Has anyone started using Google’s DNS? It about tripled my pageloading speed. Of course I was stuck with awful bellsouth DSL DNS service. That is I hadn’t successfully avoided their attempts at forcing their DNS on my router. But I have switched to Google’s (220.127.116.11) and it is great! Anyone else using this service?
How does one use it?
I’m trying it on one computer. It’s hard to tell if it is actually faster and will continue to be so over time and many URLs. It does feel faster, but it could be due to expectations.
Strange that the Google how-to instruction pages only mention Vista and non-Windows OSes, not XP. Or maybe I overlooked it?
I have trouble seeing how a faraway server will be faster than the DNS server internal to my ISP’s network. Also, doesn’t DNS get cached locally and isn’t called all that often? That’s a nice IP, though. I’ll use it to ping against or if the DNS server goes down.
Anyone else want to share whether it really improves performance?
Btw, that Google blog post is funny. “Our research has shown that speed matters to Internet users” Is that why you only make AJAX software?
Great. More docs for Google to gather on its users. I’ll stay with my self-administered DNS, thank you very much. Hell, OpenDNS safer.
I use OpenDNS. Seems to work great.
Wow. I didn’t even realize this. Now they know ALL the websites you visit. Wonderful. Google: Don’t be not evil.
I use OpenDNS too, it’s always faster than my ISP’s nameservers, but so are smoke signals. This is nice to know though, and it seems as fast as any nameserver I’ve used. They’re easy to remember and it will probably never go offline so I put them in my resolv.conf to use if needed.
The only one I’ve tried is the one for Firefox, and this is what I’ve found:
My home bandwidth is around 12mbps, but most sites have a maximum of 250kbps or 500 kbps.
Most sites will load pages in order, top to bottom.
The top part of the site is usually a banner ad, which takes the longest to respond (not necessarily download, although this is the case for animated banners.)
So, when a page is loading, there is an illusion that it is slow because parts of it are loading at different times, although each part is loading at the maximum speed the source can do (250-500kbps.)
The speedup software I used simply waited for everything to download first, then showed the page, making it appear as though it loaded instantly.
Looking at this, it appears that it may have the same effect.
That’s pretty cool, but it can’t top Google Breathe. I haven’t respirated on my own in weeks!
Sounds like you’re ready to upgrade to Google Bowel.
This was most people’s (and mine) initial assumption:
But an update to that article clarifies Google’s intent:
And here’s the response from OpenDNS:
Ah, you mean Poogle? Been there, done that.
But did you get the paperwork?
I tried Google Wipe, but it replaced all the sensitive data on my hard drive with context ads.
NB: I normally wouldn’t defile a GQ thread with third-rate vaudevillian cheese, but I figured there’s a better than average chance this thread will end up in MPSIMS, if it doesn’t die on its own.
I use Apple’s iPoo.
I think I can infer from the comments that others aren’t as impressed as I was. Sigh.
I like it because it is definitely faster than my previous configuration which used the Bellsouth DNS service. Just about anything would be faster than they are.
I tried OpenDNS but had unexpected trouble with it. I was using my DHCP server to hand out the OpenDNS addresses and I suspect Baby Bell got jealous. Anyway, I had trouble until I gave up and went back to defaulting to my ISP.
With Google, I switched off my DHCP and have everything manual.
Pages load faster than I have ever seen them load.
As for user data collection-uh how is OpenDNS less safe than Google? How is any DNS server less safe than any other. Google at least has a reputation to uphold-and lots of other revenue to do that with. Your local ISP or OpenDNS have less incentive to not make money off your queries. But I agree that any service can compromise one’s privacy. Google included. But as far as I can see, Google has less incentive than most.
I hear there’s a nap for that.
Google’s entire business model revolves around compiling, analyzing and utilizing the operating habits of its users. What on God’s green earth leads you to believe they have less incentive than most? Because their unofficial motto is “Don’t Be Evil?”