It would be nice with a one click tool that just went through this in order and gave a diagnosis.
#!/bin/zsh
ip addr | grep $localNetworkPrefix
ping $localGateway
ping 1.1.1.1
ping $DNS01
ping $DNS02
open -a Safari https://downdetector.com/status/%1
Edit: Thanks @Shared404
You can use the following:
netstat -rn -f inet | grep default | head -n 1 | awk '{ print $2 }'
scutil --dns
If you prepend each line with 4 spaces it'll format as code.
ping -c 1 -n 1.1 2>/dev/null | awk -F '/' 'END {printf "%.2f ms\n", $5}'
GATEWAY=$(netstat -nr | grep '^default' | grep en0 | grep -o '[0-9]\{1,3\}\.[0-9]\{1,3\}\.[0-9]\{1,3\}\.[0-9]\{1,3\}')
ping -c 1 -n -q $GATEWAY 2>/dev/null | awk -F '/' 'END {printf "%.2f ms\n", $5}'Nice and short read.
https://developer.apple.com/documentation/foundation/nsmutab...
Pretty lame mistake to let slip through review and testing and a common enough error that Apple calls it out in its documentation:
https://developer.apple.com/documentation/foundation/nsmutab...
This tool is also mentioned in that page, albeit briefly.
I recently tried setting my ipad 5g as a hotspot but couldnt share the internet over the ethernet over my dock. If i could do that, it would enable the full 1+ gigabit 5g speeds that i get natively on ipad to the 2.5G port on the usb-c dock connected ethernet.
I also tried tethering through usb-c which gave only 250mbps.
Finally settled using wifi tethering which maxes around 600mbps.
It would be great if there is possibility to share 5g over ethernet, that would blow any 5g hotspot out of water with the chipset apple have put in the ipads.
The UX is nicer than even the best web sites for this (assuming you're comfortable with the command line).
$ curl -v --http1.1 https://danpetrov.xyz/macos/2021/11/14/analysing-network-quality-macos.html
> GET /macos/2021/11/14/analysing-network-quality-macos.html HTTP/1.1
> Host: danpetrov.xyz
> User-Agent: curl/7.68.0
> Accept: */*
< HTTP/1.1 301 Moved Permanently
< location: https://danpetrov.xyz/macos/2021/11/14/analysing-network-quality-macos.html
EDIT: It's back now, working and visible.
https://forums.overclockers.co.uk/threads/virgin-media-discu...
I don't know what rpm score that network would get as yet.
https://starwrt.v.taht.net:8443/group/bufferbloat/
(use any login, no password, chrome is best)
There's also the "rpm" mailing list on lists.bufferbloat.net
Are there similar tools for assessing WiFi quality and bandwidth?
(Sounds good apart from that!)
That gives a more realistic expectation of how Netflix, and in this case Apple downloads, will actually perform. And it can't be artificially boosted by the ISP.
That being said, I assume both Netflix and Apple have very special CDNs with ISP co-located content servers in many cases so it is still not a realistic measurement of generic Internet performance (but Speedtest is even worse, so ¯\_(ツ)_/¯)
Not endorsing that for a second but I was using fast.com as an absolute measure of internet speed until I realised this. But speedtest has the issues you’ve outlined too, there are very few 100% reliable options!
In my previous company where we were doing live broadcast, we would have speed testers pre-installed on all the hub and edge servers, so we could get realistic numbers for a specific use case (for example, requesting. a video stream from Germany).
Well it can... by the ISP unthrottling access to Netflix. Which is exactly what Netflix wants them to do! :)
I get back:
{
"version": 1,
"urls": {
"small_https_download_url": "https://mensura.cdn-apple.com/api/v1/gm/small",
"large_https_download_url": "https://mensura.cdn-apple.com/api/v1/gm/large",
"https_upload_url": "https://mensura.cdn-apple.com/api/v1/gm/slurp"
},
"test_endpoint": "ausyd2-edge-bx-006.aaplimg.com"
}
- .../small gives me 0 bytes
- .../large gives me 4 gigabytes (!!) which I presume I am expected to range-request parts of
- .../slurp accepts input and gives me some stats back.
Upload tests are simple:
$ head -c 1048576 /dev/zero | curl -vvv -F 'test=@-' https://mensura.cdn-apple.com/api/v1/gm/slurp
[...]
{"DurationMs":11373,"Bytes":1048729,"BPS":92212}
The above is on Linux but I expect the effort to port that to macOS would be low. By all means post any needed modifications if you figure that out.
Preview's simply amazing and I miss it very much on every other platform, including iOS, but probably doesn't count as a hidden gem.
One that took me way too long to discover was the Digital Color Meter. It's a color picker that comes up instantly (much of what's so great about Apple's software is that they give at least half a shit about performance, unlike seemingly everyone else these days—it shouldn't be impressive that a color picker window comes up instantly from a cold start, but in the current software environment, it kinda is) and works for everything on your screen.
Finder's column view is also excellent. I think it's the best way to navigate the filesystem through GUI; the way it displays nested directories is just super nice. It makes me wonder why other OS don't haven't copied this layout in their filesystem explorer.
Grapher.app is also perhaps a hidden gem.
Looks like it’s been updated, I don’t remember the different zoom type options. Maybe I just never discovered them.
The biggest drawback is it affects the entire machine, you can’t enable the conditioner on a per-process basis, so it can be a bit rough on the other “normal” usage of the machine.
There’s also a version on iOS.
When you're taking a screenshot of a portion of the screen you can hold the spacebar to move the rectangle around.
The diagnostics data file is annoying to read, too...
On a related note, these hidden features are really annoying. How hard would it be to have a WiFi diags link in the WiFi dropdown? Why does Apple think that hiding things makes for a better user experience? Is it so that the people in the know get to feel like arcane knowledge masters? As it is, I have started randomly holding down option and command to see if there are hidden options. /rant Does anyone know of a site that catalogs these hidden macos options?
Can you elaborate on that a bit, please?
You don't mean Apple's implemented the Wi-Fi autoconfig functionality Ubuntu failed to deliver in ~2008, do you?
Because if they have... they'll have done it... correctly.
If the binary and/or supporting libraries have any references to FieldAgents in them... we're doomed. That's Skynet, right there.
As an example, I have shell aliases setup to cd into the folder(s) open in Finder or reference files selected in Finder.
If on wifi one can also simply option click the wifi icon in the menu bar. Maybe some people don't know yet, it was a late discovery for me option click shows more information there.
For quick internet access check I like 'curl ipconfig.sh'
netstat -rn -f inet | awk '/default/ {print $2;exit}' I believe only 2 spaces
are required.Without knowing about that background information, I suppose use of fast.com is a bit tricky.
There's also tool in the AppStore called WiFi Explorer that may be more what you're looking for.
That said it's pretty weird since there isn't much ATV users here.
Download Responsiveness: Medium (902 RPM)
It's a reference to https://xkcd.com/416/.
:P
Then again, Fast.com is primarily a tool for Netflix. It let's its users feel like they are getting "useful" information, but actually provides much more useful information to Netflix than users. If that data generated from Fast.com use allows them to provide better service, then great. So if from time to time they decide to switch to different boxes (premise), then I'm actually okay with that too.
I clicked around to see if they defined it in more detail about specifically testing Netflix CDN vs general internet activity, but I found not such information. However, this has always been understood on my part to be the case. Maybe because of where I was working when it first came on scene? I clearly didn't get that information from their website.
Neither of those give you a general internet performance indicator. You'd need to run many tests to really know, and it depends on your ISPs network, transit and peering, most of which is pretty opaque.
It would be more accurate to say when you open a file with the Stationary flag set, a new of copy of the document is open in the default application. I don’t think a file system copy is created until you save.
Now, that might not be faster — my local Cloudflare endpoint appears to be ~16ms vs ~20ms for my ISP's Netflix deployment but it can tell you whether they're routinely underprovisioning peering capacity even if it doesn't give you as much data as a distributed test would.
If you're looking for a generic internet connectivity test then you'll need to test a few dozen sites at least, with diversity in which CDN's they're using and so on.
Option-click is pretty much the only trick used for menus, and it's fairly universal across the nearly 80 years of Mac. The incidence of people that would be helped by those graphs, and the people that option-click is pretty high, so this seems like a great combination. It's similar to option-letter for inputting characters not on the keyboard (alt-code on Windows).
Exposing my parents to one more menu item that will never help them, and mostly confuse them and reduce their scanning speed, well, that's really not worth it. Every option has a cost, and different people bear the weight of that cost differently. Some people like having 30 different brands of canned tomatoes to choose from at the grocery store. Others would prefer 2 or even 1, that are more carefully curated. My favorite grocer is like this. It's a tiny store, an eighth the size of a super market or less, but has a better butcher, better basic groceries, and a more extensive selection of rarer ingredients than a Safeway. It just doesn't have an entire aisle of pasta brands. That's not for everyone, but it is for me. The Mac also doesn't have to be for everyone, it for the people it fits, it fits really well.
2021 - 1984 == 37
You can get shockingly far just by holding the "Option" key while taking a lot of actions/looking at a lot of menus. Always the first thing I try.
Far better than when the surprise fades into realization that the measurement is accurate, and that your internal estimate of time acceleration needs updating!