Calling all Maxonline users.

[evershine]

They may throttle ports used by popular p2p filesharing software, but that is easily overcome. I doubt they will throttle bandwidth on any specific user. In anycase, it is difficult to say with any certainty what is the issue if one is using P2P performance as a gauge.

I've always been able to get full download speeds on all http/ftp downloads for the past 8 years and that I believe is a more accurate measure of whether the bandwidth is present.

I am just guessing, and it is not difficult to see the logic. If I am the server admin, if a user has very high speed link and continously download from my server, it definitely will deprive other users from accessing and may slow down other users. I would start to investigate what this user is trying to do. Bandwidth is expensive. I need to buy bandwidth from the service provider to host my webserver. If a user is hogging it, then others maybe affected.

May I know what is your speed? I am surprise if you can get full download speed if you are having 3Mbps. If you have 512kbps, then it is easily fill up. Also it depends on timing, during peak period, it will be very difficult to get full download speed as it will likely to be congested. Also it depends whether its local or overseas. There are too many factors..

Anyway, but if you are satisfied with what you are getting, then its all right.

 

[evershine]

Zhun bo... like that why subscribe to high speed unlimited access in the first place? :dunno:

server A ----10Mbps---------isp a ---isp b-------- internet users (1Mbps each)

Just take a look at this, 10Mbps at server A can be easily fill up. It is not cheap to have a 10Mbps link in a webhosting environment.

Well, some have explained that your big pipe is only from your home to the isp/local exchange. That part is sort of gurantee to a certain extent too. Once your traffic is out of your local ISP going to overseas or to another ISP, its another different story.

I ever experience this... my company is using Singnet and if a user from Starhub trying to access my company network via VPN, sometimes it may slow down quite a lot. All these can be easily find out through traceroute. The latency is not consistent. Sometimes is 20ms and sometimes it can go up to as high as 100ms. It seems like they route us to 'holland' even though we are in Singapore! So it is either congestion between SingNet and Starhub or it route one big round.

Speed is very much dependant on latency.. anyway..too long a story...

 

[Zerstorer]

I am just guessing, and it is not difficult to see the logic. If I am the server admin, if a user has very high speed link and continously download from my server, it definitely will deprive other users from accessing and may slow down other users. I would start to investigate what this user is trying to do. Bandwidth is expensive. I need to buy bandwidth from the service provider to host my webserver. If a user is hogging it, then others maybe affected.

May I know what is your speed? I am surprise if you can get full download speed if you are having 3Mbps. If you have 512kbps, then it is easily fill up. Also it depends on timing, during peak period, it will be very difficult to get full download speed as it will likely to be congested. Also it depends whether its local or overseas. There are too many factors..

When I was on Maxonline 1500 I was getting 200KB/s downloads, on Maxonline 4000 I was getting 400-500KB/s. Now on Maxonline 12000 I get 500KB/s-1MB/s as long as the server can keep up, tested mainly on US servers that allow multi-threaded downloading. This has been so for the past 7years that I've been on SCV and I can do so without fail.

Port specific throttling I have experienced, mainly when certain file-sharing programs suddenly start to crawl, but never have they attempted to throttle the bandwidth of a user specifically nor would they touch the usual ports like 80,8080,21 which are used for ftp/http transfers.

Anyway, but if you are satisfied with what you are getting, then its all right.

I'm perfectly satisfied, my point is for disgruntled users to try to seek out the exact root of the problem and not be too quick to pin the blame solely on the ISPs concerned. Their service standards could well be better in terms of tech support or customer response, but I don't think they are shortchanging us in terms of bandwidth. I've heard many of my friends grumble about slow downloads only to see that it is often due to user error in settings or unrealistic expectations of how servers assign bandwidth.

 

[Zerstorer]

Example:
http://us.download.nvidia.com/Windows/97.92/97.92_forceware_winxp64_english_whql.exe

I downloaded the 54MB file in 76secs.
Max speed attained was 1MB/s, average for the entire download is ~700KB/s.

Considering that this is download from a single server I'd think that's pretty decent for what they promised. It shouldn't be an issue hitting the rated bandwidth if I were to add a few more files from different sites all at once.

 

[vince123123]

I think the point for me to get higher bandwidth is for P2P usage - however the questino then is, how much mileage would I get for this? Intending to go MaxOnline Ultimate, but still waiting and seeing.

The method you mentioned on "easily overcome" - does that involve the changing of ports from the default one?

They may throttle ports used by popular p2p filesharing software, but that is easily overcome. I doubt they will throttle bandwidth on any specific user. In anycase, it is difficult to say with any certainty what is the issue if one is using P2P performance as a gauge.

I've always been able to get full download speeds on all http/ftp downloads for the past 8 years and that I believe is a more accurate measure of whether the bandwidth is present.

 

[evershine]

I get what you mean, it is usually not the local isp-starhub/singnet problem. The local pipe can be easily fill up using multi-threaded or multiple ftp sessions even during peak hour.

Unfortunately, not many users aware of these methods of filling up the pipe.

Also, ultimately, it depends which servers the user are going to. If the user try to download from China sites, very unlikely he'll be able to achieve the rate you are achieving during peak hours 9pm-12midnight.

So the best way to find out is to compare starhub and singnet, and which one give u a better rate and experience to a most frequent destination/servers.

user a ---6Mbps--starhub------china very congested---server b
user b ---512kbps singnet------china very congested---server b

both users a/b may get only 512kbps.

When I was on Maxonline 1500 I was getting 200KB/s downloads, on Maxonline 4000 I was getting 400-500KB/s. Now on Maxonline 12000 I get 500KB/s-1MB/s as long as the server can keep up, tested mainly on US servers that allow multi-threaded downloading. This has been so for the past 7years that I've been on SCV and I can do so without fail.

Port specific throttling I have experienced, mainly when certain file-sharing programs suddenly start to crawl, but never have they attempted to throttle the bandwidth of a user specifically nor would they touch the usual ports like 80,8080,21 which are used for ftp/http transfers.

I'm perfectly satisfied, my point is for disgruntled users to try to seek out the exact root of the problem and not be too quick to pin the blame solely on the ISPs concerned. Their service standards could well be better in terms of tech support or customer response, but I don't think they are shortchanging us in terms of bandwidth. I've heard many of my friends grumble about slow downloads only to see that it is often due to user error in settings or unrealistic expectations of how servers assign bandwidth.

 

[Zerstorer]

I think the point for me to get higher bandwidth is for P2P usage - however the questino then is, how much mileage would I get for this? Intending to go MaxOnline Ultimate, but still waiting and seeing.

For P2P? No point in my opinion. The value of Maxonline Ultimate is only for the local additional content that they may be streaming in future. P2P downloads are by nature volatile and heavily dependent on the number of seeders vs leechers. Unless your usage patterns result in you always maxing out your bandwidth on a current plan, upgrading to a higher plan is not going to help. The current basic Maxonline 6000 plan is more than sufficient in most cases.

The method you mentioned on "easily overcome" - does that involve the changing of ports from the default one?

Yes, among other things(winxp sp2 connection limit..etc) It's all program dependent. Pop over to the HWZ Internet Bandwidth forums for program specific tweaks.


evershine:My point is that is pretty difficult to pin the blame anywhere. If the congestion is due to internet routing, then its hardly fair to be blaming the ISP. Much more so, if they are trying to download froma slow china server. The fact that I can almost always max out my connection to fast US servers even near peak hours shows that they do deliver on promised bandwidth at least for some cases and that the fault is not necessarily the ISP. It is always so often that users upgrade to a high bandwidth plan and yet only download using their browser and then jump onto forums to complain that they have been cheated or that they are being throttled even though bandwidth tests on speedtest.net or dslreports may prove otherwise. From my experience I don't think that is so as I hardly encounter issues that are not due to factors other than the ISP pipe itself.

 

[ah.zeep]

I believe P2P speed will be limited by uplink speed. So it depends on whether the fellow you're grabbing from has a huge 512Kbps upstream (or better). You have 100Mbps also no use.

 

[vince123123]

Okay, what I hope to do is not so much to get a fast thruput for any one file/set of files. What I hope tod o is to be able to transfer more files per day - would MO Ultimate help? E.g. right now if I transfer more than 2, I will max out the 20-30kbps upload limit and can't effectively get more.

Howevr, if I get MOU, the upload limit is 100kbps - that would theoretically mean I can download 5 times as many at the same time. Yes they may all be slow, but over time, its faster cos I can get 5 times as many in the same period of time.

For P2P? No point in my opinion. The value of Maxonline Ultimate is only for the local additional content that they may be streaming in future. P2P downloads are by nature volatile and heavily dependent on the number of seeders vs leechers. Unless your usage patterns result in you always maxing out your bandwidth on a current plan, upgrading to a higher plan is not going to help. The current basic Maxonline 6000 plan is more than sufficient in most cases.

Yes, among other things(winxp sp2 connection limit..etc) It's all program dependent. Pop over to the HWZ Internet Bandwidth forums for program specific tweaks.


evershine:My point is that is pretty difficult to pin the blame anywhere. If the congestion is due to internet routing, then its hardly fair to be blaming the ISP. Much more so, if they are trying to download froma slow china server. The fact that I can almost always max out my connection to fast US servers even near peak hours shows that they do deliver on promised bandwidth at least for some cases and that the fault is not necessarily the ISP. It is always so often that users upgrade to a high bandwidth plan and yet only download using their browser and then jump onto forums to complain that they have been cheated or that they are being throttled even though bandwidth tests on speedtest.net or dslreports may prove otherwise. From my experience I don't think that is so as I hardly encounter issues that are not due to factors other than the ISP pipe itself.

I believe P2P speed will be limited by uplink speed. So it depends on whether the fellow you're grabbing from has a huge 512Kbps upstream (or better). You have 100Mbps also no use.

Got use, MOU has a higher upload limit than the lower plans.