Looking for bandwidth feedback please!

[Tom]

I've had some comments about Carpokes not loading quickly enough. Have you experienced this? If so, is it consistent or random? All pages or just big pictures? Just trying to get a sense for what others are seeing. I've personally had a few instances where pages or pictures load very slowly, but that's pretty rare for me, and not much different than my general web-surfing experience. I'm looking for feedback from others to hear what others are experiencing.... Thanks all.

[Stormy_Monday]

seems to be just fine on my computer. Also fine on my Samsung phone running Android.

[blueline]

As mentioned, I've had a few random occurrences the last couple of weeks, especially with larger (normally sized locally stored-type) file size photos. They can be suddenly very slow-loading until in (or back into) my PC's cache.

There have been some slow loads this morning. For example, I went to the first page of the Garage thread which I hadn't accessed in awhile and the opening pics of Tom's garage were slow to open. However all seemed fine a short time later. I just now breezed through about half of the 39-pages and all pics were already there or opened instantly. I also just tabbed through each of the 15 pages of the Pet thread and they too are good at this time.

For me the anomaly so far has been recent and infrequent. I'll see if it's happening on my Android Pixel the next time I notice anything unusual on a PC.

[71eh]

Always loads pretty quick. When it does load slow, It's probably a cache issue on the users(my) end.

These values are well within normal ranges. Perhaps your host at times get bottle-necked?

2342.png (266.61 KiB) Viewed 846 times

[icb]

Images usually load really slowly for me; I have a pretty bad internet connection (Hughesnet satellite). I always assumed it's just because digital cameras take ridiculously high-res images by default nowadays and most people won't know to scale down their images for the internet. I always scale my images down to 800x600 at 300 dpi before uploading them and they load pretty quick through my connection.
I suspect you're going to find that it's only an issue with people like me who have no bandwidth available. Hughesnet claims I have something like 1.5 Mps but in reality it's more like slightly better than a 56K modem through a dial up connection. People with really fast connections can load anything instantly.

[Tom]

Images usually load really slowly for me; I have a pretty bad internet connection (Hughesnet satellite). I always assumed it's just because digital cameras take ridiculously high-res images by default nowadays and most people won't know to scale down their images for the internet. I always scale my images down to 800x600 at 300 dpi before uploading them and they load pretty quick through my connection.

Thanks, good feedback. I looked at Hughes before getting Starlink (which I'd highly recommend). Do large images on Carpokes download slower that large images from other sites for you?

p.s., I should probably implement some kind of auto-scaling system for images, since the really big images consume extra bandwidth for no particular reason...

[icb]

Images usually load really slowly for me; I have a pretty bad internet connection (Hughesnet satellite). I always assumed it's just because digital cameras take ridiculously high-res images by default nowadays and most people won't know to scale down their images for the internet. I always scale my images down to 800x600 at 300 dpi before uploading them and they load pretty quick through my connection.

Thanks, good feedback. I looked at Hughes before getting Starlink (which I'd highly recommend). Do large images on Carpokes download slower that large images from other sites for you?

p.s., I should probably implement some kind of auto-scaling system for images, since the really big images consume extra bandwidth for no particular reason...

That's a good question. If you could point me to a known large image somewhere else I can try it and let you know...I think the issue will be knowing which ones are large/hi-res. I just took another look at 500's Canadian 944S thread in the 944S forum; those are images that take forever for me. I also just did a speed test on speedofme.net and it's a good night for Hughesnet - I'm actually testing at 2.3 Mps download speed right now. The images on 500's thread are still agonizingly slow though.

[71eh]

Images usually load really slowly for me; I have a pretty bad internet connection (Hughesnet satellite). I always assumed it's just because digital cameras take ridiculously high-res images by default nowadays and most people won't know to scale down their images for the internet. I always scale my images down to 800x600 at 300 dpi before uploading them and they load pretty quick through my connection.

Thanks, good feedback. I looked at Hughes before getting Starlink (which I'd highly recommend). Do large images on Carpokes download slower that large images from other sites for you?

p.s., I should probably implement some kind of auto-scaling system for images, since the really big images consume extra bandwidth for no particular reason...

That's a good question. If you could point me to a known large image somewhere else I can try it and let you know...I think the issue will be knowing which ones are large/hi-res. I just took another look at 500's Canadian 944S thread in the 944S forum; those are images that take forever for me. I also just did a speed test on speedofme.net and it's a good night for Hughesnet - I'm actually testing at 2.3 Mps download speed right now. The images on 500's thread are still agonizingly slow though.

Hey I am curious... There is no reason on your BW' side they should load slow if you are 2.3Mps... Did you try clearning your cache?

Better yet, try viewing Carpokes via incognito mode, or whatever browser you use.

[Tom]

Thanks, good feedback. I looked at Hughes before getting Starlink (which I'd highly recommend). Do large images on Carpokes download slower that large images from other sites for you?

p.s., I should probably implement some kind of auto-scaling system for images, since the really big images consume extra bandwidth for no particular reason...

That's a good question. If you could point me to a known large image somewhere else I can try it and let you know...I think the issue will be knowing which ones are large/hi-res. I just took another look at 500's Canadian 944S thread in the 944S forum; those are images that take forever for me. I also just did a speed test on speedofme.net and it's a good night for Hughesnet - I'm actually testing at 2.3 Mps download speed right now. The images on 500's thread are still agonizingly slow though.

Hey I am curious... There is no reason on your BW' side they should load slow if you are 2.3Mps... Did you try clearning your cache?

Better yet, try viewing Carpokes via incognito mode, or whatever browser you use.

Well I do wonder if his download speed is part of the issue. If 2.3Mps means 2.3 megabits per second, that's pretty slow internet. (I just tested mine at about 700Mbps.) The website below says a single 3meg picture take 10 seconds to download at 2.3Mbps, and there are a LOT of pictures that size in the 500's thread. [mental note: I really need to work on auto-sizing pictures when posted.]

https://www.omnicalculator.com/other/download-time

[71eh]

That's a good question. If you could point me to a known large image somewhere else I can try it and let you know...I think the issue will be knowing which ones are large/hi-res. I just took another look at 500's Canadian 944S thread in the 944S forum; those are images that take forever for me. I also just did a speed test on speedofme.net and it's a good night for Hughesnet - I'm actually testing at 2.3 Mps download speed right now. The images on 500's thread are still agonizingly slow though.

Hey I am curious... There is no reason on your BW' side they should load slow if you are 2.3Mps... Did you try clearning your cache?

Better yet, try viewing Carpokes via incognito mode, or whatever browser you use.

Well I do wonder if his download speed is part of the issue. If 2.3Mps means 2.3 megabits per second, that's pretty slow internet. (I just tested mine at about 700Mbps.) The website below says a single 3meg picture take 10 seconds to download at 2.3Mbps, and there are a LOT of pictures that size in the 500's thread. [mental note: I really need to work on auto-sizing pictures when posted.]

https://www.omnicalculator.com/other/download-time

lol! I read that wrong... 2.3Mps is quite slow. My apologies. Really large images would def take some time to load.