****ing Counter Ad - Page 2

I have a 3M download speed (fastest available in my area) but this morning it has slowed to a crawl (Embarq) so I have sympathy for anyone with a slow connection trying to view this site!

I should have been more specific.  I didn't mean to suggest that all of NY has access to FIOS yet  (or to gloat) but it's getting more and more widespread.  Here in the suburbs of NYC we've had FIOS for a number of years and just recently we became a pilot area for their 35/20 service
and I understand that it will be rolled out to other areas shortly.  However, it's been a slow process (even within the suburbs of NYC) to get FIOS implemented because cable had a grip on lots of small town contracts, etc. that are now just being overturned by the courts.  I strongly suggest that when FIOS becomes available in your area that you at least take a hard look at it.  FIOS might not be a fit for everybody but I have yet to find anyone who thinks that cable is better once they have switched to FIOS.  In our area cable is obviously taking a major hit because they are now showing ads where "unsatisfied FIOS customers" are returning their equipment to the UPS store in "droves" because they miss their cable.  Yeah, right!  These ads were probably written by the same people who were broadcasting the ominous warnings (directed to mostly the elderly) that warned that Cable was the way to "ensure that you don't lose your TV signal when the digital switchover occurs."  What's next, "Help, I've fallen and I can't get up unless I subscribe to Cable!"?

 

Even the recent claims of cable's new "100Mb Internet Service" is highly misleading because cable is a shared system so that 100Mb is a theoretical maximum that is compromised as soon as multiple users are on the same node.  FIOS is a direct connection (like DSL) so what you get, stays essentially the same regardless of the number of users.  I get 35/20 regularly when I test the speed.  Tales From Cable - A modern day Racket Squad episode, if you ask me. (I'm dating myself with that reference.)

I understand entirely, but it's not only the HTF that suffers in such cases.  Occasionally in hotels, my connection will also drop to a crawl and in cases like that I would appreciate an HTF-lite version that cuts to the chase with only the essentials.  Maybe this is something that the tech support squad could look into.  And, like I said, that goes for any site taking advantage of the latest Internet features which consume a lot of bandwidth. There is always a bit of a trade off between performance and features which is magnified by older equipment and slower connectivity.  In today's video rich, instant gratification, facebook et. al.,  feature laden Internet sometimes we forget the days of 110 baud acoustic coupler modems and text-only BBS services.  While I'm loving the new HTF interface I also realize that it will take some people time to get up to speed - literally - when they can.

Not to sound cold, but that's part of the price of progress (and this coming from The Old Dude!)

I get your message loud and clear, Robert.

It's just that, for me, the only problem I've ever had--technologically--at the HTF has been that counter ad.  I've only run across it a couple of times since it reappeared for me a few days ago.  That's why I so appreciate the staff's ability to keep it away.  No other ads (Amex included) have been causing me (or my older machines) any problems. 

I just realized that when I saw the offending "counter" ad last night and it bogged me down, I wasn't on either my home or work PC but our family laptop.  It is a Pentium 4 2.80Ghz with 384Mg of RAM.

My connection is back to normal now, but when it was slow I noticed that what was taking so long with HTF was the loading of ads. This site was one of the slowest to load of all the other sites I was using at that time.

BTW it's not my computer: Intel Core2 (2.40Ghz) w/Quad Core, 4 GB RAM, dual nVidia GeForce 9800GT.

 I totally agree that your computer is more than up to the task of handling just about anything that today's Internet throws at it in terms of "difficult" graphics and other multimedia.  The weak link, as you stated, was the connection and your experience indicates that something about the way that the HTF handles page loads (or whatever the correct terminology is) is causing a problem.  I trust that the tech staff is taking note of your experience and uses this information to tweak the HTF for better performance - especially since other sites seem to do better with slow connections.   There is always the possibility that the pathway that the HTF took to get to your computer node might be the culprit and not the HTF site itself, but that's for the engineers to try to figure out.  Thanks for the input. I think that it will be helpful.

Well, the AMEX counter ad just showed up for me as I fired up my home PC after my weekend's travels.

Why would the ad keep showing up after the Huddler staff said it wouldn't?       

:) I know what you meant. Just tweaking you a bit for forgetting the "C" from your "NY" initially. (Contrary to popular belief, New York extends outside the "City" limits.)

Rochester was relatively ahead of the curve on broadband access during the 90s and 00s. I think we've been testing grounds for RoadRunner's services over the years. However, being locked into RR, we're falling behind with new technologies from other providers not getting to us.

Mike,

Huddler originally did indeed put a block on that ad.
However, that temporary block expired.  Since your
post above, Huddler has put an additional block on it.

One thing that should be noted is that internet connection
speed as well as the individual's hardware\software can
impact ad load times.  

Thanks, Ron. 

I've got decent internet hook-ups at the two main locations I compute from.  At home I've got a Time-Warner broadband hookup.  I'm not sure exactly what my work set-up is....but I would wager something comparable. 

Is there a quick way for me to see the speed of my internet connection?

www.speedtest.net/

Oh cheers Marianne I can do with a speed test um let's see - 8.83mbs - woohoo!

A friend sent me his current speed from his networking company -

http://www.speedtest.net/result/527100382.png

Wow thats outrageous, too much.

Speed isn't everything!

Thats not the impression I got from reading this page. Someone earlier posted - "This site was one of the slowest to load of all the other sites I was using at that time." and another posted - "this forum is so slow I go and put the kettle on while it's loading a page" one more "I'm on 48k dial-up and I was waiting all afternoon for the bleeding page to open up.. I fell asleep twice!" So you see, speed is everything.

I have to say that because I only get 3mbs!

3mbs? That's speedy enough. Marianne I used to dream of getting 1mbs back in me dial up days, I still remember waiting and waiting for pictures to unload here on the forum, It took about 20 minutes for a post with a bunch of large pictures to slowly unfurl. That was when I'd had enough and moved onto broadband.

Btw I never got that Amex counter advert, it doesn't show here, wrong country?

Only a select few got the Amex Ad!

Sam:

Google bought Double Click about a year or so ago so the delay is through the Google Ad servers.

Parker

Thanks, Marianne.

Here's my results for my work PC: 

2.71mbs download and .65 mbs upload.

Does that look like it would be a problem for the Amex ad?  I wouldn't think so. 

Hmmm.  As I look at a list generated for my work IP, it says sometimes the mbs is up over 20 and 30 mbs for download & upload speeds.  I guess the 2.71 is at this very second.  A few hours ago, it was 27.88 mbs download speed.

The only reason I have a land-line is for my internet and I have no other options. So including my basic phone fees, tax and internet the cost is about $70 per month for a 1.5m down and .5m up. I can double that speed but it would be another $40 per month and I just don't see the reason for that. Block all the ads and prevent flash players from starting automatically - 1.5 is doing just fine. My network consists of 5 laptops (family of 4 including 2 teens and Mother-In -law) - 3 PCs ( weather station, "work pc' and brother next door) and the XBox online. We rarely have any issues. Other than ads, most websites are mainly text.

I have a few different computers here with that kind of bandwidth. On the fast, multi-core systems, the CPU goes way, way up (no individual core is maxed, but when you add them together, it's more than "100%" of one), but if I didn't have a CPU meter visible, I wouldn't be able to tell. The count to 25,000 (or whatever) takes a few seconds, and the rest of the page loads fine with no delay.

On the slowest single-core system, the CPU is maxed out, the count takes several seconds, but the rest of the page does try to load in the meantime. Everything is slow, but unlike what you've seen, the page is not blank waiting for the count to finish. But it's not a Pentium III running Firefox and who knows what version of Flash on Windows.

My home PC tests at 17.74 mbs.  So I guess that's not the issue here, either.


I've been clear that I've got the latest version of Flash on both PCs.  Pentium III, at home, 834 Mghz, 384 RAM.  Flashplayer is 10.0 r 22 on both home and work PCs. 

Glad to know, at least, that Ken has been seeing the Amex ad, too. 

Sorry, that behavior was from a few weeks ago when this problem first started. I'm not getting the ad now -- just refreshed several times.

Now getting flashing ads "You have won a free laptop" and "You have won a WalMart gift card". They are making HTF look cheap and tacky and are probably dangerous to click on. Also getting really gross "teeth whitening ad".

If you provide a link, we can do something about them. Without a link, there's nothing we can do.

What link do you want? Click the ad and copy the target address? The ugly yellow teeth ad is stomach turning.

Right-click, copy shortcut. What other address is there?

There is the address of the ad and then there is the address that it actually takes you to . I didn't know if you wanted the former or the latter. As a current example:

Ad address:
http://ad.doubleclick.net/click;h=v8/387f/c/72/%2a/n;210316690;22-0;0;37900662;3454-728/90;31918217/31936093/1;;~sscs=%3fhttp://ad.afy11.net/ad?c=rymcpFCYcUeQ2hU9XAtJvk+K1w7pqE3p9oZXArbBNo6xNf9-jL70VLRiFxdJOaCYJQRx5vnp75HaiPCtl6ZReA==!http%3a%2f%2fwww.wynnlasvegas.com

Actual address:
http://www.wynnlasvegas.com/#homepage/


You've answered that now: the former. (Nothing against Wynn. Those ads are fine.)

Also: you can't right-click and copy the address of ads that in Flash, like the new low-rent "WINNER!!!" ad that's headining today.

So, I'll double-check: which address is wanted for noting malignant or annoying ads? Or is either one OK?