Not possible. Sounds like some very deceptive marketing.
Back when 56k and dialup was more common, there was software available that would work to cache your regularly visited sites in the background but even this had very mixed results and was made completely obsolete with the advent of broadband/dsl/cable growth that we have seen.
Matthew Russell | Namecheap
They appear to be using http compression using gzip. It's not exactly an uncommon practice, but it's possible they have a custom made Apache module, even though it doesn't seem to have made a huge difference in the compression ratio.
I think it's important to remember where your target market is and serve from a node(or nodes) relatively close to them. Doing so will normally achieve a relatively greater speed increase then http compression--not that it hurts! :-)
Is that why their website took 16 seconds to load on a 6mbps cable connection?
Oh, I thought that was just my cable connection acting up when it took that long to load--even long for a Singapore host.
It all depends on your target... If all your clients are in Singapore then you're best off with a host in that region of the world. If in North America, you're best off with a host there. If your clients are all over the world and quick loading is extremely important, consider a global load balancing solution that takes clients to the closest node.
u have remember cable interent is shared and it is very rare that u will get 6 down.
A while back I was on Cable Vision/OOL and never had a problem with speed (ever). I was always able to achieve my 10mbit max in speed tests. Right now I am on FiOS, and it also always maxes out. Someone using Cable/DSL shouldn't have to wait 16 seconds for their site to load up. With that said, it only took about 3-4 seconds for it to load up from here.
When you use dialup and you have a speed booster, your ISP compresses the images of which you are downloading to make your web pages appear to load faster. In reality, they are taking away from the quality of the image of which you are looking at. I personally believe that their claim to make your downloads up to 10x faster is a load of false advertising (unless you disable the viewing of images ).
█ Matthew Rosenblatt, and I do lots of things.
█ Currently a Master Electrician on Broadway.
█ My company, BurstAV, specializes in A/V Systems Design and integration.
█ I also own ConcertCables. We build power/data cables for the entertainment industry.
I would agree, the overall site provided a quick load time, but the images did take a short while to load. I think this is something which you can experience when you have compression enabled on the server, this is why sometimes if you are serving relatively small pages its not worth investing in cache modules etc as it sometimes has the opposite affect, granted it may increase the site load time a little, but you then make a compromise on the server load time which tends to increase due to the caching in effect.
Personally I would stick with gZip if you plan on implementing compression, at least it has been tried and tested in many environments, this product seems fairly new, its the first I have heard of it.
Best of luck
█ Tahir Ahmed █NetspaceOnline.net - Reliable Personal Web Site Hosting & Business Web Hosting Solutions! █NSDomains.net - Our Dedicated Domain Registration & Management Portal! █ • Reseller Hosting Solutions • Linux Plesk 8 Control Panel • Provding Quality Hosting Since 2001