Google Is Testing Its Own Internet Speed Test In Search Results (thenextweb.com) 43
An anonymous reader writes: Everyone appears to have a speed test of their own nowadays. Netflix launched fast.com more than a month ago; SourceForge released their new HTML5 speed test soon after. Google appears to want a piece of the action as they are trying out a way for people to check their internet speed by simply typing "check internet speed" into search. The tests are performed by Google's Measurement Lab tools, and were first spotted by Pete Meyers, who posted a screenshot of the feature and discovered a Google Support webpage detailing how it works. The feature has not been widely released yet, but it's possible we'll see it made more widely available soon.
First (Score:4, Funny)
internet is fast enough for me!
Regional Thing (Score:1)
Must be a regional thing. Not working in Spain.
Re: (Score:3)
Must be a regional thing. Not working in Spain.
Nor in my backwards country Kerry forgot about.
Re: (Score:1)
Net Neutrality is the kryptonite of libertarians.
Re: (Score:2)
Well, if you don't like Net Neutrality, you're free to set up your own Internet.
Re: (Score:1)
You could always install your own speedtest server and test your own speed, but of course you wouldn't be able to convince trendy idiots of the validity of your results unless you own a name brand speedtest app, and bragging to trendy idiots about your speed is the only real reason to do a speedtest, now isn't it?
Re: (Score:1)
Vive le Linux libre!
Countdown until legal action... (Score:1)
Countdown until legal action from the speed testing sites that they're stealing traffic and users from. They already had this problem with maps and shopping, they just never learn.
I doubt legal action. (Score:2, Offtopic)
I doubt legal action.
Mostly it's major ISPs that offer speed testing, e.g. Comcast.
The trick is that they offer the test from a customer node within their network, to a test server node also within their network, which avoids crossing one or more peering points.
That actually only gives you "last mile" speeds, which don't represent real world expected performance.
A lawsuit would make this information very "in your face" for the general public, and stir up the whole NetFlix/peering controversy again, and that
Re:I doubt legal action. (Score:4, Informative)
I see it as a play to make sure all those ISPs give google a node on their network, so it will continue to be a device to ISP network test. Google can throw the speed test into Android and pretty much guarantee that they have nodes in all ISPs and make it mighty hard for a competitor (search, ads or youtube) to enter the market.
I think your idea is fundamentally flawed.
A single speed test node on an ISP network would have exactly the same effect as the ISP's current configuration of having a speed test node on their own network.
Further, a single Google node or even a full two racks aren't enough to provide local to the ISP's network all of the Google services, let alone all the Google services used by all the ISP's customers. A "unit of Google" is far too large to fit anywhere short of a full datacenter.
Finally, Google actually runs its own Internet, including transatlantic and other undersea fiber lines. The only place it touches the actual Internet is at peering locations, in order to externalize the services it provides to consumers.
So there really is no benefit to Google for the architecture you are suggesting they are trying to emplace.
Co opting the search (Score:2)
So they make the search term you would naturally type in to find their competitors be the cue to run their own service. Nice job if you can get it.
Re: (Score:2)
It's not just because of the Sourceforge servers being unreliable, it also depends on what browser you use. With the latest Palemoon, I had 180ms latency according to SF's test, and 50Mbit/s download 60Mbit/s upload, while with Vivaldi I had 108ms latency and 79Mbit/s download, 120Mbit/s upload. With Opera, I got 120ms latency, 85Mbit/s download and 25Mbit/s upload. So, it's totally worthless as a test.
Oh, I should add: Moving my cursor during the latency test added to the latency jitter...
Re: (Score:2)
Yeah, but when the variability is so high against the same IP, just by switching browsers, and the test performed before the morning surge starts in the US, shows that it's highly flawed. And as I mentioned, moving my cursor around caused latency jitter.
Re: (Score:2)
What we really need is a speed watchdog. (Score:4, Insightful)
Doing a quick test of speed is fine, but what about ongoing records, automatically recorded? It's a very common story for actual internet speeds not to match advertised speeds (be that truth or exaggeration). While a single speed test might reveal underperformance, charting performance over time would be far more revealing.
Re: (Score:1)
$work is doing just this in the UK (we also work closely with the UK communications regulator, Ofcom).
https://www.actual-experience.com/actualhome/ [actual-experience.com]
We don't just focus on speed, we calculate a quality score based on a number of parameters.
France (Score:1)
Not available in France right now :(
Hey maybe ComCast will speed up Google too then (Score:3)
So the other day, my internet was very slow, I did a speed test on speedtest.net, and it reported about 25Mpbs, which is exactly what my internet is supposed to be.
But it didn't seem right, because every site was painfully slow. So I went to speedof.me and did a speed test, and I was getting like 1.5Mbps, which was definitely more accurate.
The other day I overheard a Comcast commercial where they mentioned that they're number 1 on speedtest.net. So, I came to the very obvious conclusion that Comcast deliberately makes sure to un-throttle your internet when doing a speedtest on speedtest.net (and who knows where else).
Re: (Score:2)
You know, this is a business opportunity for Speedtest.net. They should start selling VPN
Re: (Score:1)
If speedtest.net connected you to the closest server, that happens to be near/on Comcast infrastructure, that would explain it.
Pick a test server host further away, and see what happens.
Why? (Score:2)
I can understand ISPs wanting to have their own speed test available for their customers within their network, but what benefit does making this available offer for other companies?
What is the ROI for SourceForge having its own speed test?
Testing Their Servers (Score:2)
I see this more as a way to test their servers more so than our own connections... well, at least when testing from Gigabit FTTH
CenturyLink: 535 / 727mbps (the fastest I've ever gotten from my ISP's test server. Usually in the 200mbps range)
Comcast: 470 / 819mbps
Speedtest.net Sprint Seattle: 657 / 751mbps
SourceForge: 282 / 133mbps (usual speeds when testing)
Netflix Fast.com: 44mbps (the fastest I've ever gotten, I usually get around 10mbps from them)
MeasurementLab.net: 71 / 67mbps
SpeakEasy.net: 500 / 896 mb
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
I'm getting similar results with that site: 367 / 906 mbps. So once again, downstream from the remote servers is being over-saturated, whereas upstream to the servers is mostly idle. (note: multiple tests ran, all within similar ranges)