Slower than previous ipod?

My new 80 GB ipod is much slower than my old 40 GB. I've got more music on it, but just wondering if anyone else was experiencing this? Is there anything I can do?
80 GB

slower accessing songs for sure. seeking forward to the next song takes much longer than my old ipod. i've heard that a certain version of the 80 GB ipods was slower and that apple had corrected it in the new versions. anybody else heard that?

Similar Messages

Firefox 4 is slow in loading web pages, much slower than previous version. WHY?

I am having problems with slow loading of pages, slower than Explorer for the same page for example.
What can be done?

Have you tried (1) restarting your router, and (2) resetting the wifi on the iPad? To do #2, go to Settings, General, Reset, Reset Network Settings.

BT Speed - Slower than previous ISP Plusnet

Hello everybody Lets get right to it shall we.
ADSL Line Status
Connection Information
Line state: Connected
Connection time: 0 days, 00:12:14
Downstream: 1.875 Mbps
Upstream: 448 Kbps
ADSL Settings
VPI/VCI: 0/38
Type: PPPoA
Modulation: G.992.1 Annex A
Latency type: Interleaved
Noise margin (Down/Up): 12.7 dB / 17.0 dB
Line attenuation (Down/Up): 60.4 dB / 31.5 dB
Output power (Down/Up): 17.2 dBm / 11.9 dBm
FEC Events (Down/Up): 1 / 0
CRC Events (Down/Up): 1 / 5
Loss of Framing (Local/Remote): 0 / 0
Loss of Signal (Local/Remote): 0 / 0
Loss of Power (Local/Remote): 0 / 0
HEC Events (Down/Up): 0 / 0
Error Seconds (Local/Remote): 1 / 1
http://www.speedtest.net/result/1689620736.png
http://www.broadbandspeedchecker.co.uk/bimages/80146...
MY BT Exchange:
http://www.samknows.com/broadband/exchange/SWLJ
According to Google maps I am 2.8 miles away but not sure on the distance when the crows flies.
BT Speed Tester Results:
Download speedachieved during the test was - 1413 Kbps
For your connection, the acceptable range of speeds is 400-2000 Kbps.
Additional Information:
Your DSL Connection Rate :1920 Kbps(DOWN-STREAM), 448 Kbps(UP-STREAM)
IP Profile for your line is - 1500 Kbps
So after having Plusnet for a few years and bad teething problems for most of it I decided to move to BT and have the unlimited package with the home hub 3. Plusnet provided me with speeds between 1.8Mbps - 1.9Mbps using their Thompson Router, on a D-link Router the speeds were the same.
I know that BT owns Plusnet but I thought why not cut out the middle man and go straight to the main supplier, considering others in my street have speeds of 2.3Mbps and over with the likes of Sky, Talk Talk and Supanet, it seemed like a no brainer to go with BT.
My IP Profile with BT is a max 1.5Mbps and the fastest I can have is 1.44Mbps which seems strange considering I had more with plusnet? I complained to BT, the recommended way was to chat online via their chat app which to me seemed a better option. So after my first online chat I was advised that my speed was very low but to wait for 10 days for the line to stabilize from install.
12 days later the speed hits 0.8Mbps which more than warranted my second online chat. They advised me to run the usual checks, the only thing different from my setup was the change in router switching the Plusnet out for the BT Home Hub 3. So we checked everything, Filters, Ethernet Cables, Master Socket and so on....done this so many times with Plusnet and past providers but thought it best to do it all again for the sake of the BT Customer Support.
They decide that it's a network fault and the Noise Margin was to high, a few tweaks on their end and my speed should increase in a day or two. The next day my speed was 2.1Mbps and hooray I could now play Xbox 360 online whilst others used the computers, something I could not do without lag when the speed was 0.8 and 1.4Mbps.
The very next day it was back down to 1.44Mbps and for the third time I had another online chat with BT. They suggested an engineer visit my property for which he did and changed out some internal wiring as he found some errors with my line. After he done his bits and bobs my speed decreased to 1.1Mbps, but he said he had to visit the cab outside to alter some things and then notify the exchange and my speed would increase dramatically in the next 48 hours.
The next day the speed was 1.8Mbps slowly dropping through out the day back to 1.2Mbps and stayed like that until I contacted BT for a 4th time. They ran a few tests and my speed increased but only to 1.44Mbps and this I was told was the best they could do. They advised my not to contact them again in regards to the line speed as this was the fastest I would ever get and they could no longer raise a fault with my line.
So here I am stuck with a measly 1.44Mbps wishing I was back with Plusnet, If I attempt to play online with any Xbox 360 game it is fine until someone in the house uses a computer, even to check their emails, the lag is terrible, my wife and kids are complaining about the internet speed, I have tweaked the computers for the fastest connection possible. Even when I don't go online with the Xbox 360, we still have slow connection when two people are using the computers at the same time.
I have the Xbox update with new dashboard and I also have the Lovefilm, 5OD, 4OD and youtube apps, works great when not using anything else, in fact love film states you can stream movies to 3 devices the same time, but this slow connection basically ties the whole of my family to use one device at a time, a shame really when we all like to do different things sometimes.

It's been like this since install in early November, as my post states they did up my speed to just over 2mbps but it lasted one day and went back to 1.44Mbps. When the engineer came out he change some wiring for me just to be sure and said there were no errors or problems at me end, then the speed dropped to 1.2Mbps on his own device. I then complained again later that day and it went up to 1.7 ish and dropped back to my usual speed of 1.44, a speed that enables only one family member at a time to use any device, but can all use the net if we visit a basic text website with no pictures or flash.
Our PC's and Laptops, Netbooks are all Dual Core, Windows 7 with huge drives and lots of Ram, not that this matters at this time because the engineer tested his own equipment via the master socket.
If I read Sky news then nobody can play Xbox online or stream Lovefilm, Youtube, BBC iPlayer or use any other computer without dreadful lag and slow speed. The speed can cope fine with all over the above when only one person uses it.
My neighbour is with Supanet and he uses his pc upstairs whilst his wife uses her laptop and their son plays online via Xbox 360 all at the same time, his speed is 2.6 at the moment and he lives next door to me?
My other neighbour on the otherside of me has Talk Talk and they get 2.3Mbps...I mean Talk Talk gives them that speed? That truly is amazing for them but forget about BT matching any such speed, they can't even match the speeds I previously had with Plusnet and I thought they were slow

After Effects CC 2014.0.2 rendering slower than previous version with identical settings

Is this a known issue? Can't find confirmation just some mention of it.
I'm on an 27" iMac with 32GB Ram and SSD. Latest OSX. Latest After Effects.
I first noticed after accidentally opening a file in CC2014 when asked to supply a client a render. It takes almost 3 times longer to render a file. I've checked preferences on latest on and previous version of AE and everything seems identical. Am I going mad?
I guess I could stay on the previous version for a while but hardly ideal as I'm paying for access to the latest versions and need to move up eventually.
Help much appreciated.
Anthony

Yes everything is identical. I setup a file ready to render and opened it in each version and rendered. I did this with an old large project file and also a new test file with a very simple 2 minute loop of a square moving left to right.
Beginning to hope the upcoming update fixes it somehow though would prefer to fix and learn something from this...

[SOLVED] Arch slower than Suse?

Hello all,
A few weeks ago I installed Arch over openSuse 11.2, because I liked the idea of Arch. I think OpenSuse is a great distro, I really liked it, but the rolling release model of Arch also sounds very good.
Now I have a working KDEmod desktop on top of Arch, and everything works. But in comparison with OpenSuse, it seems slower in everything. I can't really pinpoint what it is, top doesn't show strange processes or high values, the harddisk isn't constantly working. But for some reason all apps just start slower, the KDE-menu has a lag of a second for all items, firefox is slow on opening and displaying webpages.
On OpenSuse (11.2 with KDE) this wasn't a problem.
Is there a way to determine what is causing this slowness?
My hardware:
Asus laptop: Intel Pentium M 1700 Mhz
Memory: 1Gb
Nvidia Geforce Go 7300
I'm using KDEmod (KDE 4.4) on Arch.
Thanks in advance
Last edited by b2b (2010-02-16 15:12:35)

brazzmonkey wrote:From my own experience, KDE 4.4 feels slower than previous releases.
Yeah, and on my box it breaks badly Hal. After an update nothing more was working because the hardware was not detected anymore
I removed KDE4.4, installed Gnome instead and til now it works perfectly (and quicker)...Tough I miss a little KDE4 which I found very eye candy...
Last edited by Gnux (2010-02-16 14:37:50)

Iphone 4s with ios 8.1.1, imessage gets slower than ever, sometimes even deliver after 10 min, was not like this with the previous ios, how can I improve imessage sending time?

iphone 4s with ios 8.1.1, imessage gets slower than ever, sometimes even deliver after 10 min, was not like this with the previous ios, how can I improve imessage sending time?

Hi there skmonirul,
Welcome to Apple Support Communities.
From what I gather, iMessages are taking longer than expected to send on your iPhone 4s. If you aren’t seeing issues with other apps, try restarting your iPhone as shown here:
Restart or reset your iPhone, iPad, or iPod touch - Apple Support
If the issue persists, try restoring your iPhone as shown in the article below.
Use iTunes to restore your iOS device to factory settings - Apple Support
So long,
-Jason

Why is the iPad Mini slower than iPod touch 4 at buffering video?

As mentioned in the title I have an iPad Mini that is being outperformed by my iPod touch 4. I have been using both devices on the same network and on You Tube the iPod is a lot faster at loading, Furthermore, when using BBC iPlayer I can connect with the iPod and watch whereas the iPad Mini comes up that there is insufficient bandwidth and doesn't even play.
I was convinced that the iPad Mini would be faster than my iPod which is a year older. I am really disappointed about this and have tried as many things as I can possibly think of. Is anyone else out there experiencing these problems and, if so, do you have any advice on what I can do to solve this problem.
Kind regards,
Emubob

I noticed that my iPad is far more sensitive to signal fluctuations than my MBP. The MBP would report 5 bars, but the iPad would drop the connection every 3 seconds. It turned out that the router was varying the signal, and the iPad couldn't keep a solid connection.

Brand new Macbook Pro slower than my 2006 Macbook

I bought a new Macbook Pro last month and upgraded the RAM to 4 GB and the hard drive to 500 GB. My previous Mac was a mid-2006 Macbook with 2 GB RAM.
I was expecting it to be noticeably faster than my 2006 Macbook (which is still running Tiger/10.4), but it isn't. Two things are particularly noticeable.
1) Startup time. The 2006 Macbook is 5 or 10 seconds faster starting up.
2) Safari. Safari is a couple of seconds faster loading identical websites on the 2006 Macbook. I tried updating Safari on the Macbook Pro to the new Safari 4 beta, and that is slightly faster, but still noticeably slower than on my Macbook.
I've tried running the set of Applescripts called "Maintenance" (available on the web) to do all regular maintenance tasks.
I've run software update. Everything is up to date.
Any suggestions of other things I should be checking to try to improve the speed of my Macbook Pro are much appreciated.
I find it really mystifying that performance is so noticeably worse on a brand new, much more powerful machine.
Thanks

Thanks for the replies.
In re the OS, I personally don't see many significant improvements in OS 10.5. Sure, little things here and there, but major power improvements over 10.4 that should cause startup time to be slower? I don't see it. I'm surprised in the design phase Apple's software engineers would allow longer startup time (always one of their biggest selling point over the Windows world) in return for such things as being able to hit the space bar in the finder to open a document quickly. I'm not using Time Machine, for instance, so that shouldn't be slowing down startup... or at least actually loading it in functioning mode shouldn't be slowing things down.
In re Safari, I'm doing as scientific a test as I possibly can here at home. Both computers sitting right next to each other, connected to the same network wirelessly, clicking on the same web link at exactly the same time. My 2006 Macbook is consistently faster at loading the page. Even more, it is significantly faster at loading the page to a "usable" point. For instance, if I click on the main page of the New York Times, the 2006 Macbook will load faster and will let me scroll down much earlier in the load process. On the 2009 MBP, the page shows up a few seconds slower, and it takes another few seconds more before the spinning beach ball stops and I can scroll down on the page. This is true both with Safari 3 and 4 on the MBP.
I just find it weird that a much more powerful computer, with a "new, improved" operating system and twice the amount of RAM, is noticeably more sluggish on these really basic tasks.
My next step is to go to the Apple store and try to compare mine to some other MBPs...
I have issues with some developments at Apple recently. For instance, the gen 2 iPod shuffle strikes me as a perfect design. Does it need to be smaller? Moving the controls to the headset seems really weird to me, much less convenient than the old one. I know that comment is OT, I just am starting to wonder about some decisions at Apple.
Not enough to make me complain seriously... I still vastly prefer Apple to the other options. But that sense I had for years that somebody really smart is paying attention to all these details and getting them right... that's starting to fade away for me. On the other hand, I do not have an iPhone and I think it's clear a lot of Apple's resources are going into the iPhone these days.

Mac OS internet 5x slower than Windows 7 on BootCamp

Alright, here is my problem...
My one and only computer is a mid 2010 iMac... I recently moved to a new place. Prior to me moving I was stuck with an awful 3Mbps download speed. (You can tell how much I hated it by looking at my username) Now that I moved, I am able to get much faster internet. So, I got a plan that offers up to 50Mbps download speeds (Xfinity Blast cable internet). I didn't want to rent my ISP's modem/router, so I purchased my own. I got a Motorola sbg6580. As soon as I got everything hooked up, it seemed perfect. I used speedtest.net to see what I was getting. I first tested on Windows 7. To my surprise, I was getting around 70Mbps. I then restarted my iMac into the Mac OS to do some speed tests. On the Mac OS, I was getting around 50-60Mbps. A bit slower than Windows 7, but still very good. The next day I decided to do a "real world" test. I downloaded a 1 Gigabyte file just to see how fast it was. Now, if I was getting 50Mbps the file should have taken just under 3 minutes to download. Instead, it took around 7 minutes. I figured it was maybe just the website I was downloading from. (the file I was downloading was the Cry Enginge SDK - http://www.crydev.net/ ) I did some research and discovered the website testmy.net - I am not sure if this is completely reliable or not, but every test I do on testmy.net I get around 10Mbps. At first I thought it was my ISP ripping me off, then I decided to do a testmy.net test on Windows 7 via BootCamp. (please note that on both Mac OSX and Windows 7 I did multiple tests over the coarse of multiple days) On Windows, I could instantly tell that the test was going much faster. The results for testmy.net on Windows 7 were 50-60Mbps. I did not completely trust the website, so I downloaded the same Cryengine SDK on Windows. It took around 3 minutes, just as it should have. I researched a bunch online trying to find info on this problem. I tried many "solutions" but none of them changed anything. (these include but are not limited to: Tried different DNS servers, Disabled ipv6, disabled sbg6580 firewall, disabled mac osx firewall, tried changing the wireless channel, and reset sbg6580. I came to the conclusion that it was the sbg6580. I thought that maybe an airport express would give me better results. So, today I bought an Airport express. With the sbg6580, I was able to disable the router features so it was just a modem. I was then able to set up the Airport express as my router. It fixed nothing. I am still getting the same results, Windows is still getting anywhere from 50-60Mbps while Mac OSX is getting around 10Mbps. I am out of ideas, if anyone could please help me that would be great. Also, if you need to know anything else please let me know. I may have missed something...
A quick note:
At my old house I had my iMac hooked up to a surge protector. For maximum internet performance, my iMac was connected to my router with an ethernet cable. During a bad storm one day, a lightning bolt either hit my house or very close to it. Ever since, my ethernet port has not worked. I have tried multiple eithernet cables as well as multiple routers and networks. I do not have the money for apple to completely replace my logic board. - So anyway, I am unable to test the performace with an eithernet cable.
Extra information:
My sbg6580 as well as my Airport extreme are both sitting on the same desk as my iMac, so it is obviously not a signal problem.
I also own both a iPod touch 5th gen and a iPad 2nd gen. I am getting around 20-30Mbps on both of them. I am not sure what would be a "good speed" on either of these, but I figured that was pretty good for a tablet and ipod.
The upload speeds on both windows 7 and Mac OSX are around the same 5-10Mbps.
I am using Google Chrome on both Windows 7 and Mac OSX but, I have also tried Firefox and Safari.

Please read this whole message before doing anything.
This procedure is a diagnostic test. It’s unlikely to solve your problem. Don’t be disappointed when you find that nothing has changed after you complete it.
The purpose of the test is to determine whether the problem is caused by third-party software that loads automatically at startup or login, or by a peripheral device.
Disconnect all wired peripherals except those needed for the test, and remove all aftermarket expansion cards. Boot in safe mode and log in to the account with the problem. Note: If FileVault is enabled, or if a firmware password is set, or if the boot volume is a software RAID, you can’t do this. Post for further instructions.
Safe mode is much slower to boot and run than normal, and some things won’t work at all, including wireless networking on certain Macs. The next normal boot may also be somewhat slow.
The login screen appears even if you usually log in automatically. You must know your login password in order to log in. If you’ve forgotten the password, you will need to reset it before you begin. Test while in safe mode. Same problem? After testing, reboot as usual (i.e., not in safe mode) and verify that you still have the problem. Post the results of the test.

Flash player 10.1 slower than 10

At least, that's how it is on my secondary computers. On my Dell Inspiron B120, flash 10.1 latest is like a train wreck when it comes to playing Youtube videos in full screen. Disabling hardware acceleration helped a little, but this shouldn't be happening as I uninstalled 10.1 and installed an archived version of Flash 10 with much better playback AND with h/w acceleration enabled. The laptop uses XP SP3 and Firefox.
Simply put, Flash 10.1 feels a lot slower than 10 on my Dell laptop (1.4 GHz celeron-M, intel 915g video, 512 mb ram)
And there's another odd but minor problem I seem to be having with is flash animations on my main computer and any other computer/laptop I have using Flash 10.1. I get this alternating 'lag' every few seconds; it's like the computer is dropping frames because the CPU can't keep up. I could completely understand this, but this is happening on practically any flash animation I throw at the computer. I just tested a flash movie (SWF format) on my main computer (2.8 GHz AMD Athlon x2 240; 2 gb ram, Windows 7 x64, Firefox) and I get this irritating choppy lag here and there. Again, with the previous Flash version 10, I did NOT have this problem AT ALL. Everything was silky smooth; the only benefit I'm getting from Flash 10.1 is x264 hardware acceleration for my ATI Radeon 4200 HD. Before anyone asks, all of my computers were using the latest flash version AND video drivers prior to these tests.
I am VERY frustrated with these problems as I've posted a similar thread twice now in the past. No one seems to be answering or helping me with this; Those that do reply simply claim that they're having the same problem.
Adobe, please look into this problem. Eventually Youtube and several other sites will force me to upgrade my laptop to Flash 10.1.

Has Adobe fixed the problems with version 10,1,82,76 of flash player ?
I compared it and found nothing but problems.
I then uninstalled 10,1,82,76 and rolled back to 10,0,12,36 which works fine on Firefox and Opera but I can't install 10,0,12,36 on Exploer or Chrome
it keeps telling me there is a new version even when I try to install it from local drive with a archived version.
With all the complaints about 10,1,82,76 and the lack of response from Adobe on any fixes I will not be using Adobe auto updates until I let some
other poor guinea pigs suffer all the bugs and problems first.
You would expect a large company to have better development and testing before imposing buggy upgardes on us.

I have found that my Mac Book Pro 15 inch late 2011 is slower than my PC Windows 7 for certain downloads, and working with iPhoto. Would adding RAM be helpful in speeding up this process. Currently I have the stock 4GB RAM, and storage 500GB HD drive.

I have found that my Mac Book Pro late 2011 15 inch is slower than I expected with certain downloads, or working with iPhoto than expected compared to my previous Windows 7 PC. Would adding RAM be of any value in speeding up the process?

how to tell if your mac needs more ram

How can I revert back to 10.0.2. 10.0.3 is slower than Final Cut Pro 3 on my Power PC.

How can I revert back to 10.0.2. 10.0.3 is slower than Final Cut Pro 3 on my Power PC.

I was able to switch out my HD to a previous drive with Snow Leopoard and FCPX 10.0.2. Final Cut Pro is working again like magic! I don't think it has anything to do with Lion. I already miss some of it's features. I am once again scrolling backwards. Within 5 minutes of using FCP 10.0.2 I already notice huge improvements of speed and lack of beach ball. I can honestly say that 10.0.3 is a completely unsuable application unless you have the patience to wait 15-30 seconds between the pushing of any button on the keyboard or the slightest movement of the mouse, well trackpad. Either way FCPX 10.0.3 is a dissappointment on so many levels. I am even giving up my solid state drive to revert back to the awesomeness of FCP 10.0.2.
Really looking forward to the improvements on FCPX but feel that Apple should be releasing the software as Beta and offering it free for those who want to help develop and make it better.

HT2463 Since I installed my new d6300 netgear my downloads on Apple TV have taken a lot longer than previously using a billion router. Do I need to do something with the net gear set up?

Since I installed my new d6300 netgear my downloads on Apple TV have taken a lot longer than previously using a billion router. Do I need to do something with the net gear set up?

Just connect the new iPod to your computer and setup the iPod via iTunes (instead of via wifi).
If you want to copy all the infor from an old iPod touch to the inew iPod see:
iOS: Transferring information from your current iPhone, iPad, or iPod touch to a new device

My Library has ten more songs than my iPod. How can I find out which songs are not syncing?

My Library has ten more songs than my iPod. How can I find out which songs are not syncing?
I recently had to purchase a new hard drive. Because the size of my music collection exceeds 140 GB, I stored all of my music on a separate external hard drive. When I exported everything back into my new iTunes library, I found that I had about 200 more songs than I had in the previous library. After deleting most of those extraneous songs, I was able to get my library close to where it was before. However, after syncing to my iPod Classic, I noticed that only 34,853 of the 34,863 loaded. How can I figure out which of those ten songs in my library did not sync to my iPod?
Yellow12

It may be that the 10 songs are unchecked. To find them select songs view.
If there is a column Heading marked with a tick then click on it to sort by this column.
If the Column is not there then View > View Options and select the Checked column which will then display
Check the songs by putting ticks in the empty boxes and resynch. Now those tracks should go over as well

On Mac FAT32 Format Slower Than HFS

My 60GB iPod came in Windows FAT32 format which I liked since I could use it in disk mode on both Mac & Windows. However it seemed slow to start playing video and when switching between video files.
I did some timing tests and on the Mac FAT32 was much slower than HFS.
FAT32
Start playing movie = 12s
Stop movie and restart at same location = between 12-30s
HFS
Start playing movie = 5s
Stop movie and restart at same location = between 6s
If you have a Mac and your new 5G iPod is formatted for Windows, you may want to use the iPod Updated to restore and make the drive HFS.

> Any NI techs have any insight as to why? Is there some Endian
> conversion being done internally? Any workarounds?
Well, there isn't any endian conversions going on. Both the file and
Mac memory model are big-endian. But the classic Mac file I/O is pretty
slow. The only thing I can recommend is to do the reads in larger
blocks. I've also heard some people claim that running their file I/O
bound apps underneath OSX will speed things up. In other words, running
an OS9 app underneath OSX is actually more efficient because it replaces
all of the OS9 code. So, you could give that a shot.
Greg McKaskle

Slower than previous ipod?

Similar Messages

Maybe you are looking for