Overall speed

hello as heavy user of skype, i am getting more and more annoyed. Whatever I do, the recent performance is underearth.
Calls (Video chat, quality, establishing speed) send files, adding people (and getting the request), assortment of chats/ answers, nothing works prperly anymore.
in the moment we switch to VIBER, YM, QQ or such, line speed appears as sufficient. suddenly i am able to transfer files within sec.
What is rella going on?????

does anybody has similar experience?
I am talking especially about connection between asia and europe
Peter

Similar Messages

HT5639 Will running windows with bootcamp effect my macbook pro's overall speed

Will running windows with bootcamp effect my macbook pro's overall speed ?

Welcome to Apple Support Communities
In some cases, there may be slowness in OS X because of the lack of free space. However, you shouldn't note this and in most of cases, performance is the same in Windows and OS X after installing Windows, more in the case of a MacBook Pro with Retina display.
The only thing you have to worry is to give Windows the necessary space. The MacBook Pro with Retina display hasn't got a lot of storage

Does running any Office prog. kill the overall speed of your computer?

It seems like whenever I run other UB apps concurrently, be it 10 programs or 1, the computer is SO fast and runs nicely. But once I open Word the whole computer goes into crutch mode, where everything seems to slow down. I check RAM, but it doesn't be seem to be fully utilized. What gives?

Check and see if your font book is set to load all the fonts you have.
I activated fewer fonts in font book and Word speeds up opening.
Separately, have you gotten the latest Office 2004 update?
http://www.microsoft.com/mac/downloads.aspx?pid=download&location=/mac/download/ office2004/Office2004_11.2.3.xml&secid=4&ssid=29&flgnosysreq=True

Does 802.11n give a speed boost on the iPad?

I did some testing to see if I'd get a speed boost by enabling 802.11n on my Belkin F5D8233-4 router, which supports 802.11n draft specification. I have Verizon FIOS with 25Mbps download/upload. I also have the Verizon router, which only supports 802.11b/g, and I can switch which router I'm connected to in order to compare speeds of 802.11n and 802.11g. All tests were done less than 3 feet from either router.
Bottom line is that the iPad doesn't get any speed boost by using 802.11n, at least by using speedtest.net to do the testing.
The test I used was with the speedtest app for the iPhone. I made the Belkin a pure 11n router, and ran that app from the iPad. So the connection had to be 802.11n. Then I connected the iPad to my Verizon router, which had to be 802.11g, and saw virtually no difference.
I did the same test with a Windows laptop from my job that supports 802.11n. It connected locally to the Belkin router at 72Mbps according to the internal utility. Testing using speedtest.net indicated that using the 802.11n connection on the Belkin was 50% faster than the 802.11g connection on the Verizon router. (About 30Mbps for Belkin/802.11n compared to 20Mbps for Verizon/802.11g for downloads).
But with the iPad, doing the same test (switching from Belkin router to Verizon router), the speed didn't change. It actually seemed a little slower when I was on 802.11n, but repeated tests showed some variability, and the average was about 19Mbps.
I realize that the overall speed for the iPad when I'm in my house will get throttled by the FIOS connection max of 25Mbps (although it's interesting that with my MacMini, and the Windows laptop, when connected via 100baseT, I get 30Mbps from FIOS when they promise 25Mbps!). But I can't get the good results from the iPad using 802.11n that I see with the Windows laptop. I'd like to try a local speedtest using the local LAN. I installed Speedtest MINI on the MacMini, enabling the Mac as a server, and the Windows laptop did 72Mbps on the local LAN. But Speedtest MINI requires Flash in the browser, so I can't do that test on the iPad. And the Speedtest app for iPhone doesn't let you pick a local URL for the server.
So I'm now pretty sure that 802.11n isn't really working right on the iPad with my Belkin router, in terms of delivering increased performance. I've read other posts where people have looked at the transmit rate from the router side, but I really wish I could look at the transmit rate from the iPad (like I do in Mac OS X, or in Windows) to verify.
To be sure, I'd like to run a speedtest on my local LAN from the iPad. Has anyone been able to actually do some kind of test that verifies the speed of an iPad connection on a local LAN, and does that verification from the iPad, and not the router?
And finally, has anyone ever done a test that verifies that 802.11n from an iPad delivers a speed boost compared to 802.11g? Are there specific requirements on the router side that need to be satisfied so that the iPad gets a boost? I've read elsewhere where someone said that you only get the boost if using Apple's Airport Extreme as the router (so that you can't really get 802.11n on a non-Apple router), and I think I saw someone say that the router has to support communication over 5.0Ghz for the iPad to be fast on 802.11n. Has Apple ever said what are the real requirements for the iPad to be faster on 802.11n versus 802.11g?

To the contrary, my experience is that the "G" standard on WiFi provided MUCH faster speeds than the "N" standard on Wi-Fi. It makes no sense, I know, but it is true.
I was having horribly slow Wi-Fi speeds on my iPad2, despite a fast cable modem connection and a "N" generation Linksys wireless router (maybe 2-3 yrs old). Was achieving speeds of only 1.3Mbs -- slow enough that you couldn't watch YouTube videos. From hunting around on the web, I came across the suggestion to manually set the Wi-Fi router to the "G" standard (ie downgrade it from the faster "N" standard). Remarkably, I did it and it worked like a charm. I now get Wi-Fi speeds of about 12 or 13 Mbs, or 10x what I was getting before. It is an easy fix. And also I think the "G" standard is capable of 50Mbs so even though it is a slower and older standard, it is still way faster than anything you are likely to achieve as a home user. I think there is some glitch or oddity in the iPad and iPad2 which can cause it to perform very poorly with older "N" standard WiFi routers. New ones don't seem to have a problem.

Verizon.net Email Speeds Do Not Match FIOS Line Speeds

In the past months since about September 2012, Verizon email servers are not moving data as fast as the line speeds customers are subscribing to. Such as, Fios 15/5 mbps line speed package, using a browser and going to a speed test website, the results are equal to or better than 15/5.
Except for when Verizon.net customers use the Verizon.net email accounts which come with the internet package. Those speeds have degraded, especially when moving from the old email servers to the new ones (incoming.verizon.net to pop3.verizon.net). The overall speed with their email, via browser or software (Outlook, Windows Live Mail, Outlook Express, Thunderbird etc.) has dropped to as little as 1.0 mbps when obtaining email, especially those which have some payload such as a 6 MB .pdf, .jpg., .tiff, .zip, .rar and so forth.
What's fowl about this is, Verizon.net support folks have no access to the email network so they are unable to communicate to those running the email servers that customers are unhappy with the service. Mostly, those who are new to Verizon Fios just continue to use their Gmail or Live accounts which just happen to work satisfactorily, speeds in the area of the above example, 15/5 mbps.
What's really bad about this is, upgrade to the Quantum Fios packages and guess what? Email speeds don’t move an inch faster. This means, the email network/servers with Verizon.net are speed regulated outside of the customers line speed connection. Too bad, customers pay extra for more speed yet, email with Verizon remains at the slow pace. I have much issue with this since in the past, this had never been an issue. Now that Verizon has Fiber, it is? It would be nice if they published this alongside of the many features that come with a Fios ISP account however, it is nowhere to be seen.
This is obviously bait and switch service and features.

You don't go into the details as to why the account was suspended ... that background might be helpful since you're asking others for their opinion. In general it sounds like the account was "deleted" at which point all mail is bounced because the address no longer exists -- but Verizon holds the name in reserve for some period of time to prevent someone from re-registering it in case an error was made and for some level of security, I suppose.
Anyhow ... on your commentary about not using an @verizon.net address as your primary address ... I think you will have this with many providers. Hotmail, Yahoo, and Gmail all do this if you terminate the account (they do have a suspended account due to inactivity feature which operates differently, but pretty much do the same thing for deletions and such. I don't use the @verizon.net account as my primary for a different reason however -- my primary address is provider agnostic. I can move providers (although I'm quite happy with FiOS at the moment) -or- if at some point down the road I have to move out of Verizon territory, my email address will not need to change. I used this little fact to my advantage when I moved from Comcast to Verizon a few years ago -- no one knew I changed providers because my email address didn't change. Now .. I don't use one of the free services for email, I own my own domain name (about $10/year from the likes of GoDaddy) and have my domain hosted on the Google Apps tier (but even without that, GoDaddy will do basic forwarding for you of any email address to whatever mail account you're presently using). Something to think about.

Speed with iPhoto 6: Great and very slow.......

Is it just me or does the new version take forever to update titles and keywords? The old one was much faster in this regard, but the opening and overall speed of iPhoto 6 is increadible. Great job Apple. I still don't know how to merge two libraries into one. Any help?? iPhoto Library Manager does not work as of today.

Is it just me or does the new version take forever to update titles and keywords? The old one was much faster in this regard, but the opening and overall speed of iPhoto 6 is increadible. Great job Apple. I still don't know how to merge two libraries into one. Any help?? iPhoto Library Manager does not work as of today.

Speed limit

Hi!
My turn to ask a question. I read some- and everywhere the Athlon XP has a MHz limit of 2500. It seems to be so, but is it? I tried on my own to find an answer, and below is a result of that, but...
Why I don't ask AMD?! Before asking well-paid and intelligent people, I thought I should try the forum.
Speed limit
Athlon XP and Sempron reached a speed limit
The main difference between the socket A processor nowadays seems to be in the architecture of the cache memories. The speed does not pass 2500 MHz. Why is that?
The first Athlons came in 1999. Their advantages compared to their competitor are/were the number of pipelines and calculation units:
- Three decoders for translating the complex but fundamental CISC-instructions into RISC-instructions. The processor has no problem working with the short and simple RISC-instructions.
- Athlon can have 72 instructions simultaneously, (Pentium III 40, and the earlier K6 only 24).
- Very competent FPU:s, three of them, and as FPU is better at calculating decimal numbers than the main ALU, it makes Athlons good at 3D graphics – where there are lots of that kind of mathematics when producing polygons.
In the beginning Athlons had external Level 2 cache. The cache sat on a slot beside the processor, and the architecture was called slot 1. With XP this changed, both Level 1 and Level 2 cache were built into the processor, and we got the socket A kind. Athlon XP was also built with thinner lines connecting the transistors, and got the ability to handle new instructions, got a better data pre-fetch technology, and an overheating protection.
So what’s the problem? Speed it up!
Well, one bottleneck lies between the processor and the RAM memory, the Front Side Bus (FSB). The processor is much faster than the RAM and process data as they come by. To keep the processor busy mainly Intel invented a sort of pipeline, or ladder. The processor is working on every step.
Data is sent from hardware, like sound data or network data over the PCI-bus, graphics data over the AGP-bus, hard-disk data over the IDE (PCI-/SATA) bus, etc. The data comes in ones and zeroes in little packages, which make up complex instructions. For the processor to be able to efficiently perform the instructions they need to be sized down to simpler instructions, from CISC to RISC. (CISC codes is such a fundamental part of the PC history they must remain.) The sizing down is done in the very beginning of each pipeline. In later steps of the pipeline, the instructions are interpreted further and performed.
Early processors needed one clock-cycle per step in the pipeline, but Athlons can manage 2,5 steps, as can for example Pentium 4. With the pipelines, as said, Athlon XP can do 72 instructions at the same time. Pentium 4 however has longer pipelines – with 20 steps – and can process 126 instructions. But the efficiency of a Pentium 4 is lower, which is why Athlons are quicker at the same MHz. Apple’s (Motorola’s) G4 processor is yet more efficient.
Athlon XP has 10 steps in each pipeline for the “main” ALU processor and 15 for the FPU. The reason why there are not more pipelines is that the processor is not kept busy with the slower RAM, and a lot of clock-cycles would be wasted. What is more, there will be too many erroneous instructions, when the processor has to start over, filling the pipelines with correct instructions.
RAM is slower
This was not the case in the beginning. All ran at the same speed, say 20 MHz: Processor, FSB, RAM-memory, PCI-bus etc. By separating the PCI-bus, which had hardware connected that couldn’t work at higher frequencies, things could start moving.
In 1989 came a Pentium with clock doubling. To compensate for the not ‘doubled RAM, L1 cache was invented. But processors kept getting faster. Next thing to be pushed forward was the FSB, which for socket A boards now is increased to 200 MHz x 2 (DDR). Intel increased it even further, but as the efficiency rate isn’t increasing at the same rats, Intel has backed down from the megahertz spiral, and has followed AMD in other ways of thinking.
So is this the simple basic calculation?
Athlon XP:s can do 2,5 instruction per clock-cycle in 10 steps per pipeline x the number of pipelines. The number of pipelines is limited by the number of instructions sent and their quality, 72 instructions at the same time. Can this be the reason for 2500 MHz limit?

Ok, reality check people...
Sharp, nice explanation, but you are wrong.
the x86 instruction set (including those nice MUL, ADD and other instructions) is a CISC instruction set.
The difference? A MUL takes 12 cycles, a DIV 40 or something...
RISC was a new computing architecture. Each instruction is simpler to allow higher execution frequency.
The efficiency of a computer is judge by the work done. W= IPC x Freq
Frequency is the well known number that we can find on our beloved processors. IPC is the instructions per clock. Why is the athlon more efficient than a P4 at the same frequency? higher IPC.
How do the chip manufacturer choose those factors?
Well, the problem is that the instruction set is FIXED. x86 (or i386), the instruction set, has been defined years ago as CISC and to maintain compatibility, you have to keep it. They then included internal decoders to change those instructions to streams of RISC instructions, each simpler. Those are the ones really implemented.
How does that influence the speed of the processor? Each instruction is executed by a unit (integer unit, floating point, MMX...), the more that unit has to do for that imstruction, the more time it takes (and the more transistor). This has 2 problems:
- one is that it will limit the overall speed as the more complex the unit, the less speedy.
- The second is that it ties down the unit. If you do a div in 40+ clocks, your integer unit is tied during this time.
The answer to this problem? Pipelines.
Pipelines are splitting the tasks in simpler tasks and executing each as independant as possible.
Example: laundry. You need washer and dryer. However, some of your clothes cannot go to the dryer.
Now, you have 2 loads. If you have a combined unit that takes 1.5h for wash + dry, it will take 3h total.
If you have a washer (.5h) and a dryer (1h), you load the first load (.5h) then transfer it to the dryer (1h). While the drier works, you load the next washer (0.5h). If you need it to perform also the drier, total time is 2.5h instead of 3h. If you dont need it, it is even faster 1.5h.
This is the way intel followed. Prescott has a 25+ pipeline. The problem comes from branches. If you misspredict your branch, you have to flush the pipe.
All that to say that with its manufacturing and its architecture, AMD could not release a AXP even close to 2.5GHz. Can you overclock a good unit over that limit? Sure. Intel did not release a 4GHz and yet you can overclock some P4 up to 5GHz (with appropriate cooling).
Oh, and the technology used is 90nm or 0.09um. Athlon XP is not even that small, it was still on 130nm.
This is the smallest critical dimention (smallest trace. Usually smallest transistor width).

What is the minimum speed Telstra guarantees ADSL 2+ to connect at?

What is the minimum speed Telstra guarantees ADSL 2+ to connect at? I asked a Telstra sales person what the minimum speed was they said the minimum was 8 Mb/s. I asked for that in writing but they could not find it, nor could they find the minimum speed in any documentation. Am I correct in thinking the minimum speed guaranteed by Telstra (for ADSL 2+) is 256 Kb/sec?

Hi jjobrien, Not since the 90s has anyone considered 0.33mbps to be a good speed, so I can understand your frustration with this. What affects your ADSL speed The speed achieved on ADSL depends on a number of factors, the main one being the cable distance between your premises and the DSLAM. Whirlpool have an article that explains the relationship between distance and speed very well and you can view it here: http://whirlpool.net.au/wiki/dslam_speeds There are also DSLAMs that are affected by high demand, and lowering the overall speed available to customers. We are working on upgrading these exchanges and as upgrades are planned, these can be viewed here: http://telstrawholesale.com.au/download/document/tw-report-backhaul-upgrade.xls The configuration of the equipment and internal wiring of your home can also have a big part to play in speed results. How to check your equipment It is possible that there is a fault within network (and not just a matter of cable length), but to confirm this we ask customers to perform an isolation test. We do this on every call as it can not only resolve or identify the issue sooner for customers, but also prevents an unnecessary technician visit and the possibility of an incorrect call out charge. You have already checked these when you called previously, but to make sure a simple fix hasn't been missed, please take a look at this link for the things we look for: http://crowdsupport.telstra.com.au/t5/General-Internet-KB/How-to-perform-an-Isolation-Test/ta-p/5501... In some circumstances, applying a line profile can provide more stability on the network. This next link provides information on how this works and how customers can manage this setting. This is mainly used for customers experiencing disconnections, however in some cases can also improve speed if the issue is caused by packet loss. https://go.telstra.com.au/helpandsupport/-/adsl-line-profiles [Note: after logging in, some customers will be redirected to My Account and need to perform the following steps to then select Account Services then My BigPond from the menu located at the top right of the page.] If you are connected to your modem via WiFi, then this is also an area where speed can be lost. This WiFi Troubleshooting link may be helpful: http://crowdsupport.telstra.com.au/t5/General-Internet-KB/WiFi-Troubleshooting/ta-p/107516 If you have confirmed that the above has been done, and you would like for us to assist you further, please provide your contact and account details via the online form that I will send via private message. Please allow up to 5 business days for a response as we respond to each one in the order that it was submitted. - Shelly Wow. Thanks Shelly. I could all do that, but given I have been onto this issue for years on end, and Telstra have freely admitted that their infrastucture is inadequate of delivery their own quoted minimum speeds, I think you are being completely unreasonable.I can understand that getting cutomers to do your work for you is better for you economically, and that using your own staff and technichians would cut into your profits, reported to be 3.8 Billion last year, I get that, I'm in business too, but we have a contract, you and I, and I'm fulfilling my part of that contract and you are not.My part says that I will pay you. Your part says that you will deliver a service.So as I see it, and I'm not a comercial contract lawyer, perhaps you are, maybe "Ira" from billing is, who knows, but as I see it you have a responsibility to either A: upgrade the service - we both know that is not going to happen, because I have been informed by Telstra directly that no upgrade is scheduled, and I followed the link you sent me to report/backhaul-upgrade.xls to a blank document that I couldn't make sense of, or B: change the contract and charge me far less. I propose that you charge me on a pro rata basis. If you deliver 25% speed, I pay 25% fee. You must understand here, I'm not proposing that upgrade a DSLAM and/or that you dig a trench and lay a fancy new cable to my house just so that I cmay enjoy a first world luxury, Im not saying that. What I am saying is that we have a billing issue.How do you see it?John.

How to speed transition using "Curves Steel - Transition" template?

I'm using the "Curves Steel-Transition" template to create a transition and I need to speed it up so that it's a faster "whoosh" effect instead of the more gradual six second effect it is now. But I find that it's not simply a matter of shortening the duration of the motion path, that it's the development of the particle sequence itself that needs to be modified and shortened, and although I've tweaked just about every speed and generation parameter within the Particle Cell and Emitter channels I can't seem to get an overall speed increase of the effect while maintaining the original look and function of the "curves cloud".
How do I speed up a complex effect like this?
iMac G5 Mac OS X (10.4.8)

You could just try using the scrub filter to speed up the playback of the transition...
Patrick

Most cost efficient upgrade for A3 speed increase on '07 iMac 24"?

I've read a bunch of posts on this forum on the "hardware upgrade" subject and I am trying to prioritize my options.
I have a 24" 2.4Ghz iMac7,1 w/ 3g or ram and the stock 320g internal drive. I have my A3 masters referenced on an external WD 1TB drive using the USB port. I am on OS 1.5.8
As I am shooting more weddings, the speed it getting unbearably slow, especially when using brushes on raw files (from a Nikon D7000).
I would love to simply get a newer machine, but the cost is just too much with a growing family. So I am wondering what will give me the biggest bang for the buck. Most of my info comes from references found on this forum including the excellent installation guide at amfiteatar.org
- Upgrade to OS 10.6 ($30)
- change ram from 3G to 6G (Kingston Apple 2 GB 667 MHz DDR2 SODIMM and Kingston Apple 4GB Kit (2x2GB Modules) 667MHz DDR2 SoDimm => total $130)
- change internal drive to WD Caviar blue 1TB $70)
Total: $230.
Does this make any sense? IS there a better path for this?
Thanks very much for any feedback.
Bo

Update.
I did the open heart surgery yesterday (replace original internal drive from 320g to 1tb and upgrade RAM from 3g to 6g) and it is a resounding success.
Overall speed in Aperture seems to have improved between 2 and 4 times. Particularly noticeable are the retouch operation with brushes.
So far the 6gb transplant is working without any hitch. After doing a lot of research on it, it seems like the key is to get matching sets of chips from a reputable vendor. OWC in my case.
So for about $200 and 2 hours of labor (not including hours of research on the net of course) this 3 year old machine has gotten a new lease on life. Definitely worth it!
In case it helps anyone else, here are the 3 most useful links I have found for this operation:
General overview of iMac HD and RAM upgrade:
http://www.amfiteatar.org/content/view/155/78/lang,en/
Video of HD upgrade:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IN2vWKlDcdg&feature=related
Memory:
http://eshop.macsales.com/item/Other%20World%20Computing/5300DDR2S6GP/?utmsource=amazon&utm_medium=shoppingengine&utmcampaign=productads
Plus countless great info on this forum of course.
Thank you Frank and Mr Endo.
Bo
PS: Anyone with an answer of whether Snow Leopard would make a difference in A3 speed on a 07 iMac. Some people on this board say yes but since it is not a 64 bit machine, I would not think so.

Wireless speed calculation

Please refer to my pic below: example, i do have one switch, with all LAN ports (1Gbps) and my wireless ap, connected to this one of the port Q1 Let say my wireless ap, can support up to 54mbps, and how much speed for each clients if 1. only 1 user connected to wifi 2. if 10 users connected to wifi Q2 may i know is it 54mbps - 1 user, then if 10 users, 54mbps/10 = 5.4mbps per user.. or need to reduce some for the buffer or etc ? Q3. but even after connected to wifi, the backbone still 1Gbps.. so how to calculate? NOTE: please ignore that interference, location, material (concrete wall, glass, etc) first.. I just want the simple calculation

The speed of a wireless network depends on several factors particularly the protocols being used. The signal range a WiFi wireless network supports also affects its overall speed. These frequently asked questions cover the essential concepts in wireless network performance
It's the maximum data rate that the WiFi network can theoretically support. To achieve sppeds approaching 54 Mbps, the router and its client computer must be close together (probably less than 1 or 2 metres), and there must be no other traffic using the wireless network.
Also, there must be minimal interference from other networks in the area. Any other networks that are nearby on the same channel or within about 3 or 4 channels either side can affect the performance.
Both the router and the client computer's WiFi adapter must support the 'N' specification. If the computer is only a 'G' specification device

Lightroom's Processing Speed

Can anyone tell me why Lightroom is so much slower processing images than Photoshop? I can remove dust spots much faster in photoshop. Everything seems to be slooow in Lightroom? Photoshop works fine. I have more than adequate RAM and hard drive space. I have been working with RAW files. Also I had the Beta of LR but have removed it since installing LR 1.0 I don't remember having problems with the Beta.

From any perspective, speed relies on many complex factors. It is abjectly relative and certainly subjective, espcially if taken as a measure of expectations.
The best comparisons are between similar apps on a given machine. Timed. Speed in the overall sense is measured by how fast the same operations can be performed on two similar apps on the same machine on real world examples.
Since LR and Bridge 2 beta 2 use virtually the same code for their develop features--although one is browser based and the other DB based--some important overall speed comparisons can be made.
Workflow speed is what counts for me. How long does it take me to open a directory of newly downloaded images, sort them, cull them, develop them, and ingest them into a DAM.
I did a test of forty NEFs yesterday, running them from a download Directory through Bridge, renaming, keywording, develop processing them, and ingesting them into Iview, then ingesting them into LR and making the same develop edits and other operations (that gives LR a slight edge because by then I knew just how I wanted each developed). Bridge + Iview was 60% faster. Why? Ingestion is very slow in LR, previews and all file operations (this required making 5 new client/subject folders in each app and sorting the files to them) much faster in Bridge, and ingestion into Iview was going on in the background through watched folders.
By the way, I ran the same test using IDimager as the DB based DAM and the results were virtually the same as with Iview.
For me, whether one app does one little step in workflow a bit faster or slower than another similar app is not critical, but the overall time to fully process a batch of images from start to finish is definitely the measure of 'speed'.
I think one can draw the conclusion that LR's speed--no matter what machine its on, is relatively 'slow' measured against the closest competition (on a PC--Macs are a different story) at this time. And it will be until Adobe rectifies the bottlenecks created by having everything dependent on I/O through Library. Nothing wrong with the concept--it just needs modifications, tuning, and optimization. We have read about the individual problems contributing to the bottlenecking, so I won't rehearse them. But, making the changes will take time. And the most important test of LR's 'speed' will be possible then.

Variable speed question

I'm trying to do something that seems pretty simple and can't figure it out even after reading over the manual several times and searching the forum.
i want a clip to start at 100% and gradually slow to 50%. in so doing, i want the duration of the clip to extend from say 10 sec. to 15 sec (i want the same in and out points, with a gradual speed change). how do i gradually slow a clip without being forced to speed up another part of the clip?
-matthew

In the Motion/Time Remap tab of the viewer try to change the green line to something like this: Variable Speed 100-50:
1. move the cursor over the 2nd point at the end of the light grey area (OUT point); the cursor becomes a small crosshair; right click on the point and select Smooth.
2. drag the blue dot (Bezier handle) that just appeared, down so the light blue line is no longer horizontal, but takes a direction midway between horizontal and that of the virtual segment connecting the 1st (bottom left) and 2nd (top right) point. Now the line has a shape of a long S.
3. drag the 2nd point (the Bezier handle should follow without changing shape) down at roughly 2/3 rd of the graph, so it should resemble the picture in the link above.
Why all this? point 1. allows to create and control a curve at the clip OUT point; point 2. changes its default speed to an approximation of speed = 50%; finally point 3. slows down the central part of the clip so that the overall speed dynamics is what you are looking for....
Easy ?
Well I believe that using my suggested free Time Remap plugin is much easier... just install it and follow the instructions in my previous answer above and in the download web page. But I'd like also to know your opinion.
Thanks
Piero

Streaming speeds awefull above 480p on twitch.

Hi,
This isn't so much a complaint about the overall speed of my connection as I get 17.9mb down and 0.98mb up but rather the speed when I try and watch casters on twitch.tv in either 720p or above.
It constantly judders and freezes on me after a second or so and then I get a message saying my connection isn't good enough and to lower the quality. I know it's not the caster dropping frames and all the other viewers in the stream have no problems on these settings so is BT throttling my connection to twitch.tv?
I can stream youtube video's ok at 720p and even 1080p with no problem at all so was wondering whats going on and get this issue fixed as I enjoy just relaxing and watching these streams and obviously the higher quality makes for a better experience.
Thanks.
Oh, here's my line info aswell if it helps...
Connection information
Line state
Connected
Connection time
0 days, 0:07:58
Downstream
20,895 Kbps
Upstream
1,163 Kbps
ADSL settings
VPI/VCI
0/38
Type
PPPoA
Modulation
ITU-T G.992.5
Latency type
Interleaved
Noise margin (Down/Up)
3.1 dB / 6.0 dB
Line attenuation (Down/Up)
11.0 dB / 3.8 dB
Output power (Down/Up)
0.0 dBm / 12.3 dBm
Loss of Framing (Local)
0
Loss of Signal (Local)
0
Loss of Power (Local)
0
FEC Errors (Down/Up)
0 / 4294967264
CRC Errors (Down/Up)
0 / N/A
HEC Errors (Down/Up)
N/A / 0
Error Seconds (Local)
0

try using the search facility for 'twitch tv' and change 'board' to community. you will a few other posts recently which may help
did you try a different browser?
If you like a post, or want to say thanks for a helpful answer, please click on the Ratings star on the left-hand side of the post.
If someone answers your question correctly please let other members know by clicking on ’Mark as Accepted Solution’.

Snow leapoard speed

i installed snow leopard onto my computer a week ago, hoping it would increase overall speed. What has happened is that my computer barely runs at all. my only guess as to why is that maybe my computer isn't powerful enough to run snow leopard. What can i do besides reinstall the discs that came with my computer (which i don't have anymore).

my only guess as to why is that maybe my computer isn't powerful enough to run snow leopard.
We can't really tell you if that's the case if you don't tell us what your computer's specs are. However, if you were running Leopard before, SL on the same hardware should be an improvement.
Chances are you've got something else wrong. Take a look at the [Mac OS X speed FAQ|http://www.index-site.com/Macosxspeed.html] for some tips.
What can i do besides reinstall the discs that came with my computer (which i don't have anymore).
Regardless of what you do, you need to get those disks replaced. They contain things that the retail SL disk does not, such as software that was bundled with your machine and the [Apple Hardware Test|http://support.apple.com/kb/HT1509] boot system. Contact Apple, they'll replace the disks for a small fee.

Overall speed

Similar Messages

Maybe you are looking for