Even though I've never had such an issue myself, I've often followed the threads in tech support about speed problems. Usually in one of first couple of replies will be instructions about running a series of speed tests, and how they are absolutely necessary to trouble shoot your system.
Why are they necessary? Earlier in the week my speed was 30.24, this morning it's 27.90. What does this tell one, other than the system had less load on it on the first test?
Here's some speed tests that I ran within minutes of each other this morning:
Hughes speed test: 27.90
25mb file size with testmy.net: 37.4
Testmy.net default file size: 30.6
Perhaps that's why Hughes prefers the testmy.net 25mb test over anything else. It always reports much higher speeds on my system.
I recently followed one members travails with speed issues, who had testmy.net results going back over a year, which was not good enough. It never is! The tests have to be performed in an exact certain way. One file size for gen4, a different size for gen5, 3 tests, 3-10 minutes apart, but not an hour apart, 3 times a day, morning, noon, and night.
BTW the member's issues were not resolved as of today, after a month of running more speed tests. Of course, the member was told that the testmy.net 25mb tests showed that they were on the threshold of being within the promised speeds. Not surprising, if their system is like mine, where the testmy.net 25mb results are always about 10 mbps higher than the Hughes speed test.
Sorry, but all of this is beginning to strain my credulity about the usefulness of all these speed tests. Especially since I believe that Hughes may be cherry picking the tests for the highest speeds. Why else would they refuse to accept the results of their own speed test?
"I know I'm paranoid, but am I paranoid enough?"
Tom Clancy
