]

Originally Posted by Jeffsounds

Viewport/Frames - 1280x720 / 134 dropped of 13461

Current/Optimal Res - 1920x1080@30 / 1920x1080@30

So you are dropping frames even @720p?

[karbomusic]

Originally Posted by chip mcdonald

If it's ok, then I would suggest your ISP is throttling you.

There could be 100 other reasons - he could take a network trace and I could probably tell within reason what the issue is but not really worth the effort.

[Jeffsounds]

Originally Posted by chip mcdonald

Go to www.fast.com and see what your download speed is.

If it's ok, then I would suggest your ISP is throttling you.

13Mbps

Originally Posted by karbomusic

So you are dropping frames even @720p?

Well, if that's what it says, it must be.

Originally Posted by karbomusic

There could be 100 other reasons - he could take a network trace and I could probably tell within reason what the issue is but not really worth the effort.

What's a network trace and why isn't it worth the effort?

[karbomusic]

Originally Posted by Jeffsounds

13Mbps


Well, if that's what it says, it must be.


What's a network trace and why isn't it worth the effort?

So it's really 13 megabits/sec which = 13/8=1.625 megbytes per second = slow enough to cause your issue - do you know what you paid for through your ISP because I'd expect the behavior you are seeing with that small bandwidth.

If you think you should getting more than 13 megabits/sec, and you've never really had issues before with fullscreen YT videos at 1080p etc. then reboot your router etc. first since 90% of issues like this (assuming you really should have more than 13mbps) are at the residence.

A network trace is just a capture of all network packets to/from your machine that I could read and figure out what is most likely the issue but 13mbps sort of answers that already.

[Jeffsounds]

Originally Posted by karbomusic

So it's really 13 megabits/sec which = 13/8=1.625 megbytes per second = slow enough to cause your issue - do you know what you paid for through your ISP because I'd expect the behavior you are seeing with that small bandwidth.

If you think you should getting more than 13 megabits/sec, and you've never really had issues before with fullscreen YT videos at 1080p etc. then reboot your router etc. first since 90% of issues like this (assuming you really should have more than 13mbps) are at the residence.

A network trace is just a capture of all network packets to/from your machine that I could read and figure out what is most likely the issue but 13mbps sort of answers that already.

I did the Spectrum speed test and it came up 14Kbps and then it recommended that I get 14Kbps. But I'm supposed to be getting much more than that, somewhere around 60 if I'm not mistaken. Guess I'll be giving them a call. Thanks for the info.

[nait]

Originally Posted by Jeffsounds

I did the Spectrum speed test and it came up 14Kbps and then it recommended that I get 14Kbps. But I'm supposed to be getting much more than that, somewhere around 60 if I'm not mistaken. Guess I'll be giving them a call. Thanks for the info.

16KBps is slow as shit, nevermind 16kbps (capital B = bytes, lowercase = bits)

Did you mean Mbps? That would be somewhat respectable, although as someone else mentioned here, if you are in a rural area, that might not get much better.

[karbomusic]

Originally Posted by nait

16KBps is slow as shit, nevermind 16kbps (capital B = bytes, lowercase = bits)

Did you mean Mbps?

Shouldn't be, internet speeds aren't generally stated in kilo/megabits, that's why what he posted caught my eye.

@Jeff:

You really need to plug a machine or laptop directly into your router, with a cable, no wireless, before and after reboot your router/modem - like I said 90% of the time it's on premise - No I don't work for an ISP but I've done enterprise level network analysis for a decade or more. Once you have the same slow speed testing directly and after reboot, call the ISP.

They are going to ask you to do that anyway, so knock that out first.

Edit: if wired works and you have plenty of neighbors, you might get a wifi analyzer app and see if everyone is hogging the same channel, I've had to swap channels around 4 times in the last five years - that problem will result is similar speed issues.

[Jeffsounds]

Originally Posted by nait

16KBps is slow as shit, nevermind 16kbps (capital B = bytes, lowercase = bits)

Did you mean Mbps? That would be somewhat respectable, although as someone else mentioned here, if you are in a rural area, that might not get much better.

I do know the difference between KBps and Kbps (not that YOU would know that) and yes, little b.

Originally Posted by karbomusic

Shouldn't be, internet speeds aren't generally stated in kilo/megabits, that's why what he posted caught my eye.

@Jeff:

You really need to plug a machine or laptop directly into your router, with a cable, no wireless, before and after reboot your router/modem - like I said 90% of the time it's on premise - No I don't work for an ISP but I've done enterprise level network analysis for a decade or more. Once you have the same slow speed testing directly and after reboot, call the ISP.

They are going to ask you to do that anyway, so knock that out first.

Our router is pretty old and it really needs to be replaced. I wish I could get a cable to it but I'd need about 60 feet of cable to get to it. I could get a shorter cable and move the computer but its current position is where it will always be anyway.

Originally Posted by karbomusic

Edit: if wired works and you have plenty of neighbors, you might get a wifi analyzer app and see if everyone is hogging the same channel, I've had to swap channels around 4 times in the last five years - that problem will result is similar speed issues.

Ok, is that a phone app? Where can I get one? And how do you swap channels? Or is that too big a thing to go into here?

[karbomusic]

Originally Posted by Jeffsounds

Ok, is that a phone app? Where can I get one? And how do you swap channels? Or is that too big a thing to go into here?

There's a desktop app if your desktop is wireless (Got it from the windows app store). The one I have on my desktop displays the channels, but if I need to move things around then I have to log into my router, go to the wireless setup and see if there is a channel I can assign that is less crowded.

I'd be surprised if there weren't a similar phone app as to my desktop app. Here's what one of the ones I have on my desktop looks like, there the numbers at the very bottom are channels and the bumps are wireless access points:

[nait]

Originally Posted by karbomusic

Shouldn't be, internet speeds aren't generally stated in kilo/megabits, that's why what he posted caught my eye.

"Internet speeds" as in download speeds (or the # spit out by a speed test)? If so, agreed, that'll be in megabytes / kilobytes (and again, 16KBps is fucking criminal, if that's the result, but I assume he meant MBps). Or do you mean bandwidth? Because unless you guys do things differently there in the States, bandwidth is always given in megabits. Looks bigger, looks better, is probably the reason.

Originally Posted by Jeffsounds

Our router is pretty old and it really needs to be replaced. I wish I could get a cable to it but I'd need about 60 feet of cable to get to it. I could get a shorter cable and move the computer but its current position is where it will always be anyway.

You could run ethernet that long (just make your own, it's pretty easy, and way cheaper), or you could use repeaters to boost your Wifi signal. That of course assumes that from point a to b you have somewhere to plug power in, however.

[karbomusic]

Originally Posted by nait

"Internet speeds" as in download speeds (or the # spit out by a speed test)? If so, agreed, that'll be in megabytes / kilobytes (and again, 16KBps is fucking criminal, if that's the result, but I assume he meant MBps). Or do you mean bandwidth? Because unless you guys do things differently there in the States, bandwidth is always given in megabits. Looks bigger, looks better, is probably the reason.

I meant the designation used for network bandwidth is bits not bytes. It caught my eye because a mental calculation of what he posted converted from bits to bytes (bits/8), looked even shittier.

[Tod]

Originally Posted by karbomusic

So it's really 13 megabits/sec which = 13/8=1.625 megbytes per second = slow enough to cause your issue - do you know what you paid for through your ISP because I'd expect the behavior you are seeing with that small bandwidth.

Hi Karbo, you're representing a second by "8", where do you get that number? I don't doubt you, I'm just trying to understand this.

So if my download is 100 megabits per sec, that would be 12.5 megabytes per second, right?

[karbomusic]

Originally Posted by Tod

Hi Karbo, you're representing a second by "8", where do you get that number? I don't doubt you, I'm just trying to understand this.

So if my download is 100 megabits per sec, that would be 12.5 megabytes per second, right?

Right 12.5 megabytes is the most you will get, but it will likely be slightly lower in reality due to various losses. Each row below stands for 1 byte, but they have different values:

00000000
10011001
11001101

Those individual numbers in a row are bits, it takes 8 bits to construct one byte, so that's why we divide by 8 to figure out how many bytes we have when bits are used in the number.

The bit/byte designation is usually denoted by a lower case or uppercase "b" b=bits B=bytes so 100 Mbps (megabits) = 100/8=12.5 MBps (megabytes) - there's an annoying exception for kilobits/bytes but the uppercase B is still the thing to watch IMHO.

I forget my network history but I assume that in the early days, bandwidth was so low (in the buad rates days) that everyone was used to bits and kilobits, and they never formally switched over to avoid confusion once things got much faster but that's just a guess. Not to mention bits sound a lot faster when written down which is convenient.

[Tod]

Originally Posted by karbomusic

Right 12.5 megabytes is the most you will get, but it will likely be slightly lower in reality due to various losses. Each row below stands for 1 byte, but they have different values:

00000000
10011001
11001101

Those individual numbers in a row are bits, it takes 8 bits to construct one byte, so that's why we divide by 8 to figure out how many bytes we have when bits are used in the number.

The bit/byte designation is usually denoted by a lower case or uppercase "b" b=bits B=bytes so 100 Mbps (megabits) = 100/8=12.5 MBps (megabytes) - there's an annoying exception for kilobits/bytes but the uppercase B is still the thing to watch IMHO.

I forget my network history but I assume that in the early days, bandwidth was so low (in the buad rates days) that everyone was used to bits and kilobits, and they never formally switched over to avoid confusion once things got much faster but that's just a guess. Not to mention bits sound a lot faster when written down which is convenient.

Thanks Karbo, I just did a speed test and got 114 megabits/sec. Thats 14.25 MB/sec, which doesn't sound like much, although I know it's faster then a lot of other folks are able to get.

Ha ha, I always thought I was getting 100 MBytes/sec until you corrected me one day a while back.

[karbomusic]

Originally Posted by Tod

Thanks Karbo, I just did a speed test and got 114 megabits/sec. Thats 14.25 MB/sec, which doesn't sound like much, although I know it's faster then a lot of other folks are able to get.

Ha ha, I always thought I was getting 100 MBytes/sec until you corrected me one day a while back.

Well you could try downloading a 100 MByte file and see if it comes down in one second'ish but I'm guessing it wont. 100MBs is not bad at all though, I have 300 but 100 was pretty good when I had it for my day-to-day needs.

Edit: Just in case you do try downloading a 100 MB file, that measurement can be tricky because when you go to download a file from the internet, while you are browsing to where you save the file (if you do), the browser is actually downloading as a temp file in the background - it's a perceived speed trick/optimization.

[nait]

Originally Posted by Tod

Thanks Karbo, I just did a speed test and got 114 megabits/sec. Thats 14.25 MB/sec, which doesn't sound like much, although I know it's faster then a lot of other folks are able to get.

Ha ha, I always thought I was getting 100 MBytes/sec until you corrected me one day a while back.

114Mbps (megabits per second) is actually pretty good. Of course, it depends on what you're paying for, however, as that could be lower than what you should be getting. I would think you're likely in the wheelhouse of your internet plan though. If you're in a rural area, then I would go so far as to say that's quite amazing. In a city, it really depends again on your plan. It does in rural areas too, but I don't know many people in rural areas that get internet as fast as 114Mbps though.

I'm not sure what max consumer bandwidth you guys have in the US either. Here in Canada where I live, one major provider goes up to 750Mbps. I'm on a 150MBps plan. I wouldn't be complaining at all if was getting the 114MBps you are though.

Edit: looks like plans do go up to at least 1Gbps in the States, so you COULD be getting 114Megabytes per second, but I'd guess it's probably megabits. (consider me jealous though, if it is 114 megabytes).

[nait]

Originally Posted by karbomusic

I forget my network history but I assume that in the early days, bandwidth was so low (in the buad rates days) that everyone was used to bits and kilobits, and they never formally switched over to avoid confusion once things got much faster but that's just a guess. Not to mention bits sound a lot faster when written down which is convenient.

I can't help but slightly derail this thread briefly, with a bit of nostalgia (so, sincerest apologies to Jeffsounds). My PC days go back to when we got our first modem, which of course didn't connect to the internet at that time, but rather to BBSes... 300 baud, it was. So 0.034kbps if you were lucky. Of course, files were way smaller back then. I don't remember when T1 and T3 lines came about, but me and my friends never could afford those... I think the fastest modem I ever had would have been 14.4kbaud.

Then, one day, somehow I get accepted into a beta test for cable modems. This was brand new here, and no one really even had them in the US either. I used to play a lot of online games back then, and we would have a LAN going with us on cable modem connection playing against poor saps using anything between 2400baud to 14.4kbaud modems. I miss those days. haha

Actually, I really miss the simplicity of bulletin boards. And what a naive online explorer I was back then. lol

[karbomusic]

Originally Posted by nait

I can't help but slightly derail this thread briefly, with a bit of nostalgia (so, sincerest apologies to Jeffsounds). My PC days go back to when we got our first modem, which of course didn't connect to the internet at that time, but rather to BBSes... 300 baud, it was. So 0.034kbps if you were lucky. Of course, files were way smaller back then. I don't remember when T1 and T3 lines came about, but me and my friends never could afford those... I think the fastest modem I ever had would have been 14.4kbaud.

Nice I first got on with an Atari 800XL, 300 baud modem, connected to compuserve when it was just a mainframe computer, so it was the beginnings of the internet but not yet the internet - though it wasn't the internet, everyone in the world using it was there, and we could interact via chat etc... and the beginnings of what they called special interest groups at the time, so it was internet'ish just as a command line LOL.

[nait]

I do remember Compuserve. I don't think we ever had it though, cause if I recall correctly, it came with a monthly cost (although either that and/or AOL used to spam you with free month subscription in every single computer related thing you bought back then too lol). I was too young back then, a young teen, and my parents weren't going to pay for that.

[Glennbo]

Originally Posted by nait

I do remember Compuserve. I don't think we ever had it though, cause if I recall correctly, it came with a monthly cost (although either that and/or AOL used to spam you with free month subscription in every single computer related thing you bought back then too lol). I was too young back then, living at home, and my parents weren't going to pay for that.

Compuserve had a lot of additional fee areas, and after ringing up over $100 in additional fees one month, I cancelled my account and got AOL for about a year until Netcom, the first unlimited internet provider I found out about came along.

[karbomusic]

Originally Posted by nait

I do remember Compuserve. I don't think we ever had it though, cause if I recall correctly, it came with a monthly cost (although either that and/or AOL used to spam you with free month subscription in every single computer related thing you bought back then too lol). I was too young back then, a young teen, and my parents weren't going to pay for that.

AFAIK, in 1983 (when I was on Compuserve) AOL was non-existent, by the time AOL came around I had bailed into music/gigging mostly full time and forgot all about computers for about a decade. I remember that phase where AOL sent you free minutes offer CDs... seemed like once a week LOL but I didn't even have a computer (my room mate may have though).

[Jeffsounds]

Originally Posted by karbomusic

There's a desktop app if your desktop is wireless (Got it from the windows app store). The one I have on my desktop displays the channels, but if I need to move things around then I have to log into my router, go to the wireless setup and see if there is a channel I can assign that is less crowded.

I'd be surprised if there weren't a similar phone app as to my desktop app. Here's what one of the ones I have on my desktop looks like, there the numbers at the very bottom are channels and the bumps are wireless access points:

Hey, I'd rather have an app for my desktop than for my phone so if you can point me to an app, I'd be most appreciative!

Originally Posted by nait

You could run ethernet that long (just make your own, it's pretty easy, and way cheaper), or you could use repeaters to boost your Wifi signal. That of course assumes that from point a to b you have somewhere to plug power in, however.

You know, I just may do that. It would be a major pain to get to the router but it would probably be worth it. Just need a CAT 5, right? I remember when my wife and I were looking at houses, the one she really wanted had built in CAT 5 stations in every room. They just wouldn't budge on the price and it wasn't worth what they were asking for it.

Originally Posted by karbomusic

AFAIK, in 1983 (when I was on Compuserve) AOL was non-existent, by the time AOL came around I had bailed into music/gigging mostly full time and forgot all about computers for about a decade. I remember that phase where AOL sent you free minutes offer CDs... seemed like once a week LOL but I didn't even have a computer (my room mate may have though).

I remember those CD's... we called them coasters...

[karbomusic]

This is the one I was using, I think I upgraded to pro but I think the free version will do what you need.

https://www.microsoft.com/en-us/p/wi...r/9nblggh33n0n

[nait]

Originally Posted by Jeffsounds

Hey, I'd rather have an app for my desktop than for my phone so if you can point me to an app, I'd be most appreciative!


You know, I just may do that. It would be a major pain to get to the router but it would probably be worth it. Just need a CAT 5, right? I remember when my wife and I were looking at houses, the one she really wanted had built in CAT 5 stations in every room. They just wouldn't budge on the price and it wasn't worth what they were asking for it.


I remember those CD's... we called them coasters...

Cat5 will suffice, but be sure to use 5e or up for ability for Gigabit speeds. I did a little wiring in my house with Cat6. You could even just buy a fully assembled Cat6 cable for $17+shipping on monoprice.com (I've bought a lot of stuff there, they are pretty good). Only thing is, if you have some weird routing to do of the cable through tight spaces, you might want to just buy some cable and some ends, and then crimp some ends on yourself. That saves money if you do this a lot, but if it's just a one time thing, you'll pay more though.

Of course the price goes up a lot (let's say triple), but you can even order outdoor rated ethernet cables that are a bit more rugged, if that's a concern.

FYI cat5 (not recommended), cat5e or cat6 will all work just fine with any of your networking devices. I bought ends that actually said they were for cat6 cable, but I'm not sure if they really work any differently. They do sell different ends for stranded wires vs. solid wires though, so pay attention to that if you order the cables and ends separately to do it yourself. I think either way they're all "RJ45" ends, so any RJ45 crimper will do.

Originally Posted by karbomusic

AFAIK, in 1983 (when I was on Compuserve) AOL was non-existent, by the time AOL came around I had bailed into music/gigging mostly full time and forgot all about computers for about a decade. I remember that phase where AOL sent you free minutes offer CDs... seemed like once a week LOL but I didn't even have a computer (my room mate may have though).

I don't think we got our first computer in my home until 85 or 86, so I would have missed out on the dawn of the "Al Gore". lol But I think we got an IBM PC Jr in 85-ish. A year or two before that, we had a Texas Instruments TI-99/4A! That one never had a modem at all. I'm not even sure if our PC Jr did either.. I know the next computer, PC XT, we did get a modem for that. So it was probably 4 or 5 years after the dawn of Compuserve before I finally got to explore the virtual world outside my home. haha By then, AOL was definitely a thing. Not sure which of those were spamming free subs at the time though.. maybe both.

[Glennbo]

Originally Posted by nait

Cat5 will suffice, but be sure to use 5e or up for ability for Gigabit speeds. I did a little wiring in my house with Cat6.

There's a couple hundred feet of Cat6 running back and fourth through my attic and every room has a drop with a gigabit switch.

I set it all up way back when only two machines out of seven in the house had gigabit lan adapters, but I figgered that I might as well get the infrastructure in place.

[cyrano]

Solid is for long cable. Stranded is for patch (short) cable. Stranded is flexible, but degrades in use. Solid lasts decades, unless it's abused.

Be sure to connect the different pairs to the right pins. The twist is different for real cat6.

Don't worry for home use.

[nait]

Originally Posted by Glennbo

There's a couple hundred feet of Cat6 running back and fourth through my attic and every room has a drop with a gigabit switch.

I set it all up way back when only two machines out of seven in the house had gigabit lan adapters, but I figgered that I might as well get the infrastructure in place.

Nice, that is a great setup, and good planning!

My house was built in 2010 and they wired all the phone jacks with cat6. So I just had to change the jack ends to wire in all the wires to have ethernet, in a few locations. Had to wire in a couple of rooms that didn't have phone lines in convenient spots though. This seems to be more of a common thing now. If I ever do this new build thing again, I'm going to put a little more thought into that though.

Originally Posted by cyrano

Solid is for long cable. Stranded is for patch (short) cable. Stranded is flexible, but degrades in use. Solid lasts decades, unless it's abused.

Ahh, right.. forgot about that. I did order solid in my house for that reason.

[Glennbo]

Originally Posted by nait

Nice, that is a great setup, and good planning!

My house was built in 2010 and they wired all the phone jacks with cat6. So I just had to change the jack ends to wire in all the wires to have ethernet, in a few locations. Had to wire in a couple of rooms that didn't have phone lines in convenient spots though. This seems to be more of a common thing now. If I ever do this new build thing again, I'm going to put a little more thought into that though.

That was convenient having some of your wiring already in place. Even though we retired our land line and now use a phone system that connects through our cell phones, the physical phone lines in the house are the old school solid copper 4-wire type.

[toleolu]

Originally Posted by Jeffsounds

I did the Spectrum speed test and it came up 14Kbps and then it recommended that I get 14Kbps. But I'm supposed to be getting much more than that, somewhere around 60 if I'm not mistaken. Guess I'll be giving them a call. Thanks for the info.

Maybe you should upgrade that dial up modem.

Bet you have a rotary phone on that bad boy too.

[nait]

hahaha I would hope he meant 14Mbps (mega instead of kilo).

[chip mcdonald]

Originally Posted by Jeffsounds

13Mbps

That's slow.

Check the speed at 9:30 a.m. and see if it's any faster.

[serr]

I hear dialup can get up to 54kbps these days!