Slow Slow Slow Slow Slow.....

[Guest]

Damn the jive a$$ hamster is slower than the old Webx hamster. I've been logged out of the forum while waiting to get in.

that is weird.

[Bob_Peters]

John Joslin wrote:

I can the imagine that the number of users on DP Review is infinitesimal compared with here.

Well, according to the dpreview web site they have about 7,000,000 unique viewers per month.  I have no idea how that compares with the overall traffic for all Adobe forums.

[Bob_Peters]

It is really annoying to stare at the following message page after page after page!

Contacting "forums.adobe.com"

I am spending way too much time (several seconds and more) just waiting.

[Bob_Peters]

Bob_Peters wrote:

It is really annoying to stare at the following message page after page after page!

Contacting "forums.adobe.com"

I am spending way too much time (several seconds and more) just waiting.

Consider the following numbers I just got by running Speedtest from 40 miles west of Chicago to San Jose:

Download:  22.3 mb/sec

Upload:      4.2 mb/sec

And I am still seeing "Contacting forums.adobe.com" with almost all page/response changes.  What's wrong with this picture?

[Zeno_Bokor]

Consider the following numbers I just got by running Speedtest from 40 miles west of Chicago to San Jose:

the servers are located in Colorado, not in San Jose as per this post 28.

[Bob_Peters]

Zeno Bokor wrote:

Consider the following numbers I just got by running Speedtest from 40 miles west of Chicago to San Jose:

the servers are located in Colorado, not in San Jose as per this post 28.

Thanks.

Denver:

  Download:  18.18 to 23.4 mbps

  Upload:       4.8 to 4.9 mbps

Colorado Springs:

  Download:    6.5 to 11.4 mbps

  Upload:        4.4 mbps

[Guest]

Since the page load times from here (UK) can vary between 3 seconds and 30 seconds, I fail to see the relevance of the server location.

It seems to be more dependent on the time of day if anything.

In any case, the slow speed and the logging out (3 times today so far) make this a totally pathetic effort at a user to user forum.

It's hard to express the magnitude of the blunder Adobe has made, without resorting to bad language.

... and we said it wouldn't work!

[Ann_Shelbourne1 · Accepted solution]

... and we said it wouldn't work!

And we got sworn at and were insulted for having the temerity to say it; and were told to give the new format a chance … but we couldn't have been more right:

Adobe's pig-headed dive into Jive has destroyed their Forums irreparably.

Just looking-in in the hope of seeing some trace of improvement … and promptly checking-out again ….

[Bob_Peters]

Still getting terrible response today.

Speedtest.com results:

Denver

  upload:       19 to 20 mbps

  download:   4.6 to 4.7

Colorado Springs

  upload:       8 to 10 mbps

  download:   4.3

[S_D_A_]

What's the relevance of this to Adobe Forums Bob ? This just shows us that you have a slow ISP connection to the backbone of the Internet.

[Guest]

S.D.A. wrote:

What's the relevance of this to Adobe Forums Bob ? This just shows us that you have a slow ISP connection to the backbone of the Internet.

well, I think most of us can see that if it's taking him 4 seconds to download other pages, why does it take 20-30seconds (5 to 7 times longer) for these pages to dl??  It's almost painful to sit here and wait for these pages to load.  If I didn't know better, I would swear I was on a 14.4K dial up modem. 

[Bob_Peters]

S.D.A. wrote:

What's the relevance of this to Adobe Forums Bob ? This just shows us that you have a slow ISP connection to the backbone of the Internet.

A slow ISP connection?  You must be kidding.  The Colorado Springs is the slow connection.  I typically see 20 mbps to most regions.  The reason for the two locations I chose were because the Jive servers are in Colorado.

The point?  The point is that it's the servers that are crappy.

[S_D_A_]

Bob what that speedtest does is measure what YOUR speed is from a particular server to your local machine in order to test what speed your Internet connection from your ISP to parts around the Globe. It's comparing your bandwidth and has nothing to do whatsoever do with any issue Adobe may be having in terms of performance. It simply says that your connection is slow when trying to access a particular server in Colorado.

I know that most of the consumer ISPs in the U.S. use various traffic caching and packet inspection techniques some of which are quite draconian. I would suspect your ISP before ranting at Adobe re slowness in the forum.  Not that you were ranting,but some are.

Traceroute helps in narrowing down where the bottleneck is in terms of YOUR  connection.There are so many variables to consider that to use any or either of available network tools aren't conculsive. Not all of us are experiencing the slowness some of you have and some of us are farther away geographically are getting adequate speeds.

It doesn't seem to matter what browser I use (among current up-to-date versions) or whereabouts in my geographical area I read these forums from, I get consistent page loads of 2-3 sec..That's pretty good considering how heavy the pages are.

[Bob_Peters]

S.D.A. wrote:

Bob what that speedtest does is measure what YOUR speed is from a particular server to your local machine in order to test what speed your Internet connection from your ISP to parts around the Globe. It's comparing your bandwidth and has nothing to do whatsoever do with any issue Adobe may be having in terms of performance. It simply says that your connection is slow when trying to access a particular server in Colorado.

I understand that.  But 10 megabits/sec is not, in and of itself, the reason for the poor response times I get all too frequently.

The closest I can get to the server (forums.adobe.com) which for *me* resolves to 209.46.39.53 is 209.46.54.37.  The traceroute (12 hops) result is 38 msec.

[Ramón_G_Castañeda]

Bob_Peters wrote:

…10 megabits/sec is not, in and of itself, the reason for the poor response times I get all too frequently. …

Of course it isn't, you're absolutely right.

Even on a lowly 3 megabits per second connection (measured often at random), loading pages was as instantaneous as changing channels on a TV with the remote in the WebCrossing forums—when they were functioning normally.  The progress bar in Firefox didn't even get a chance to start drawing!

This speedy behavior still exists for me in other forums and similar sites today.

Sometimes, even the pages here load relatively fast and I only see the progress bar for two or three seconds.  But going into the Reply Editor takes forever, as does typing and working in it, and posting when finished forces me to take a short break.

I'm not B.S.-ing when I say I'm spending considerably more time here (in an honest effort to survive the changeover) and yet I'm reading about one tenth of I used to in thel forums.

<facetiousness> Maybe someone can come up with a hack to change the progress bar in Firefox to a video player.  I'm tired of looking at it. </facetiousness>

[Guest]

Not that anyone is the slightest bit interested, but it's about this time every day that the page loads here go to 30 seconds and more.

[Bob_Peters]

The responsiveness today is worse that ever.  It took me more that a minute(!) to get from selecting "Forum Comments" to the main page of this forum.

[Bob_Peters]

Buko. wrote:

Damn the jive a$$ hamster is slower than the old Webx hamster. I've been logged out of the forum while waiting to get in.

that is weird.

I think the hamster died. 

[OldBob1957]

YMMV But that's been my experience on these new 'improved' fora.

When I can even get in here without the whole thing timing out on me.

[Guest]

there is a MINIMUM 5 second delay on any navigation action (ex. clicking on a thread title. clicking reply. hitting the back button. etc. etc. etc.)  in the forums. sometimes it's more like 10, esp. for page reloads.

[JayJhabrix]

dave milbut wrote:

there is a MINIMUM 5 second delay on any navigation action (ex. clicking on a thread title. clicking reply. hitting the back button. etc. etc. etc.)  in the forums. sometimes it's more like 10, esp. for page reloads.

You're being exceedingly generous

[Guest]

jhabrix wrote:

dave milbut wrote:

there is a MINIMUM 5 second delay on any navigation action (ex. clicking on a thread title. clicking reply. hitting the back button. etc. etc. etc.)  in the forums. sometimes it's more like 10, esp. for page reloads.

You're being exceedingly generous

i am, but i'm averaging... note i deleted your winking smiley because i'm dead serious. the forums are pretty much unusable.

[Guest]

dave milbut wrote:

the forums are pretty much unusable.

Like I said, with no blocking scripts, I can get along. It ain't WebX but it's OK – apart from the occasional slow-down.

Be flexible, people!

Edit: 4s to post that!

[Guest]

Like I said, with no blocking scripts, I can get along. It ain't WebX but it's OK – apart from the occasional slow-down.

the only style (not script) i'm using changes "(Updated)" to a little red flag. and there are no flags once in a thread...

[JayJhabrix]

dave milbut wrote:

i am, but i'm averaging... note i deleted your winking smiley because i'm dead serious. the forums are pretty much unusable.

That's ok... but that's what i meant about you being generous... nothing less than 5 secs+... runs into minutes sometimes... not that often but yes...

[Guest]

jhabrix wrote:

dave milbut wrote:

i am, but i'm averaging... note i deleted your winking smiley because i'm dead serious. the forums are pretty much unusable.

That's ok... but that's what i meant about you being generous... nothing less than 5 secs+... runs into minutes sometimes... not that often but yes...

i know what you meant. just busting on ya.