Keynote/Boardwatch Internet Backbone Index A better test!!!
black at zen.cypher.net
Fri Jun 27 21:53:43 UTC 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
> jack.rickard at boardwatch.com Littleton, CO 80123
> www.boardwatch.com Voice: (303)973-6038
> > From: Ben Black <black at zen.cypher.net>
> > To: Craig A. Huegen <c-huegen at quadrunner.com>
> > Cc: Jack Rickard <jack.rickard at boardwatch.com>; Peter Cole
> <Peter.Cole at telescan.com>; nanog at merit.edu; marketing at keynote.com
> > 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
More information about the NANOG