|
nudone
|
 |
« on: December 03, 2009, 12:12:14 PM » |
|
this should be really easy but i can't find anything - or remember anything - but can anyone recommend a system tray util that will display network activity? please.
i'm sure i had something years ago that did - no idea what it was now - maybe it was zone alarm.
any ideas, preferably free.
oh, it's for vista.
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
skwire
|
|
« Reply #1 on: December 03, 2009, 02:57:54 PM » |
|
I've used NetMeter for years. It has two types of tray icons you can choose from. |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
Innuendo
|
|
« Reply #2 on: December 03, 2009, 04:52:27 PM » |
|
My friend swears by BitMeter II. |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
Innuendo
|
|
« Reply #3 on: December 03, 2009, 04:53:49 PM » |
|
Judging from NetMeter's home page it looks like it has some problems under Vista. |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
joby_toss
|
|
« Reply #4 on: December 04, 2009, 01:40:05 AM » |
|
NetWorx – Free Bandwidth Monitoring and Usage Reporting This is free, portable, actively developed, more advanced than NetMeter (I also used NetMeter for years, but recently switched to Networx).
|
|
|
|
« Last Edit: December 04, 2009, 01:43:04 AM by joby_toss »
|
Logged
|
I am a 3D body trapping a single dimension soul.
|
|
|
|
nudone
|
|
« Reply #5 on: December 04, 2009, 05:59:04 AM » |
|
excellent. thanks everyone. i'm going to check these out later and then report back which i've chosen to use...
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
bgd77
|
|
« Reply #6 on: December 04, 2009, 08:49:08 AM » |
|
+1 for NetWorks, mentioned by joby_toss. It is highly configurable and you can make it work the way you like it. |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Innuendo
|
|
« Reply #8 on: December 04, 2009, 11:26:49 AM » |
|
I just checked out all these for myself & the Networx Desk Band that puts a data graph on your taskbar just puts it over the top & outclasses the others mentioned in this thread, IMHO.
Thanks for mentioning Networx, guys!
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
nudone
|
|
« Reply #9 on: December 04, 2009, 11:45:46 AM » |
|
i'm thinking Networx is probably the one i'll stick with too - because of the taskbar graph feature.
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
f0dder
|
|
« Reply #10 on: December 04, 2009, 06:26:30 PM » |
|
Can NetWorx filter by LAN/WAN?
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
 - carpe noctem |
|
|
|
bgd77
|
|
« Reply #11 on: December 05, 2009, 02:13:18 AM » |
|
Can NetWorx filter by LAN/WAN?
You can choose what network interface to monitor (if you have more than one). And there is also an option to filter out local LAN traffic: (quote from product help http://www.softperfect.co...x/manual/options_main.htm) " The Ignore local traffic within the LAN option enables NetWorx to take into account only your Internet traffic, excluding all local communications. Technically this means that all traffic between the following addresses is ignored (these IP address ranges can be adjusted):
IPv4:
10.0.0.0 to 10.255.255.255
172.16.0.0 to 172.31.255.255
192.168.0.0 to 192.168.255.255
169.254.0.0 to 169.254.255.255
IPv6:
Link-local addresses starting with fe80:
Turning this feature on causes NetWorx to load a network driver needed for this purpose. Although the driver has been properly tested, there is always a chance of a conflict with a third-party driver that may result in a crash. If your PC becomes unstable, simply unselect this option and restart the application." Is this what you need? |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
f0dder
|
|
« Reply #12 on: December 05, 2009, 05:49:33 AM » |
|
Is this what you need? If the filtering can be done at "show-time" rather than "capture-time" - I'd kinda like to have stats for both LAN and WAN traffic, but the ability to separate the two  |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
- carpe noctem |
|
|
|
bgd77
|
|
« Reply #13 on: December 05, 2009, 06:28:55 AM » |
|
It seems that you can only eliminate LAN traffic, not display both LAN and WAN traffic separately. Maybe there is another tool that can do this.
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
f0dder
|
|
« Reply #14 on: December 05, 2009, 07:25:17 AM » |
|
It seems that you can only eliminate LAN traffic, not display both LAN and WAN traffic separately. Maybe there is another tool that can do this. I used the free version of NetLimiter for a while, it has this ability - but there was something about it that didn't feel "right", dunno if it was resource consumption or the UI or whatever, it's been a while |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
- carpe noctem |
|
|
|
sinum
|
|
« Reply #15 on: December 08, 2009, 04:52:42 PM » |
|
I use Samurize http://www.samurize.com for years now, it offer a lot more than a network monitor but needs some personal configuration. I currently use it with Windows 7 to show the number of open TCP connections, up/down speed in KB/s, basic up/down meter, transfer in MB, CPU/RAM usage. You can use it to show more than one network interface. Its free, there are a lot of plugins, includes a WYSIWYG editor for configuration... |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
IainB
|
|
« Reply #17 on: April 13, 2010, 06:53:49 AM » |
|
Thought this feedback might come in useful.
I have been using NetWorx for about a year now. Originally, my laptop had been the sole user of the connection (via a WiFi Access Point), but now we have two laptops that share the connection via the same WiFi Access Point.
The other week, we blew our bandwidth cap. This was no surprise, as our ISP had automatically emailed us to warn that we were approaching 80% utilisation of the capped limit. However, I had rather wished that I could use NetWorx to monitor all bandwidth utilisation for that line, but I had assumed that it could not do that except across a LAN.
Today I was playing around with the NetWorx settings on the two PCS we have that use the line, and - somewhat hopefully - I tried ticking the box in the "Advanced" tab that said "Synchronise usage data with other NetWorx instances on the network".
To my pleasant surprise, both laptops' instances of NetWorx almost immediately picked up each others' data, and on both laptops you could see the bandwidth consumption by user within laptop, or as an aggregate total for all users.
NetWorx is currently up to v5.1.1 as of 2010/04/14. This usage data synchronisation, together with its nifty reports and bar charts, make NetWorx a very good piece of free software.
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
bgd77
|
|
« Reply #18 on: April 13, 2010, 09:31:28 AM » |
|
Thanks for sharing. This could be very useful!
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
Innuendo
|
|
« Reply #19 on: June 26, 2010, 05:34:08 PM » |
|
Unhappiness!! Just installed Networx since moving to Windows 7 x64 and the deskband feature is only compatible with 32-bit versions of Windows.  |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
IainB
|
|
« Reply #20 on: June 27, 2010, 10:26:55 AM » |
|
Ahh, bugger! Bad luck.
I was thinking of migrating to Windows 7 64-bit, but I shall defer it - I have heard of a few too many instances like this, where the thing is not yet supported by this or that application.
Fortunately, there's no compelling urgency for me to do the migration right now.
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
Innuendo
|
|
« Reply #21 on: June 27, 2010, 01:56:06 PM » |
|
I was thinking of migrating to Windows 7 64-bit, but I shall defer it - I have heard of a few too many instances like this, where the thing is not yet supported by this or that application. This is a software developer problem rather than a Windows problem, IMHO. 64-bit versions of Windows have been around since Windows XP x64. It's time to get the lead out and support what is new and modern. This is the only program so far I have run into this problem with & quite frankly, it's worth giving up the deskband feature of Networx in order to enjoy all the benefits that a 64-bit version of Windows will bring me (enforced driver signing, increased security, access to RAM greater than 4 GB, etc.). I can't see myself going back to Windows x86. IMHO, x64 is the way forward. |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
IainB
|
|
« Reply #22 on: June 27, 2010, 04:17:34 PM » |
|
... 64-bit versions of Windows have been around since Windows XP x64. It's time to get the lead out and support what is new and modern.
Heh, I think you might be surprised to find that 64-bit versions of Windows have been around a little longer than that. I was working at Digital Equipment Corporation (DEC) in 1992 when they introduced the 64-bit Alpha architecture (I think it came out of something called the PRISM project). It came installed with OSF/1, but after a few months there was an option to have it with a 64-bit Windows NT install. It was blazingly fast, with amazing throughput rates on the I/O buses. Quite a few of my customers bought the NT version, and their support techos absolutely lurved it, of course. Did you know that the Cray computers at the time were made from assembling arrays out of the DEC Alpha 64-bit chip? That said, yes, I understand that Windows 7 has a software developer problem, and I absolutely recognise that it is arguably the only way to go - and it is certainly where I still intend to go. However, I have some "legacy" (= "old") proggies that I use, which have no software developer maintaining them now, and I wish to continue to be able to use them. The thing is, I do not want to install Windows 7 in order to find out which of my fav old proggies no longer work. I suspect that I shall end up with maintaining a dual-boot install (Windows 7 + XP) whilst I wean myself off the old but now obsolete favs. Kludgy maybe, but probably appropriately cautious. |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
Innuendo
|
|
« Reply #23 on: June 27, 2010, 05:03:50 PM » |
|
Heh, I think you might be surprised to find that 64-bit versions of Windows have been around a little longer than that. I remember DEC & Itanium, but I was talking more along the lines of consumer-oriented OSes & while I loved to have had an Itanium-based system it was a lil out of my reach. However, I have some "legacy" (= "old") proggies that I use, which have no software developer maintaining them now, and I wish to continue to be able to use them. Unless those legacy programs are 16-bit you may be surprised how many do work even if you have to use some compatibility options. Of course, you won't know for sure till you try them. |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
IainB
|
|
« Reply #24 on: June 27, 2010, 08:46:48 PM » |
|
@Innuendo: OIC. Thanks for that.
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
