Why is eSATA slower then Firewire!?!

I just purchased a 2-Port NitroAV eSATA II 3Gb/s Professional Express Card (34mm) from Firewiredirect.com and a quad interface 7200RPM 500GB/16MB cache external Mercury Elite Pro from OWC for video editing with FCP and backup. I installed the drivers from NitroAV and I have all recent updates.
I've been waiting for the lightning fast eSATA speeds, but instead, it's been rather sluggish. Using a stopwatch and a keen eye, i*t took me 13min40sec to transfer 12.54 gigs over to the external using FW400 and 14min44sec to transfer the same data over eSATA!* Am I wrong to expect it to be faster, especially given the massive number of benchmarks online that state otherwise (I've done my googling!) The firewire speeds are the same to my older FW400 drive (7200 RPM/16MB Cache). The test file was my music folder (lots of subfolders and files).
Video editing is sluggish as well.
Did I receive a dud? Did I waste my money? Should I return the products? Any help would be appreciated. At this point, I feel I should just get a FW800 card instead for my first gen MBP... - thanks

It's not necessarily. I would suggest that it always is; whencomparing
specific tasks.I would suggest that is never is (significantly)
when non-trivial and non-specialized applicationsare
involved. Requirements and design always have a
much greater impact.There's no doubt that the design is the most
important
aspect when writing a program, but assuming those
things
are equal, the fact is that a c program will be
faster.Yes, but given the fact that there is almost zero chance that the requirements, design and implementation will be optimal, it means that the real differences between the languages are insignificant compared to the real difference caused by the other factors.
In the theorectical world C/C++ is faster. In the real world, most of the time, it is not significant.

Similar Messages

Why is the SSD on 2011 Macbook Air much slower then 2010 Macbook Pro with Samsung 830 SSD (less then half the speed) ?

Why is a laptop designed from ground up to use flash slower then a older laptop with a upgraded SSD from a 3rd party?
My old MBP is more then 2x the speed (read/write) with a SSD upgrade (Samsung 830) then my Air.
Any fixes or mods to boost the flash speed of the Air?

We would like you to show us how to do that.......Especially when the Samsung 830 will not fit the Air.....Please don't say duct tape....
Ok, scratch that idea. Let me think for a moment,,,em,,,em. OK I got it. Sell both units and buy a mid Macbook Air 2012 version.
(d-mn I'm good)
__________ All Hail The King _________

Why downloads so slow

Why is my download of Final Cut Pro X so slow? About 500 bytes/sec. My download speed check is 9.4 MBPS!

WELL WITH 15MPS I BET YOU ARE RUNNING SLOW!
I would restart the router * any networking gear you have* and maybe the ipad if it is still slow. then do the following..
"sometimes I like to throw my hands up and yell AAAA YOOO IM A LEGO!"

ActionScript 3.0 is 5~7 times slower then ActionScript 2.0

I have a code that will translate this XML
quote:
<?xml version='1.0'?>
<Member>
<M>
<Username>Test 1</Username>
<Password>Test 1 Password</Password>
</M>
<M>
<Username>Test 2</Username>
<Password>Test 2 Password</Password>
</M>
<M>
<Username>Test 3</Username>
<Password>Test 3 Password</Password>
</M>
</Member>
Into this array
quote:
Array[0].Username = "Test 1"
Array[0].Password = "Test 1 Password"
Array[1].Username = "Test 2"
Array[1].Password = "Test 2 Password"
Array[2].Username = "Test 3"
Array[2].Password = "Test 3 Password"
Here is my variable declaration
quote:
var StartTime:Number = getTimer();
var EndTime:Number = getTimer();
var j:Number = 0;//This Variables used for ActionScript 3.0
Loop
var k:Number = 0;//This Variables used for ActionScript 3.0
Loop
Here is the XML String
quote:
var MyXMLString:String = "<?xml
version='1.0'?><member><O><member_id>1</member_id><currency_id>0</currency_id><name>Admin istrator</name><description>Account
Administrator</description><contact>-</contact><billing_info>-</billing_info><opening_pay able>0.0000000000</opening_payable><opening_receivable>0.0000000000</opening_receivable><t ype>STAFF</type><asset_chart_of_account_id>0</asset_chart_of_account_id><liability_chart_o f_account_id>0</liability_chart_of_account_id><staff_username>administrator</staff_usernam e><staff_password>21232f297a57a5a743894a0e4a801fc3</staff_password><staff_privileges>ADMIN </staff_privileges></O><O><member_id>1</member_id><currency_id>0</currency_id><name>Admini strator</name><description>Account
Administrator</description><contact>-</contact><billing_info>-</billing_info><opening_pay able>0.0000000000</opening_payable><opening_receivable>0.0000000000</opening_receivable><t ype>STAFF</type><asset_chart_of_account_id>0</asset_chart_of_account_id><liability_chart_o f_account_id>0</liability_chart_of_account_id><staff_username>administrator</staff_usernam e><staff_password>21232f297a57a5a743894a0e4a801fc3</staff_password><staff_privileges>ADMIN </staff_privileges></O><O><member_id>1</member_id><currency_id>0</currency_id><name>Admini strator</name><description>Account
Administrator</description><contact>-</contact><billing_info>-</billing_info><opening_pay able>0.0000000000</opening_payable><opening_receivable>0.0000000000</opening_receivable><t ype>STAFF</type><asset_chart_of_account_id>0</asset_chart_of_account_id><liability_chart_o f_account_id>0</liability_chart_of_account_id><staff_username>administrator</staff_usernam e><staff_password>21232f297a57a5a743894a0e4a801fc3</staff_password><staff_privileges>ADMIN </staff_privileges></O></member>";
var MyXML:XML = new XML(MyXMLString);//Parse the XML ONCE
I have a function called ConvertXML , and to check the
performance i made it loop every frame by calling the following
RunXML function
quote:
function RunXML(Events:Event){
StartTime = getTimer();
for(var i:Number=0;i<100;i++){
var MyXMLArr:Array = ConvertXML(MyXML, false, false);
EndTime = getTimer();
trace(EndTime - StartTime + " ms");
and here is my code for parsing the variable MyXML in
ActionScript 3.0 (ConvertXML function)
quote:
//Action Script 3.0 ConvertXML
import flash.xml.*;
function ConvertXML(RecvXML:XML, ChildBranch:Boolean,
IsTable:Boolean):Array {
var RowArr:Array = new Array();
for (j=0; j<RecvXML.child("*").length(); j++) {
var TempObject = new Object();
for (k=0; k<RecvXML.child("*")[j].elements("*").length();
k++) {
TempObject[RecvXML.child("*")[j].elements("*")[k].name()] =
RecvXML.child("*")[j].elements("*")[k];
RowArr.push(TempObject);
return RowArr;
addEventListener(Event.ENTER_FRAME, RunXML);
The code above run 5~7 times slower then the following
actionscript 2.0 code
quote:
//Action Script 2.0 ConvertXML
function ConvertXML(RecvXML:XML, ChildBranch:Boolean,
IsTable:Boolean):Array {
var RowArr:Array = new Array();
for (var aNode:XMLNode = RecvXML.firstChild.firstChild;
aNode != null; aNode=aNode.nextSibling) {
var TempRecord:Object = new Object();
for (var bNode:XMLNode = aNode.firstChild; bNode != null;
bNode=bNode.nextSibling) {
TempRecord[bNode.nodeName] = bNode.firstChild.toString();
RowArr.push(TempRecord);
return RowArr;
this.onEnterFrame = RunXML;
they both does exactly the same thing.. and yet the
actionscript 3.0 code run 5~7 TIMES SLOWER . why?
i have tried other benchmark, and it seems that actionscript
3.0 perform 10 to 100 TIMES FASTER then actionscript 2.0 , only for
this one it run slower... why?
I also attach all the code for actionscript 3.0
should you want to try the actionscript 2.0 , just uncomment
the ConvertXML and this.onEnterFrame for actionscript 2.0 and
comment the one for actionscript 3.0
Why? have i done something wrong?
Cheers and God Bless,
Chowi

Although this doesn't answer your specific question exactly,
it's worth noting that most of the time you do not need to convert
XML into an array or objects like it was helpful to do in AS2, as
XML is a native Object in AS3.
For instance, xml.M would give you an XMLList of logins that
would be treated the same was as your desired Array:
var logins:XMLList = xml.M;
trace(logins[0].Username) // "Test 1"
And that takes 0 milliseconds. ;) You can also declare you
XML directly in AS3, you do not need to declare it as a String and
parse it (see attached.)
Don't know what your trying to accomplish so that might not
help you, but I thought it was worth mentioning. I've been using
E4X extensively for the first time in a project and I have to say
that overall it's made life much easier for me.

Why is java slower than C and C++

Hi Guys:
I would like to know why Java is slower than C and C++ in terms of compilation speed...
Does it have to do with the fact that Java compiles to byte code first and then the JVM translates byte code to machine code which your processor can understand. whereas C and C++ compiles directly to machine code...
Any ideas on that,...let me know..

It's not necessarily. I would suggest that it always is; whencomparing
specific tasks.I would suggest that is never is (significantly)
when non-trivial and non-specialized applicationsare
involved. Requirements and design always have a
much greater impact.There's no doubt that the design is the most
important
aspect when writing a program, but assuming those
things
are equal, the fact is that a c program will be
faster.Yes, but given the fact that there is almost zero chance that the requirements, design and implementation will be optimal, it means that the real differences between the languages are insignificant compared to the real difference caused by the other factors.
In the theorectical world C/C++ is faster. In the real world, most of the time, it is not significant.

Results are in: Leopard slower then Tiger on PowerPC

Xbenched this yesterday. Dual booting on a 12" PowerBook...both Leopard and Tiger boot have Dashboard disabled and are running iStat Menu. Though the back end is slight faster, check out the User Interface and Graphic entries...finally explains why I "felt" that Leopard is slower then Tiger on this machine..it is!
Tiger first:
Results 43.43
System Info
Xbench Version 1.3
System Version 10.4.11 (8S165)
Physical RAM 1280 MB
Model PowerBook6,4
Processor PowerPC G4 @ 1.33 GHz
L1 Cache 32K (instruction), 32K (data)
L2 Cache 512K @ 1.33 GHz
Bus Frequency 167 MHz
Video Card GeForce FX Go5200
Drive Type TOSHIBA MK6025GAS
CPU Test 66.60
GCD Loop 102.38 5.40 Mops/sec
Floating Point Basic 43.53 1.03 Gflop/sec
AltiVec Basic 262.70 10.47 Gflop/sec
vecLib FFT 76.86 2.54 Gflop/sec
Floating Point Library 39.20 6.83 Mops/sec
Thread Test 54.31
Computation 53.32 1.08 Mops/sec, 4 threads
Lock Contention 55.33 2.38 Mlocks/sec, 4 threads
Memory Test 32.79
System 28.50
Allocate 110.05 404.13 Kalloc/sec
Fill 27.15 1320.16 MB/sec
Copy 16.85 347.95 MB/sec
Stream 38.61
Copy 42.49 877.53 MB/sec [altivec]
Scale 44.19 912.98 MB/sec [altivec]
Add 36.82 784.25 MB/sec [altivec]
Triad 33.04 706.91 MB/sec [altivec]
Quartz Graphics Test 58.78
Line 51.99 3.46 Klines/sec [50% alpha]
Rectangle 59.49 17.76 Krects/sec [50% alpha]
Circle 60.43 4.93 Kcircles/sec [50% alpha]
Bezier 66.27 1.67 Kbeziers/sec [50% alpha]
Text 57.54 3.60 Kchars/sec
OpenGL Graphics Test 64.96
Spinning Squares 64.96 82.41 frames/sec
User Interface Test 35.36
Elements 35.36 162.31 refresh/sec
Disk Test 27.34
Sequential 51.31
Uncached Write 46.48 28.54 MB/sec [4K blocks]
Uncached Write 42.94 24.30 MB/sec [256K blocks]
Uncached Read 81.00 23.70 MB/sec [4K blocks]
Uncached Read 48.05 24.15 MB/sec [256K blocks]
Random 18.64
Uncached Write 6.51 0.69 MB/sec [4K blocks]
Uncached Write 37.23 11.92 MB/sec [256K blocks]
Uncached Read 52.46 0.37 MB/sec [4K blocks]
Uncached Read 66.12 12.27 MB/sec [256K blocks]
Leopard is here:
Results 38.30
System Info
Xbench Version 1.3
System Version 10.5.1 (9B18)
Physical RAM 1280 MB
Model PowerBook6,4
Processor PowerPC G4 @ 1.33 GHz
L1 Cache 32K (instruction), 32K (data)
L2 Cache 512K @ 1.33 GHz
Bus Frequency 167 MHz
Video Card GeForce FX Go5200
Drive Type TOSHIBA MK6025GAS TOSHIBA MK6025GAS
CPU Test 68.24
GCD Loop 108.63 5.73 Mops/sec
Floating Point Basic 43.91 1.04 Gflop/sec
AltiVec Basic 265.00 10.56 Gflop/sec
vecLib FFT 77.25 2.55 Gflop/sec
Floating Point Library 40.70 7.09 Mops/sec
Thread Test 47.78
Computation 55.94 1.13 Mops/sec, 4 threads
Lock Contention 41.69 1.79 Mlocks/sec, 4 threads
Memory Test 35.50
System 32.91
Allocate 217.07 797.16 Kalloc/sec
Fill 29.10 1415.13 MB/sec
Copy 19.16 395.66 MB/sec
Stream 38.54
Copy 42.76 883.27 MB/sec [altivec]
Scale 43.93 907.62 MB/sec [altivec]
Add 36.47 776.79 MB/sec [altivec]
Triad 33.10 708.10 MB/sec [altivec]
Quartz Graphics Test 69.27
Line 57.49 3.83 Klines/sec [50% alpha]
Rectangle 71.05 21.21 Krects/sec [50% alpha]
Circle 63.90 5.21 Kcircles/sec [50% alpha]
Bezier 72.39 1.83 Kbeziers/sec [50% alpha]
Text 88.92 5.56 Kchars/sec
OpenGL Graphics Test 62.08
Spinning Squares 62.08 78.76 frames/sec
User Interface Test 20.86
Elements 20.86 95.72 refresh/sec
Disk Test 24.68
Sequential 40.70
Uncached Write 35.34 21.70 MB/sec [4K blocks]
Uncached Write 32.79 18.55 MB/sec [256K blocks]
Uncached Read 69.06 20.21 MB/sec [4K blocks]
Uncached Read 40.00 20.10 MB/sec [256K blocks]
Random 17.71
Uncached Write 6.30 0.67 MB/sec [4K blocks]
Uncached Write 33.58 10.75 MB/sec [256K blocks]
Uncached Read 48.26 0.34 MB/sec [4K blocks]
Uncached Read 60.08 11.15 MB/sec [256K blocks]

The Leopard interface is definitely more graphics intensive (and I have heard suggestions that Leopard transfers more work to the graphics card than earlier versions of OSX). I guess at some level of hardware any processing efficiencies will be outweighed by the load on the graphics card. In other words, can you be sure that your results would replicate on a PPC machine with a more powerful graphics card and more VRAM?

AEBSn 5.0 slower then AEXPress G

Past requests for help in Discussions have been great BUT it seems that every so often performance via AEBSn goes south.
1. AEBSn using 5.0 for my MacBook Pro. My wife's Powerbook is using Airport Express that is hardwired in to AEBSn and set up as BRIDGE (per Express recommendation.
2. Our IP is feeding house at 5614 kbps download and 953 upload. My wireless feed from AEBSn is 1454/616 which is SLOWER then when I access via Airport Express (1578/634)
3. Both units are set to determine CHANNEL automatically. In the past I have manually checked all the channels for performance on the Express (time consuming)but the AEBSn using 5.0 will only allow Automatic
4. Both AEBSn and Express use WEP Personal.
5. In the past I have been able to get very good speeds off both AEBSn and Express, in fact almost as good as hard wired. For the last couple of days it is very slow and erratic.
6. I have iStumbler but am not sure how to use it other then checking channels.
Question: Could I have AEBSn and Express incorrectly setup? Any suggestions?
Always appreciate input.
David

Hi Tingi... interesting however,
*your point 2.*: You _won't be able to change the frequency/channel (it is 36 I believe)_ for 802.11n@5Ghz. t seems set that way.
Just as a suggestion, AS A TRYOUT, why not BACK the base stations to 802.11N @ 2.4Ghz and give tha a try.
I have experienced the situation you have ages ago and it was related to signal peneration between base statsion.. for me at least.
I isolated it and ended up buying another APX 11.n .. *how I get 270-300Mbs on a 802.11N @ 5Ghz*.
Anyway just try the 802.11n@ 2.4Ghz.. you sould get 130Mbs (thats 130Mbs) .. certainly a load more than 6Mbs.!!
However you wifes PB G4 may is certainly 802..1G or earlier. My wife has an 12inches (300mm) PB 887Mhz and it connects at 802.11g at 36Mbs MAX.. so ok for small timemachine updates &adn net surfing and emails.
Post your reults.
w

11.9 very slow then 11.7

Flash player 11.9 (last version) too, too, TOO SLOW then 11.7 (or earlier 11.9). Shaders works very slow in windows player's plug-in Why? What's happen? I'm the developer and this is very important for me! Is it bug or ...?

Emerging security research related to Virtual Machines and Just-In-Time compilers compelled us to disable the JIT compilation for old-school Pixel Bender shaders. We did not take this decision lightly as we try to never break backwards compatibility; however, we feel that in this instance, it was the right move in terms of protecting customers and end-users.
We recommend that you migrate your shaders to Stage3D and AGAL (aka Pixel-Bender 3D).
You can find more information about Stage3D and AGAL here: http://www.adobe.com/devnet/flashplayer/articles/what-is-agal.html
Again, sorry for the inconvenience.

Why is SCP slow realtive to using winSCP on windows?

Why is SCP slow realtive to using winSCP on windows(3MB/s on mac and 11 MB/s on windows)?

You are not having my exact same problem, but try this:
1. Browse to "C:\Users\<YourUserName>\AppData\Roaming" in Windows Explorer.
2. Rename the "Apple Computer" folder to "Apple Computer-old".
3. Start iTunes
4. Close iTunes
5. Copy the file "iTunesPrefs.xml" from "C:\Users\<YourUserName>\AppData\Roaming\Apple Computer-old\iTunes"
6. Paste the old "iTunesPrefs.xml" into the new "Apple Computer\iTunes" folder iTunes just created (not the one you renamed) under "C:\Users\<YourUserName>\AppData\Roaming\Apple Computer-old\iTunes"
7. Overwrite the new iTunesPrefs.xml with your old copy of the file.
If you don't care about losing your iTunes preferences then you can just do step 2. You can always go back and grab things from the old folder later if you realize you wanted to have your EQ settings, individual track gains, etc...

Why are divisions slow?

Why are integer divisions in java about 30 times slower then multiplications?
Is it because java tests for division by 0?
But that shouldn't slow it down that much.
Is there some other reason?

DrClap wrote:
JosAH wrote:
(*) 'clearly' as in 'as clear as pages full of funky algorithms in obscure pseudo-code mixed with a lot of tricky modulo algebra and a boring list of corollaries can be' ;-)Well, this is the standard mathematician's definition of "clear" or "obvious".
Mathematician 1: ... and it's clear that A is homeomorphic to B in all spaces of Hausdorff dimension greater than 3...
Mathematician 2: Wait. Why is that clear?
(15 minute discussion ensues)
Mathematician 2: Oh, of course, obviously it's clear.:-) You forgot 'trivial' as in 'by corollaries #<lots of numbers all the way through the book/> and by <some mysterious theorems noone has ever heard of/> it is trivial that <some mumbo-jumbo/>'
I call those 'proof by intimidation' ;-)
kind regards,
Jos

Why is CS6 slow, 64bit-mode or not?

Got the CS6 trial for OSX. Its not nearly as responsive as promised.
It can't handle average files with let say 30states in it.
Escpecially if you create symbols with a lot of elements(30+) which are nested and you want to edit those symbols, there is huge perfomance drop:
You can't use your keyboard for moving elements within those symbols. The programs give you no feedback what it is doing.
Then I checked the activity monitor: Apparently fireworks is not running in 64bit mode.
Is this just the trial version or is the Adobe-Add misleading that it should be running in 64bit?
My comp-specs:
lates iMac
20GB Ram
SSD

And why it has not been improved? Its so obvious slow!
Dennis Itzwerth
Am 09.05.2012 um 13:20 schrieb Shubhashri CG <[email protected]>:
Re: Why is CS6 slow, 64bit-mode or not?
created by Shubhashri CG in Fireworks - View the full discussion
Performance improvement in CS6 is made interms of refreshing the Property inspector on Mac platform.
On Windows platform file open /edit and save limit has been increased for 64 bit machines.
Adobe Fireworks CS6 is a 32-bit application only.Also performance interms of rendering on canvas or preview is not changed in CS6.
Thanks
Shubha
Replies to this message go to everyone subscribed to this thread, not directly to the person who posted the message. To post a reply, either reply to this email or visit the message page: http://forums.adobe.com/message/4390299#4390299
To unsubscribe from this thread, please visit the message page at http://forums.adobe.com/message/4390299#4390299. In the Actions box on the right, click the Stop Email Notifications link.
Start a new discussion in Fireworks by email or at Adobe Forums
For more information about maintaining your forum email notifications please go to http://forums.adobe.com/message/2936746#2936746.

Mac mini Core Solo is a great deal slower then 1.5ghz mac mini G4??

I have two mac minis, one has a 1.5 Ghz G4 and the other has a 1.5 Ghz Core Solo. Both have 512mb of RAM and OS X 10.4.7. I have the same software installed between them. They both have the latest updates for Office 2004 installed, both have the latest system updates, latest Firefox updates, both have latest Adobe Reader updates, and both have Quark 6.5 installed.
The Core Solo mac mini is WAY slower then the G4, Entourage in particular is almost slow to the point it is unworkable. Is this due to the Rosetta emulation? What can I do to improve this, will increasing the ram to 1 GB clear these speed issues or am I going to have to return this mini and get one with a Core Duo?
The current sluggishness on the Core Solo mini is unbearable, literally my Powerbook G4 667mhz with 768mb of ram is loads faster then this mini is. I'm thinking more RAM will do the trick, but wanted to bounce this off of some other experts here first. Thanks.

Entourage in particular is almost slow to the point it is unworkable. Is this due to the Rosetta emulation?
Yes, almost certainly. Microsoft Office is not yet Intel-native, so it's gonig to run more slowly than a native edition would. The same will apply to any PowerPC-only software.
What can I do to improve this, will increasing the ram to 1 GB clear these speed issues
I can't say for certain, but other users have reported that increasing the RAM to 1GB (or beyond) has made significant improvements in performance.

What is cookies.sqlite and why does it slow the start up of mozilla by a minute or so. I found it and deleted it,fixed the problem, but it reappears eveery time I restart mozilla.

what is cookies.sqlite and why does it slow the start up of mozilla by a minute or so. I found it and deleted it,fixed the problem, but it reappears every time I restart mozilla.

AVG reports these sqlite cookies each time firefox starts. they usually belong to tribalfusion or some other tracker. How do I block them in the first place. I thought firefox is a safe browser. Did not have this problem until I upgraded to 3.6.

Why does Telstra slow uploads speed down

I have had ongoing issues with my internet connection over the last 18 mouths.Having a upload speed of 450/650 Kbps very slow no good for gaming an down load of 8/11Mbps down load if more than I needTo the point I have spent good dollars try to insuring that the infrastructures and the Asset Integrity with in house are in best condition this includes the replacement and work listed belowReplacement of the Wi-Fi system to a Cat.6 cabling at a cost of $2,300Replacement of the modem with a high speed 1G port modem at cost of $ 475Replacement of the fly-lead for the Telstra house connection to the new wall socket a cost of $360Total cost of $3135 this spend was braced on Telstra recommendation as the problem was with my part of the connection after a large number of call to my internet provider I at last had a appointment with a Telstra Tec to carry line testing and fault finding .At this point if no fault was found I was the be billed at $60 per 15min or part off and travel cost as I live in Bullsbrook WA this may I high . Lucky for me a fault was found in the exchange and reconfigured and the speed and the Exchange improved to 22Mbps down and 15 Mbps up an outstanding numbers >test at the house 15Mbps and so 5 / 7 Mbps loss for the Exchange to house don’t to good but still very happy with it BUT the upload was 650 kbps /750Kbps and please remember this testing was carry out by Telstra with good equipment so at this point I ask why the upload was so slow? After spending over $2000 and lot of time on the phone only to be told that Telstra slow the upload speed down so the max you can get is 1 Mbps and the only way you can increase this is by paying for a business line but you still may not get any more than 1MbpsThis is only a very small part of the story SO I LIKE TO ASK WHY IS TELSTRA SLOWING ME DOWNIf you like to know more please let me know

Hi bigdave618,
The simple answer is, that's the way the system and hardware is designed, all ISP's are the same. Uploads are limited to around 1Mbps. If you wish to get higher upload speeds you can see if Cable Broadband or NBN are available in your area as these systems allow for higher upload speeds.
Upload speeds are generally slower than download speeds because of the fact that most internet connected equipment is asymmetric. Asymmetric means that any one packet of data can either go in, or out, but not both ways at the same time. Since most internet users are receiving more data than sending, the internet connected equipment has shifted the higher majority of the signals to go toward downloading.
If you wish to find out more about ADSL I have added a link to a Wikipedia article below along with the link to the NBN and Telstra websites so you can check to see if Cable Broadband or NBN is available in your area.
ADSL Wiki article: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Asymmetric_digital_subscriber_line
Check for available Telstra Cable Broadband: https://www.telstra.com.au/broadband/home-broadband
Check to see if NBN is available in your area: http://www.nbnco.com.au/connect-home-or-business/check-your-address.html
- Ben

Anyone notice that Firefox downloads and load a page a lot slower then Dolphin HD?

Anyone notice that Firefox downloads and load a page a lot slower then Dolphin HD? That has been my experience all morning. I'm on Verizon Droid 2.
I been testing various web pages using Dolphin & Firefox Mobile, and I have noticed that in general, web pages takes longer to download and slower to render in Firefox Mobile then in Dolphin HD. It is not a cache issue as I clear my cache between tries.
Firefox Mobile 4 (downloaded 3/21/2011)?
Dolphin HD 4.5.0

I have the same problem on my website. It only happens in Firefox. IE, Chrome and Safari are working fine.
Very strange behaviour. Check this page: http://1stlook.nl/webdesign-eindhoven.html
You have to push the orange button twice. First time it only drops. Only if you click in the right corner it works???

Why is eSATA slower then Firewire!?!

Similar Messages

Maybe you are looking for