North American Network Operators Group|
Date Prev | Date Next |
Date Index |
Thread Index |
Author Index |
Re: Keynote/Boardwatch Internet Backbone Index A better test!!!
- From: Ben Black
- Date: Fri Jun 27 18:27:48 1997
the "study" gives no details on the systems used, where they were, who
provided net connectivity...far from scientific. the sort of thing one
would expect from marketeers.
and just because overall system performance affects web downloads, does
that mean web downloads can be used to accurately and meaningfully
measure overall system performance? i think your logic is flawed.
the net is not a big BBS, in case you haven't heard.
On Fri, 27 Jun 1997, Jack Rickard wrote:
> I'm not a marketing droid. But only a moron would think that overall
> performance would NOT affect the download of a web page, which is
> essentially what you are attempting to say.
> There are certainly other ways to do it. Approximately Internet User
> Population raised to Internet User Population worth.
> Jack RIckard
> Jack Rickard Boardwatch Magazine
> Editor/Publisher 8500 West Bowles Ave., Ste. 210
> email@example.com Littleton, CO 80123
> www.boardwatch.com Voice: (303)973-6038
> > From: Ben Black <firstname.lastname@example.org>
> > To: Craig A. Huegen <email@example.com>
> > Cc: Jack Rickard <firstname.lastname@example.org>; Peter Cole
> <Peter.Cole@telescan.com>; email@example.com; firstname.lastname@example.org
> > Subject: Re: Keynote/Boardwatch Internet Backbone Index A better test!!!
> > Date: Friday, June 27, 1997 2:28 PM
> > for an exmple of somewhat more complete and better designed benchmarks of
> > this type:
> > http://www.inversenet.com/about/backgrounder.html#2
> > note that they understand the numerous factors that contribute to overall
> > performance. only a marketing droid could think downloading 50k worth of
> > web pages is somehow an indicator of overall performance.
> > b3n