Discussion
I would like to understand how this can work..
www.onspeed.com/en/more.php
The only think I can think is that they have a client on the users pc which sends all requests to a proxy somewhere out on the internet,
the proxy loads the page, does some compression then sends it back the client..
Any thoughts?
Anyone used it?
TIA
D
www.onspeed.com/en/more.php
The only think I can think is that they have a client on the users pc which sends all requests to a proxy somewhere out on the internet,
the proxy loads the page, does some compression then sends it back the client..
Any thoughts?
Anyone used it?
TIA
D
davidd said:
I would like to understand how this can work..
www.onspeed.com/en/more.php
The only think I can think is that they have a client on the users pc which sends all requests to a proxy somewhere out on the internet,
the proxy loads the page, does some compression then sends it back the client..
Any thoughts?
Anyone used it?
TIA
D
Thats about the size of it really.
Its a compression tool essentially and its makes all images look crap.
Plotloss said:
Its a compression tool essentially and its makes all images look crap.
Yeah. If you think about it logically for a minute, there's no way to get the same amount of data through the same size "pipe" any quicker. You either have to get a bigger pipe (faster connection) or less data (compression). Images on t'interweb are usually JPGs, which means they've been compressed as far as they can go without losing quality already.
Therefore, the only avenue left is to lose some data, i.e. images look cr*p.
Hmmm, did a very similar thing last year for one of our Customers. I hacked the apache proxy code to ensure GZIP/DEFLATE was used between the proxy and the client browser, even if the upstream web server wouldn't do it. We also incorporated ImageMajick to reduce the size of images.
Worked really well as our customers are all satellite users where you get charged by volume.
For a heavy mobile user £24 a year could easily pay for itself quite quickly.
If you're on broadband there really isn't any point to this.
Having HTTP 1.1 enabled on your browser makes the biggest improvement.
best
Ex
Edited to say:
reading a bit more of their blurb would it appear they require you have their software running on your PC, and 10-50MB of free space on your disk.
My guess is they've implemeted a proprietry protocol between your machine and their proxy.
You install their software, your browser talks to their PC software which inturn talks to their proxy. 10-50MB disk space required leads me to believe they make better use of a local cache. Likely they compress/encode URLs too so your upstream requests can be made a tiny bit smaller.
They've got a whole heap of awards - I wonder if they are actually making any money?
>> Edited by TheExcession on Thursday 10th February 18:14
Worked really well as our customers are all satellite users where you get charged by volume.
For a heavy mobile user £24 a year could easily pay for itself quite quickly.
If you're on broadband there really isn't any point to this.
Having HTTP 1.1 enabled on your browser makes the biggest improvement.
best
Ex
Edited to say:
reading a bit more of their blurb would it appear they require you have their software running on your PC, and 10-50MB of free space on your disk.
My guess is they've implemeted a proprietry protocol between your machine and their proxy.
You install their software, your browser talks to their PC software which inturn talks to their proxy. 10-50MB disk space required leads me to believe they make better use of a local cache. Likely they compress/encode URLs too so your upstream requests can be made a tiny bit smaller.
They've got a whole heap of awards - I wonder if they are actually making any money?
>> Edited by TheExcession on Thursday 10th February 18:14
WebAccelerator, OnSpeed and the like a pretty useful. Although I wouldn't belive their speed claims as far as you can spit.
As everyone has already said it uses a custom protocol to feed requests in to their proxyserver, which obviously has a bigger connection than yours... it then compresses everything down and shoves it at you in a more modem friendly way. Good theory, but it can and will mung up images, often these things will break https sessions as well, not that useful if you do on-line banking or even want to shop on-line.
The other problem is that a lot of what you download is already compressed, game updates & executables are usually compressed as much as they can go before being released on-line, so you won't see any improvement on that.
As it needs a large amount of diskspace, it could be that the proxy is acting like a webspider and feeding you a zip of the site in question, which their client then unpacks.
As everyone has already said it uses a custom protocol to feed requests in to their proxyserver, which obviously has a bigger connection than yours... it then compresses everything down and shoves it at you in a more modem friendly way. Good theory, but it can and will mung up images, often these things will break https sessions as well, not that useful if you do on-line banking or even want to shop on-line.
The other problem is that a lot of what you download is already compressed, game updates & executables are usually compressed as much as they can go before being released on-line, so you won't see any improvement on that.
As it needs a large amount of diskspace, it could be that the proxy is acting like a webspider and feeding you a zip of the site in question, which their client then unpacks.
Interesting thread this - and spooky as I was going to post the same question yesterday, only to find I had been beaten to it.
Would this be a useful service to use when picking up email over a GPRS mobile phone and would it work OK? Using GPRS time appears expensive, but if the speed could be upped for checking email, receiving spreadsheets, word documents etc - and it was reliable, then it would pay for itself quite quickly?
I would welcome an opinion on that as far, picking up email remotely has been so prohibitive that it has put me off doing it.
Would this be a useful service to use when picking up email over a GPRS mobile phone and would it work OK? Using GPRS time appears expensive, but if the speed could be upped for checking email, receiving spreadsheets, word documents etc - and it was reliable, then it would pay for itself quite quickly?
I would welcome an opinion on that as far, picking up email remotely has been so prohibitive that it has put me off doing it.
TUS 373 said:
Would this be a useful service to use when picking up email over a GPRS mobile phone and would it work OK? Using GPRS time appears expensive, but if the speed could be upped for checking email, receiving spreadsheets, word documents etc - and it was reliable, then it would pay for itself quite quickly? .
GPRS is priced on data transfer and not connection time. Therefore anything which compressed the data would in theory reduce costs
D
Gassing Station | Computers, Gadgets & Stuff | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff