Sunday, February 28, 2016

Best VPN Battle: PIA vs. TorGuard vs. AirVPN

After seeing the trailer for Snowden recently, I finally decided that it was time to get my act together and setup a virtual private network (VPN). I have used them in the past (sparsely), but once I dug into some research and stories, I was once again reminded how miserable a digital life can become when violated. Today, among other things, I would like to discuss some of the most well-known: Private Internet Access (PIA), TorGuard & AirVPN.


VPN
A VPN is essentially a way of encrypting all your data traffic so that no one can see it. But, as I will discuss, just having a VPN does not mean your safe. There are many things to consider.

VPN's can help ensure that emails or sensitive data is sent to someone without anyone else knowing. It allows people to use torrent clients without fear or ISP repercussions. And it can easily circumvent GeoIP restrictions that certain countries impose on their people.

Keeping all this in mind, let us move forward.

My Experience
Most of my experience with setting up a VPN was using it to circumvent GeoIP restrictions. Certain countries will just not allow specific content to be seen, even if you might consider it harmless. I would setup a free VPN, or use the Tor browser--forcing it to use a country of my choosing--and get around most obstacles in a breeze. The speeds were horrendous, which in part was due to the speeds I was able to achieve without using a VPN. I should also note that the Tor browser is not a VPN, yet, in a way, acts somewhat like a VPN.

But now I do have fears of digital invasions of my privacy. Whenever possible, I try to avoid saving payment information on my phone or PC. While I do not avoid banking or making payments online (as it is by far the easiest way for so many things), I find not allowing your information to be stored gives you better chances of not having some sort of identity theft occur.

However, this is not the safest way to go about things. People can sniff out my traffic and discover all types of things about me if they truly wanted to. And who is to know when such a situation is to come up? I recently read about how someone was working on their laptop at a coffee shop, and within a matter of hours their credit and work was destroyed, along with thousands of dollars drained from their account. All this because they decided to use the free WiFi service at the coffee shop without protection.

FREE VPN's
Whenever I hear "free" I simultaneously am happy and cautious. Anything free always has some sort of reciprocation or drawback. And in the case of free VPN's, this is also true.

Free VPN's are next to worthless, unless you just need them for circumventing GeoIP restrictions (think of watching Netflix in a foreign country). In these cases, a proxy is likely a better route to go if there is no real fear of being served a notice by your ISP.

Those free VPN's that are good usually have some sort of bandwidth restriction, meaning they will stop your VPN service once you have streamed, downloaded, or surfed the net for so long. Others enforce a time limit, which can be just as bad.

Probably the worst thing about free VPN's is that their security of data is often poor or weak, which is contrary to the purpose of using a VPN. And even if they are adequate, they may keep logs which can also be construed as the opposite of why a person would use a VPN.

Encryption, Authentication & Authorization
This is important as it may matter in terms of what VPN you want to use. I will explain it with an example as even I can get easily confused on what each part does. We will use the example of someone trying to purchase a plane ticket.

Encryption would be used when you pay for the ticket. The credit/debit card you use to pay for it online is encrypted so that no one else can try to grab that information and use it.

Authentication would be used when you go to the airport and pick up your ticket. You show your passport and the airline service person now knows you are meant to get your ticket.

Authorization would be used when trying to board the flight. The airline ticket will tell the attendant if you are meant to be on this flight or a different one.

This is a simplified version, but maybe some people will recognize the characters of each moreso than just the words. Because of this, I will just give a quick example of what you might find when searching about VPN's:

For data encryption you might find Blowfish, which 128-bit. This is the cipher algorithm that encrypts and decrypts your data traffic. Authentication may be at SHA256, which is used to ensure no Man-In-The-Middle attacks will happen. Meaning no one steps in between you and the VPN server and attempts to modify/inject data to get what they want from you. And authorization, or the handshake, might be a standard of RSA2048.

What does this all mean, it means varying degrees of protection can be used, from nothing to (presently) impossible to crack. And, possibly the most important, the lower these settings are the faster your connection will be; which also means the less secure and safe your data becomes...

This is not everything about these items, as I am only scratching the surface. However, if you know at least this, you should be knowledgeable enough to choose a good VPN.

UDP vs. TCP
These are two connection protocols. Basically, you would use UDP for speed, and TCP for stability. Most people use UDP because it is faster, but can experience problems with lost packets, which might be bad in situations like online gaming. TCP will prevent the packet loss, but again, at the cost of impacting speed. There are more differences, but mainly remember it is about speed versus stability.

Logs
A lot of companies will keep connection, bandwidth, and activity logs for their servers. But VPN's may use one or none of these logs.

The best companies keep no logs (some even go so far as "losing" your payment information completely once a certain period has passed). This is what you want most so that even if they must comply with a court order, they have nothing to hand over, and so no consequences can be brought against its clients.

Some VPN's may keep connection logs. While not a desired feature of a VPN, a connection log is just that. It only logs who connected and when. If a company had to hand over these logs there is a possibility of still getting in trouble, but without having further information, there is not much government agencies or businesses can deduce other than you connected to a VPN server.

Others may keep bandwidth logs. These will likely accompany connection logs and can infer that a user has been doing illegal things if their bandwidth usage is high without explanation. This could get you in trouble if you have no reasonable excuse as to why you use so much bandwidth.

And finally some companies keep activity logs. More than likely a company that keeps activity logs will also have connection logs. This is by far the most detrimental to users. With this information someone can see what they were doing while they were connected to a VPN, which truly defeats the purpose of using a VPN.

Again, the best companies keep no logs so that nothing can happen. The exception to this rule is a company that is based in a country where they are not legally bound to hand over such logs, even if requested.

PPTP vs. L2TP vs. SSL-VPN vs. OpenVPN
The Point-to-Point Tunneling Protocol is the worst of the VPN bunch. It is weak and can be broken as demonstrated numerous times in the past. The reason most people believe it is still around is because of how easy it is to setup, especially in Windows computers. If you are looking for security, look elsewhere.

L2TP is arguably the fastest of the bunch due to less overhead requirements. L2TP is only tunneling, and often combined with IPSec for encryption purposes. While it can be secure, it has been proven that it can be cracked as well, depending on its configuration. If you plan to use L2TP/IPSec, be sure that PEAP authentication is used in conjunction. This has not yet been cracked. The unfortunate thing is that most VPN services may offer L2TP, but without PEAP.

SSL-VPN is often regarded as on par with security to OpenVPN. However, SSL-VPN is not open-source, so constant evaluations of it are not required. It uses SSL v3.0, which is still considered strong, and OpenVPN can use this as well. While not the fastest, there are many debates that consider SSL-VPN to be faster than using OpenVPN. The downside is that it has been proven to have vulnerabilities and should be only used for private WLAN or LAN connections to make it harder to crack.

OpenVPN is considered to be the best. Not the fastest, but the safest. (It can be plenty fast, but is not always regarded as the fastest.) Because it is open-source, it is regulated. It can use TLS v1.2, successor to SSL v3.0, better, and safer. TLS v1.1 & v1.0 were backwards compatible to allow SSL v3.0 to be used if necessary, but TLS v1.2 disallows this to ensure better security. It is unlikely to be cracked any time soon, and should be considered the safest measure you can take.

What To Look For In A VPN
I have a list of what to look for when finding a VPN service. Here is what I use:

  1. What type of encryption (and authentication and authorization) can be used?
  2. What are the locations of the VPN servers?
  3. What is the amount of servers they provide?
  4. What is the reported speeds people are getting with these VPN servers?
  5. What kind of support does the VPN service provide?
  6. What is the price of the VPN service?
  7. What is the VPN service's policy on logs?
  8. What are the extra features available?

I will elaborate on all of these questions as best I can.

The first question is just about what can I use to secure my data while using the VPN. Do they have everything available, do they force only a certain amount of security?

The next question is related to speed. While using a (specific) foreign VPN server would be safest, you might find that the speeds given by a foreign server to be paltry compared to closer servers. I try to find VPN services that have servers in the same region, as they should be the fastest available (but this is not always true).

The amount of servers is somewhat of a followup to the last question. Having a small amount of servers does not necessarily mean that service is bad, but having a lot of servers to choose from can always be more useful given everything else they have is good.

The speed amounts from a VPN service is better found through their forums or forums where people are discussing that service. Some people will be able to sustain the same speeds they get without a VPN server. Yet, this is not something you should expect. Getting a census of what many people seem to achieve is best in determining if they have fast VPN servers available.

The support is something you should be concerned with as you could run into problems fast and need help getting issues dealt with. I would say all VPN services praise themselves, but this means nothing. Reading external reviews is what will help the most in this regard. A greatly secure, fast VPN service is nothing if you run into a problem and cannot get help for it.

The price should also be of great concern. While most competition will have similar ranges, some will be quite high compared to others. If the cost is justified, then paying more may be what you need to do. However, paying less for great service is what I aim for.

The logs they keep is maybe the most significant point of any VPN service. As stated above, a company that keeps no logs will always be best for security purposes. Anything less (or actually more) can be taking away from your security. Not all VPN services will come out and say they do not keep logs, and those are the ones you want to check thoroughly.

Extra features can be great, and may be for free. Other services may have extra features, but at an additional cost. Maybe they offer port forwarding, or proxies, on top of the VPN service. This is great if it comes for nothing extra. It may be beneficial to have these features depending on what you plan to do (i.e. torrents, GeoIP restrictions, etc.).

Private Internet Access (PIA)
When I first began researching for the best VPN, PIA came up a lot. People praised it with great service and fantastic speeds. Initially my choice was between PIA and AirVPN. The only reason I went with them (first) was because they were cheaper and allegedly offered better support.

PIA is cheap for an annual service fee of ~$40 USD. They have a 7-day money back guarantee (that is not easily seen from their website), and payments can be made through credit/debit card, Paypal, bitcoins, and even gift cards for better anonymity! They give you every possible security option in terms of encryption, authorization, and handshakes. They have numerous servers (1000+), and many sites claim they also have the best customer service, which can also be used through online chat. And they keep no logs. In addition to their VPN service, they have port forwarding, a (single location) proxy, L2TP, and the ability to use their (OpenVPN) VPN service on routers with DD-WRT firmware. And best of all you can use up to 5 devices with their service!

Just a quick note on DD-WRT firmware. This firmware turns your router into an "enterprise-class" router. Which really just means it unlocks its full potential to do things that your router could not normally do. For example, maybe you need a repeater to strengthen your WiFi signal. DD-WRT potentially could allow your router to perform this function. It is probably the most well-known (free) router alternative firmware available, and has lists of routers that it supports. Think of your router like an Android or iPhone. There are many things it can do, but many things it cannot. Rooting or jailbreaking your smartphone will allow it to access and do things it could not do usually.

I chose PIA primarily because of price and support. They had a server in my region that should help get the best speeds possible. And I did want to try using a gift card to see if I could get service without having to use a payment method that would be traced back to me. This was not too important since no one could see what I did with the VPN anyways, but it just seemed neat!

First I went and used their online chat. I got someone fairly quickly and asked if I put the same amount noted on their website ($39.95) for an annual membership on a gift card, would that be enough for me to get a year's worth of VPN service from them. I was told yes. Following up, I asked if there were any taxes or fees I would need to add to the gift card since it was a gift card being used and not a credit/debit card. I was again told yes. (I would rather just use a credit/debit card if it was cheaper...)

Happy that I could use a gift card, I checked their list of gift cards that they would accept. I ended up choosing a movie theater gift card because if something went wrong, I could still use it. The card would also be mailed digitally so I would not have to wait to get one. Quickly, I bought one for $39.95, and went back to PIA once I had the gift card number.

I inserted the number into PIA's gift card amount checker, and it stated that I had $39.95, but it would only give me 281 days of their VPN service... Immediately, I went back on their online chat and talked to someone explaining my situation. It took about 10-15 minutes before I was given a copy-paste excuse. Remembering the name of the person I first talked to, I told them to check the chat transcripts, and asked how I could trust their service if I was already lied to before even being a part of their service.

The person took another 5-10 minutes and wrote back that they were sorry for the confusion and would make it up to me by giving me a year of service. In my mind, I thought that I would have to use the gift card first, then give them my information, so that they could add the remaining amount of days to make up a full year. This was not the case. They gave me a full year of free service!

Suffice to say, I was extremely pleased. Not only did I get a free year of service, but I got to keep and use my gift card. It was a good thing I bought one I would use if need be. So, this was already a confirmation of how good their customer support is.

I then began setting up the VPN. I had already read several how-to guides, so there was little I needed to prep for except in downloading their software. Their software took little time to download and install. Their installer essentially does everything for you, including installing a TAP-adapter to get things working. Uninstalling worked well, but was not as obvious. You would have to go through Windows' proprietary removal of programs, and PIA has a TAP-adapter uninstaller hidden away in the Program Files area (which I always did first). Even doing all that would still leave behind their folder in Program Files with some residual files that would need to be manually deleted.

The PIA app is fairly user-friendly and sits in your tray if on Windows. You right-click to connect to a VPN server, disconnect, and change settings. The settings are simplified and you can choose a default VPN server (which changes if you ever connect to a different server), the security types you want to use, the connection type, what ports you want to use (which is set to "auto" by default) and has additional features like port forwarding, a VPN kill switch, DNS and IPv6 leak protection, and (on newer client versions) a small packets option:

  • Port forwarding is commonly used for torrenting (on a VPN), and should help increase speeds.
  •  A VPN kill switch can be quite handy. It kills your network connection on your PC if the VPN were to ever go down for some reason.
  • DNS leak protection is important because if people can see your true DNS, then you are not truly protected.
  • The same goes for IPv6, if they can see this, they can figure out who you are.
  • Small packets is meant to help fix network problems, if any are present.

Once I had installed, I connected to my closest server (via WiFi) and tested the speeds against my speeds without the use of a VPN. They were horrible! I could get anywhere between 20-50+Mbps without a VPN, depending on the time of day. But all I could get from PIA was about 5+Mbps, less on every other server they had. Even less when testing legal torrents like Ubuntu.

I tried their online chat for support, but it seems like they can only answer basic questions, so I was directed to use their email support. I found their email support slow if during the day (I might get one email if it was day time). At night, they usually answered within 30-60 minutes.

I explained the situation in full, including that I had already done an uninstall and reinstall, tried several servers, and tried all the varying VPN security options (remember that less security should mean faster speeds). They first had me run a MTR test that showed how fast my ping was when trying Google. My first test was horrible, so they kept trying to tell me to contact my ISP and tell them my results. There were two problems with this: 1) During this time I had already signed up for TorGuard and found much faster speeds with them, so it seemed unlikely that it was because of my ISP. 2) Contacting the ISP may mean they would need to setup a date and come out to figure out the issue (if there was one). I did not want to waste time waiting for them.

PIA's support did oblige me by having me try a few things, nothing of which worked or pinpointed the problem. It was a bit irritating since--if I was lucky--I would have someone helping through two or three emails, then have someone step in asking me the same questions. Apparently, they do not read through the emails even if it is for the same ticket number.

Before anything else, they had me try (a last ditch effort) L2TP. After properly setting it up, as the IP address they originally provided did not work, I thought I had achieved much better speeds. But this was untrue since I had forgot to change a couple vital pieces of the configuration. With those changed my speeds were almost the same.

Eventually, they just tried to point to the MTR tests again as an indicator that it must be my ISP. Even though by this time I was signed up for both TorGuard and AirVPN, and both were performing much faster than PIA without issues. In turn, I told them I would perform another MTR test to prove that it was not my ISP.

I connected my laptop directly to my modem through Ethernet. This time the tests were great, so there was no room to accuse the ISP any further. I also tested the VPN speeds while directly connected and I did achieve much higher speeds, around 20-25Mbps. Sending the results back to PIA support, I finally got someone who had a feasible idea.

They had me check my MTU size, which I highly doubt most people are even aware of doing. MTU size is the amount of packets allowed through a connection, and if using an incorrect number, can result in defragmented packets, which you do not want. The default MTU size on Windows is 1500 for Etherner (576 if dial-up). A VPN will not be able to send all packets without fragmentation at this size. I was told to input specific numbers, but they seemed random. So with a little research I discovered how to obtain the best MTU size while using a VPN. If you have a good service and connection, you should be able to use 1472, 28 less from 1500 because of encryption overhead. Mine ended up being much lower. Through their client I had around 1440, and with L2TP I had about 1360. I would later that these numbers seem to constantly change throughout the day (at least for L2TP).

This did end up boosting my speeds to around 10-11Mbps on L2TP, and 9+Mbps on their app. Not great, but manageable. Knowing that a direct connection was better, I did not feel like hassling them further. My problem is that my laptop needs to be in a certain place, making a wired connection impossible. I did ask one more time if there was anything else they could do, and was pretty much told that was it.

I did try to use port forwarding, but it seemed to have little effect on the torrent client. It was very easy to get though, as you would just check off the box in their app, and when connected to a server that supported it, it would appear in the tooltip of the tray icon (which always shows the IP address you are using as well).

And a final point of interest is WebRTC leaks. While not explicitly stated anywhere (I found out about it from one of their forum threads), they have had problems in the past where WebRTC leaks would occur revealing the user's true IP address. Their solution was to install extensions to Firefox or Chrome browsers to prevent this. And they do work. I do feel that this should be sent out in their information emails after signup, but I guess they do not feel it is of grave importance...

Overall, PIA provided some good customer support. Their online chat is lacking, but their email support is far better. My circumstances had us do some back-and-forth over a period of 4-5 days. The only major drawback I saw was lack of information on the situation, and replies during daylight.

Their VPN is good and can provide fast speeds, depending on connection, which also depends on device placement. I found their options for security impressive, and their extra features great. If everything was setup properly, all seemed quite secure.

The VPN kill switch did not work for me, so I installed VPNCheck (Free). It provides a kill switch for the network, and individual apps. While the kill switch for the network did not work for me either, the apps I chose did get turned off if my VPN was disconnected. I also found that despite tutorials stating that you needed to enter your VPN login information, I could use it without doing so. It just knew when a VPN was on or not. There is also VPNetMon, which is free but does not have a kill switch for apps, and does not seem as user-friendly.

I did try the small packets feature during my troubles, and at first it did seem to work. Later it seemed like it did not, so I am unsure if this had any real impact on my speeds through the VPN server.

While I was disappointed with my speeds, PIA did seem to be a good choice. I got great customer support and a free year of service.

TorGuard
TorGuard was the second VPN service I tried. While trying to figure out my PIA woes, I decided to sign up for TorGuard's service to ensure that my problem was not based on my laptop or ISP.

TorGuard charges ~$60 for a year of VPN service with a 7-day money back guarantee. They have several options, but once you select a year you are only saving 1 cent compared to 4 months, and nothing at all if you go with their 2-year service. Payments can be made with Paypal, Bitcoins (as well as Litecoin and Dogecoin), and debit/credit cards. They have numerous VPN servers (in the mid-to-high 100's), and they have online chat support, as well as email, in which I found reviews and people commenting for and against their worth. TorGuard also offers L2TP as well as SSL-VPN service. Some people also swear they have the fastest speeds around. The only downsides are security options and features. They do not provide the highest security options, but do provide enough choices to be secure. And if you want a proxy or secured email, those are separate purchasable products. Although port forwarding is included with the VPN service, and they have a bundled option for getting both a proxy and VPN service. I should state that they do offer WebRTC, IPv6, and DNS leak protection all from within their app, the use of a specialized version of Viscosity (which is not as feature-rich as their own app), a kill switch for apps, and stealth servers which I will write about in more detail below. TorGuard's VPN service also has the ability to use DD-WRT, or be placed on routers with VPN support. And they offer up to 5 devices to be used simultaneously per account!

Another quick interesting item is that TorGuard openly encourages the use of torrent clients, so some people may wish to use them over others.

I did my due diligence before deciding to purchase TorGuard's VPN service. When I finally went to their website I had a discount code to get half-off any subscription. I debated on what package to buy, and landed on their bundled offer. Originally I assumed this included email, but I was wrong. And when I first attempted to get the service, I could not get the option to get the bundle annually.

Their online chat was my first stop, and someone tried to help me. Essentially, I was trying to get the 2-year service (since it would only cost one year), but that option would only allow me to get the VPN service. The support person did not seem to not understand what I was attempting to do and directed me to their email support. I emailed support and they were very curt with their answers, "simply" telling me to click the options and it should appear. What they were not explaining was that I had to first click the bundled option, select a month for the proxy service, and then get to a page for the VPN service, where I needed to also select a month. I had to figure that part out on my own, and that is not how I wanted to setup my service plan.

During this time I went back to online chat support and got someone else who did understand what I was attempting to do. But before doing so, I had already purchased the 2-year plan with my discount code for the VPN service, since that is what I really wanted anyways. The online person seemed to suddenly change into pitch-mode, and told me it was my lucky day. They gave me the same code I already used, and instructed me to buy the VPN service. On top of that, they would throw in the proxy service for free!

I told them I had already ordered and they had me take a screenshot of our discussion to send by email as proof that I was to receive the proxy service for free. True to their word, I got the proxy service probably within 10 minutes after sending the email. In essence, I had not only got the bundled deal at half-off, but for a couple dollars cheaper!

This was my first indication that while their support could be deemed poor, it could also be seen as quite good.

The setup was almost as easy as PIA. Download the installer and let it run. However, when I first ran the VPN it would not connect. After a quick Google search, I realized that they had a separate download to install their TAP-adapter. Luckily I had already downloaded that, so after having it install, everything worked.

I found their speeds impressive, consistently getting 15Mbps and up. This may be because they use lesser security than PIA. They also had a server within my region (actually in the same city as PIA).

The use of stealth servers is quite enticing. Despite being on a VPN, an ISP can detect if you are using a torrent client and throttle your speeds because of it. TorGuard's stealth servers are available to prevent that. Their stealth servers--that are only available from certain servers--encrypt data in such a way that it looks like it is HTTP traffic to an ISP. This tricks the ISP into thinking it is just regular browsing at high bandwidth usage, and deters them from throttling your speeds. They make stealth servers easy to spot as they have a small circle icon indicating so.

A word of warning, this is only a feature of the app and cannot be manually inserted for something like L2TP. I went through two online chat sessions to discover that this was no possible, and was given the response that this feature was more for users in China and India to take advantage of.

I liked that I did not have to go further than opening the app settings in order to enable leak protection, unlike PIA. Within their settings I could also choose apps to kill if the VPN was ever disconnected. Although, I never got this working, but did not worry about it since I already had VPNCheck for that. Just as easily, I could change the security settings, although you only have the option of changing the cipher algorithm.

Port forwarding is a bit harder to get than in PIA as you have to log in to your account on a web browser and request it. It then takes about an hour before you get an emailed response with the port forwarding address and the configuration needed to use it.

While I did not use their proxy much, the upside of TorGuard is they have many proxies in differing locations, unlike PIA. This can be helpful for better speeds depending on where you are, and in case you are in the place with the proxy to be used, you have a choice of a different proxy for a better chance of not being found out.

I ended up keeping TorGuard because it was cheap with the half-off discount, which supposedly used for TorGuard's "lifetime", and because I could get much better speeds on their servers. They have made comments in their forums that they will making their app more customizable with options for better security. This makes me happy as while the security they do provide is SHA1 or SHA256 (there is no clear writing of this) for data authentication, RSA2048 for handshake, with options to change data encryption from nothing to Blowfish or up to AES256; I might be able to get equivalent security and faster speeds at a cheaper price than PIA in the future. These options are considered standard for unbreakable security.

TorGuard does provide a page list of all their servers as does PIA, but includes what those servers support, like torrent downloading, L2TP, etc.

One extra thing TorGuard has that PIA does not is SSL-VPN (SSTP). I tried the service out and at first it did not work. The problem was that their tutorial used the wrong address (.tg instead of .org). Changing that made it work instantly. Unfortunately the speeds were pathetic! I changed my MTU size to what it supported, which made very little difference. In this scenario, SSL-VPN was far behind what OpenVPN through the client was able to accomplish. I contacted online chat support about the matter, and they recommended me to submit a ticket.

I also tried L2TP (using the server within my region) and this was a HUGE improvement. I was able to get between 25-30Mbps, compared to the less than 15Mbps of PIA. It seemed to work quite well. The only downside I saw was the upload speeds were about 1/2 of that PIA would give. Although, this is not something I am personally concerned with.

One final thing I did try was using their OpenVPN service on an ASUS router with Merlin firmware installed. They had an article and a YouTube video explaining what to do. The YouTube video was far more useful, but I ended up having to use pieces of information from both in order to get it working properly. Once it did, it worked perfectly! This is a great benefit to those who do not want to install software on every device they have to use the VPN. Instead, they just connect to the router with the VPN and they will be secure without any extra work.

TorGuard provided great speeds, decent service, and a good deal. They were definitely worth a shot, and I can see why people do like them. Hopefully they will provide more security options in the future.

AirVPN
I was on the fence about AirVPN when I was deciding between them and PIA. I wanted to use them for their speeds, but the price seemed too high. I liked them because their background is a group of activists a two layers (who worked pro bono) created AirVPN for ultimate security purposes. They are all about security and ensuring that nothing of their clients is given out to anyone, even if they were legally bound to. Sounds like a company you want for a VPN service!

AirVPN costs about ~$60 for a year of service. Along with Paypal and debit/credit cards, they accept a huge list of different cryptocurrencies. They ONLY give the highest amount of security available, and are often considered to have the fastest speeds of any VPN service. They offer port forwarding, and extensive lists of the servers with what bandwidth usage each one currently has. They may not have nearly as many servers as someone like PIA, but they do have more than enough for anyone's needs. Unfortunately, they do not offer proxies, L2TP or SSL-VPN, and state they never will (it is all about security with them). Their support is said to be good, but a bit slow. They do not have online chat support as they are a small company, but do try to respond to emails in a timely manner.

This was my third VPN to try while deducing my issues with PIA. They offer a 3-day trial for a small amount, but if you actually contact them, they will give you a 3-day free trial. They do not have a money-back guarantee.

I went ahead and emailed them and they responded in just about a day's worth of time. I setup their app, which I had no problem with. It was nice that I did not have to setup the security, as I wanted the best I could use anyways. But it would be nice to have options if I wanted something lesser and quicker.

I did not have a server in my region as I did with PIA or TorGuard, so I chose the closest one, which was still fairly far away. Even so, my testing revealed a steady 11+Mbps! This is amazing considering that this was matching my PIA speeds while be in a completely different area. This indicates to me that they may certainly have the fastest servers of any VPN service.

I was not able to test much more than that as I was dealing with PIA and TorGuard at this time. But I decided not to continue with their service for a few reasons:

  • There was no flexibility in security options.
  • There was no options in what type of VPN I would like to try or use.
  • While their customer support seemed okay from what little interaction we had, I expect much faster replies, and may very well need support in a timely manner in the future.
  • Lastly, while a similar price to TorGuard, there is no discounts, deals, or packages that would give me a better deal.

That being noted, AirVPN was quite good for what it was. Great security, easily setup, and fast speeds just as I had read. If they could only give me a bit more in other areas, it would have been hard for me not to want to use them over anyone else. But if the best security and speed is all you are looking for, they are likely your best bet.

Torrenting
I did do several tests on uTorrent (with legal torrents) using each service. I use uTorrent because I know it, and can configure it to avoid all the advertisements it normally comes with. The only other client I have used is qBittorrent, which is good, but does not always match my needs.

Each site has a tutorial on how to setup port forwarding or a proxy to use with uTorrent (or the client you wish to setup). AirVPN does not provide a proxy, so they do not have a respective tutorial. Nor was I actually able to find a port forwarding tutorial for AirVPN just from doing Google searches. There were a lot of AirVPN posts about how to set up the proxy, one that had a link to how to setup AirVPN for only torrenting, but not how to setup a torrent client.. Reading through their latter post was like trying to read a manual on operating an airplane without prior experience. It is very user-unfriendly, and cumbersome.

The users of the PIA and TorGuard forums also made some good suggestions on items that should be turned off to ensure the best security.

I essentially did not try port forwarding as it seems to be the least secure of the options available. People can still find out who you are with just that. Proxies are somewhat safer, but traffic is not encrypted.

To begin, I tested PIA with their Netherlands proxy and uTorrent. My speeds were fairly good. I think they got a bit faster after some time, but no incredible leaps. I then tried TorGuard with a proxy closer to my region, and speeds were still very good.

The interesting thing is that on forums for both PIA and TorGuard, people claimed that using the proxy in conjunction with the VPN service would make torrenting speeds much faster. It seems illogical since a proxy should already have a speed decrease from just being used, and a VPN on top of that should further decrease your speed. Being hopeful, I decided to test with both a proxy and a VPN service running.

I first tried the proxies mentioned with the VPN apps PIA and TorGuard provided. The speeds essentially were just as bad or worse. However, I also decided to try the proxies with L2TP from PIA and TorGuard. After a bit of waiting, the speeds soared to much higher rates! Depending on what was downloading, I could achieve speeds that were impossible to sustain (and would dip after a second or so). For whatever reason, this truly did work. I was now glad that I had got the free proxy service with TorGuard, otherwise my only test would have been with PIA.

Knowing this I have tried tests with this method to see what kind of stability it maintained. I would say PIA seems to jump up to faster speeds more often, but fluctuates quite frequently, going high then dropping low, then repeating the process. TorGuard seems usually more stable. Speeds do not seem to go above what is possible, but stay within a range without huge drops.

This is by far the better way to go if you want fast torrenting and protection. While using OpenVPN through the clients would be the better way to go for security, your speed is severely compromised. Using L2TP and the proxies still ensure a great deal of protection, and give you acceptable speeds. While not as secure, it is far more secure than just using a proxy or port forwarding to torrent. A search on people getting notices from their ISP reveals that a lot of people still get caught if just using one of these two methods.

I want to add that after a week of using both a proxy and L2TP, uTorrent abruptly stopped working. In order to get it working again I had to disable the proxy and just use L2TP...

Who was the fastest of the two? I would have to say they were fairly equal in terms of speeds for the most part. Originally I thought PIA was faster, but after doing some more testing, they seemed to be about the same. 

Mind you, all of this is dependent on many factors. Such as, the connection speeds of the person uploading a torrent, if a person uploading throttles or limits their upload speeds, how fast your speeds are, how many seeds/peers the torrent you are downloading has, how much of a torrent a peer or peers have, if the time of day has an affects your Internet speeds, your torrent client configuration, and whatever other variables that could affect speeds.

The last thing I will say on this is that I went to both PIA's and TorGuard's online chat support and asked if I would be safe just using their proxies for torrents. PIA told me that it "should" be safe. While TorGuard gave me a huge written explanation on why using the VPN is safer, and included a link for further information. In this regard, PIA really just did a bad job with their reply. A proxy will never be safer than a VPN. Only your IP address is masked, not your traffic. The VPN will ensure nothing is seen.

Aftermath
After all this, I decided to go ahead and get an Wireless AC setup. I ended up with two AC WLAN adapters, and two AC routers.

The first adapter was low-profile, and complete junk. The second adapter was a full adapter and gave better speeds on Wireless N than my laptop's internal adapter. So, I ended up using that for my AC tests.

I initially got a very good deal on a Linksys EA6300 v1, which is actually a disguised EA6400 router. I believe this jumped my speeds by about 10Mbps on both L2TP and the VPN apps of both PIA and TorGuard while using AC speeds. An incredible leap, and I would have been very content with that.

But now knowing that it seems the router was part of the issue in my speeds, I got another router. I got the ASUS RT-AC3200. A very expensive router, and is near the top of the crop. With this router I was able to achieve 80Mbps without a VPN! Through PIA's L2TP I was able to get around 45Mbps, and 55Mbps on TorGuard's L2TP! A huge bump. Still not the 10-15% drop I had been told by PIA's online chat support at one time (for their VPN app), but vastly improved from what they were.

The moral of the story is to have a good Internet setup to get the best VPN speeds.

So, Who's The Best?
That is a tough answer! I would say each has their pros and cons, and because of that it will depend on what you want:

Speed
I would guess that AirVPN is probably the best. Only testing on the closest server--which was still far away from me--gave impressive speeds. Not the best, but I could imagine if I were next to one of their servers, speeds would probably be on par or better than TorGuard. TorGuard is my current choice because it did give the best speeds (albeit with lower security settings) and I had a server close to me. However, AirVPN is still a better choice if you want better security and fast speeds. AirVPN also gave the fastest upload speeds (maxing out what my ISP gives), while TorGuard was about half of that. PIA's upload speeds were very close to what AirVPN provided.

Price
PIA has the best price unless you can get a deal on TorGuard. I ended up getting PIA for free, and TorGuard at a 50% (reoccurring) discount. This means even when my PIA service ends, I will have TorGuard, and at a cheaper yearly price than what I will get for PIA. The only problem is that TorGuard does not have as good encryption as PIA, but that might change over the next two years.

Security
I would say that it is a tie between PIA and AirVPN. They both offer the highest available security possible. The problem here is that AirVPN gives no choice in the matter, while PIA does. However, if AirVPN had a server closer to me, then their speeds might have been the best with the highest level of security. Because of this I will have to give them equal footing.

Customer Service
In my mind PIA is still a bit better than TorGuard. PIA gave me free service for a year, and communicated with me extensively during my speed problems using their service. TorGuard was almost as good as they offered me the discount code I had already found and gave me the proxy service for free. If only speaking about online chat support, I would say PIA tried to be helpful, while TorGuard was more helpful, if you got the right person. Email support goes to PIA (if done during late night), although I did not use TorGuard much in that respect.

Servers
PIA has the most servers. I found they had a great selection of servers around the world, great for any traveler. TorGuard was next, and they do have quite an extensive selection as well. AirVPN was last.

Torrents
PIA and TorGuard seemed to be best for torrents once knowing to setup both their proxy and a VPN together for best speeds (L2TP in my case). They got about the same speeds, so really if I had to choose I would go with TorGuard, because I had better VPN speeds when not torrenting.

Features
PIA and TorGuard also had the most extra features. They offered a lot of the same features, while PIA offered a network kill switch, and TorGuard has a kill switch for apps. I could get neither working, so that point is moot. TorGuard offers their proxy as a separate service, so you do have to pay more to get it. Making up for that, TorGuard does offer SSTP. Yet, when I tried it the experience was awful.

So let's tally up the scores. PIA: 5 TorGuard: 2 AirVPN: 1

Going off of that, PIA is the clear winner here. I would essentially put it this way though, if you want the fastest speeds, try AirVPN. If you want fast speeds for streaming, browsing, and torrents, try TorGuard. If you want the best customer service, a lot of server locations, and great torrenting speeds, try PIA. PIA is a good in-betweener, giving you the most of everything overall. And if using an Ethernet connection, PIA is probably the way to go regardless.

Concerns
My main concerns were primarily  price, speed, and protection. Once I actually got VPN services the main issue was really speed. PIA seemed to fall apart in that area fairly quickly. While I was able to raise them, I have done better with TorGuard continuously.

TorGuard has less protection available, but enough to be secure. And I find their speeds to be the best, always. Most of the time I use their L2TP service or their app over PIA's. In fact, I no longer PIA's app at all, and normally use TorGuard's L2TP when possible.

In terms of actual concerns, sometimes a L2TP will go down. This happens on either service. What I do like about them though is that they can be configured to redial up to 99 times before they stop trying.

The MTU size constantly changes throughout the day for L2TP, so I find myself constantly reconfiguring it to get the best speeds. It does not hurt it to be at a higher max than it should be, but it does help prevent your best speeds. On the apps, this does not seem to be as much of an issue. TorGuard usually maintains 1472, but PIA is well below that on average.

If anything, the concern should really be about encryption and logs. If you get past price and speed, those are what really matter.

Article Killswitch
That is what I have discovered while traversing the VPN frontier. There are plenty more options, but I doubt you will find one greatly better than those. In the future, I would hope that all would be comparable in price, speed, and encryption, but that is likely a pipe dream. Price will be dependent upon the company, speed will depend on their technology and servers, and encryption is again at the discretion of the company.

Your best bet on a good VPN is to do research and check for yourself, if you can. Following the questions I have outlined above should help you in making a good decision.

Thursday, January 14, 2016

Should I Buy an ExpressCard with USB 3.0? BENCHMARKS! (UPDATE!)

My birthday happened recently, and just before, I thought about what I would want. There is not too many things that I desperately need, and many of the things I may want seemed to expensive for me at the moment. My oldest laptop had an empty ExpressCard slot, as just about everything else is upgraded to the fullest (or quite close). So I decided to fill my ExpressCard slot with a pair of USB 3.0 ports. Here is what I discovered...


USB 3.0 Uses
I do not have a variety of uses for USB 3.0. I do not have any phones that would utilize it, nor any other special devices. What I do have--and a lot of--is external hard disk drives (HDD). I probably have at least 10. Two of which use USB 2.0. However, one of those also has eSATA capabilities, and since I have an eSATA port on the front panel of my desktop, it uses that instead.

But my oldest laptop, which is still working like a champ, does not have any USB 3.0 ports. I do have external HDD's connected that are USB 3.0, but are utilizing USB 2.0 transfer speeds. This has never bothered me except on a few occasions when I need to move massive amounts of large files to another drive.

Because my "old" laptop has an ExpressCard slot, I decided it might be nice to have USB 3.0 when I truly needed it (or not!).

ExpressCard
ExpressCard is the successor to PCMCIA. They can allow more connections and speed for a laptop. However, it has been noted because it is now an aging technology, it will never truly have USB 3.0 speeds, and cannot support newer connections like Thunderbolt. This may be why you do not find them on newer laptops...

Reviews
I decided to do a bit of research before making my purchase. I immediately found a few reviews, most had little useful information. But one review did some benchmarks and revealed some decent performance boosts.

The review essentially used a generic 54mm ExpressCard with two USB 3.0 ports. As with most (if not all) ExpressCards with USB 3.0, it had an external connector to power the USB 3.0 ports. Without that extra power, they would act as standard USB 2.0 ports.

They found their sequential writes for a standard USB 2.0 port between 20-25MB/s. With USB 3.0 through the ExpressCard they were able to achieve about 55MB/s. Quite a big jump! Yet, this also conveyed that it was not close to USB 3.0 speeds...

Express Card NEC Chipset Adapter Converter Card
The card I bought was not only the cheapest, but the best reviewed on Amazon. The only headache most people found was getting the drivers to work. Initially, the product came with a small CD that had drivers, but most found it would not work for the ExpressCard. I read the reviews beforehand, so I knew to go to the following link to get the proper drivers.

I should also note that this card is a 54mm ExpressCard and will not fit into a 34mm ExpressCard slot. The reverse is true, but always ensure that you have the right type of slot. The 54mm is almost 1/3 of the size of a CD-ROM slot.

And finally, this card sits perfectly flush. Like other ExpressCards, especially 34mm ones, they will usually have the ports on the end in a huge bump that is not flat with the rest of the card. This one does, and it can simply be left in the laptop for later use.

If you get this card, or one like it, and see that it seems to have no way of being pulled out, do not worry. Most should be able to pop out by pushing the ExpressCard in (much like how micro SD cards work in phones). Also, trying to unplug the external adapter, or any USB device connected to it, will force the card to come out. This is somewhat of a disadvantage because it can disturb other devices in the second port, and be a real pain if it that port is busy transferring files or whatnot.

Each test was done 3 times using AA SSD. You can find the author's homepage here with the download. If that program is in German, find the English version here. I only recorded the sequential read and write speeds as that is what most people will want to know.

There were several tests, many done for comparison purposes. I used a generic 64GB USB 2.0 flash drive, two Seagate external HDD's [a 5TB & 8TB @ 5900RPM] with USB 3.0 connectors, an older internal Western Digital 500GB 5400RPM HDD, circa 2010, and an older internal Samsung 500GB solid state drive (SSD), circa 2010. Both internal drives came with the laptop.

The generic 64GB USB was about half-full. The 5TB was almost full and the 8TB was about a quarter full. The 500GB HDD was almost empty, and the 500GB SSD was closing in on half-full.

The tests were all averaged after 3 passes had been completed and rounded to the nearest thousandth, if applicable. The following results will be those averages.

64GB USB 2.0
USB 2.0
READ - 17.72MB/s
WRITE - 3.85MB/s
USB 3.0
READ - 18.39MB/s
WRITE - 3.91MB/s

5TB Ext. HDD USB 3.0
USB 2.0
READ - 27.73MB/s
WRITE - 19.78MB/s
USB 2.0 (ExpressCard)
READ - 83.903MB/s
WRITE - 89.283MB/s
USB 3.0 (USB)
READ - 93.616MB/s
WRITE - 94.176MB/s
USB 3.0 (Outlet)
READ - 92.03MB/s
WRITE - 91.73MB/s
USB 3.0 (ChargeDr)
READ - 101.667MB/s
WRITE - 100.427MB/s

8TB Ext. HDD USB 3.0
USB 2.0
READ - 29.90MB/s
WRITE - 20.88MB/s
USB 2.0 (ExpressCard)
READ - 102.76MB/s
WRITE - 100.706MB/s
USB 3.0 (USB)
READ - 103.533MB/s
WRITE - 100.693MB/s
USB 3.0 (Outlet)
READ - 105.476MB/s
WRITE - 104.773MB/s
USB 3.0 (ChargeDr)
READ - 99.947MB/s
WRITE - 100.213MB/s

WD 500GB SATA III
READ - 72.786MB/s
WRITE - 66.23MB/s

SSD 500GB SATA III
READ - 200.40MB/s
WRITE - 97.746MB/s

READ - 199.88MB/s
WRITE - 121.32MB/s

First I will explain what each test is for. USB 2.0 is for connecting to a native USB 2.0 port. USB 2.0 (ExpressCard) is for connecting to a USB 3.0 port in the ExpressCard without a power adapter. USB 3.0 (USB) is for connecting to a USB 3.0 port through the ExpressCard by using the supplied USB power adapter. The adapter connects to an available USB port for "necessary" power for the ExpressCard. USB 3.0 (Outlet) is still using the supplied adapter, but connected to a Quick Charger that is inserted directly into a wall outlet. The Samsung SSD had two readings because on one of the first three passes one write speed was so low that it definitely pulled the average far down from what I thought it should be.

To get it out of the way, let's look at the 64GB USB results. This was about what I would expect. Part of the reason they are not as high as possible is because it is a generic USB, not something a brand name might sell at faster speeds. I picked it up at a store when it was on sale for an introductory price, all the brand names I would have chosen otherwise were 1.5x-3 times more expensive. It is good to notice that, albeit slight, an increase does occur from using a USB 3.0 port.

On the 5TB external HDD, the USB 2.0 results were right where they should be. The write speeds definitely trounce that of the 64GB USB, and have a significant increase over read speeds. When moving to the USB 3.0 port we find the read and write speeds maxing out to near-identical findings. The least quickest, but still incredibly quick, occur with no external power adapter, followed by the outlet, and then topped by the USB external power adapter. This seems a bit strange since the outlet can provide much more power, but they are close enough to not matter.

With the 8TB external HDD, my findings using the USB 2.0 port are similar to that of the 5TB. Notice that the read and write speeds are all at least about 10MB/s more than the 5TB. I account this towards the amount of space the 5TB has left in comparison to the 8TB. These write speeds are near what most external HDD's should be able to do with a native USB 3.0 port! In addition, the outlet writing has a 4MB/s boost when examining the other two USB 3.0 test results! Each read speed here looks to be topping out just above 100MB/s, also very close to what a native USB 3.0 port could do.

I did perform some tests later where I decided to use the external adapter and a ChargeDr, which is a USB device that can allow faster charging for Quick Charge 2.0 devices. You can read more on my ChargeDr experience and testing here. As you can see, the 8TB did not benefit from the ChargeDr. However, during this test, the 8TB was almost entirely full. The write speed is almost identical to that of not using an external adapter, or when it is used with a USB 2.0 port. The read speed was only a few MB's off from the slowest result. Considering that it was only a quarter full when I ran the other tests, this tells me that using the ChargeDr may not give faster speeds when closer to empty, but will keep speeds very high when the drive is near-full.

The 5TB did much better. While there was little difference in the storage capacity remaining when tested, it did have more gigabytes used when this test was performed. It gained nearly 10MB/s in both read and write speeds! This helps confirm that the extra power draw it gets from the ChargeDr keeps speeds fast when nearing full capacity.

The Western Digital 500GB had the next worst findings after the 64GB USB. It is by far better than using an external HDD on USB 2.0, but still lags behind what can be done with an ExpressCard USB 3.0 port. It cannot even match the 5TB using no external power adapter. My thoughts are that because it is 5400RPM, this has a large impact on how fast it can read or write, and incorporating its age, makes the 5TB and 8TB @ 5900RPM over a USB 3.0 port win hands down.

The Samsung SSD 500GB worked better than I thought given its age. I had been worried because I had read someone bad mouthing it and thought it gave poor performance because of its build quality. Thankfully, it did not. The SSD is the surefire winner of the group (which it should be as it is an internal SSD). It's read score was almost twice as much as any score given by the 8TB, and even it's lowest write score can almost match the 8TB findings. If you use the latter finding, the write speed cannot even be touched by the 8TB!  

What Does It All Mean?
The biggest interpretation is that despite what many people believe, you can almost get USB 3.0 read and write speeds from an ExpressCard. The write speeds are unsurprisingly diminished if compared to a SSD, but more than acceptable for most normal (and even intensive) tasks.

Essentially, using an ExpressCard will bump up your read and write speeds to just about what everyone else could achieve with a native USB 3.0 port. Your read and write speeds will dramatically increase over USB 2.0, but may be just shy of par with a native USB 3.0 port. On top of that, the speeds are still much better than what my internal 5400RPM HDD does! It would be interesting to see what an internal 7200RPM HDD will achieve against my external HDD's...

And finally, giving the external power adapter more power (with either an outlet or ChargeDr) should not only give higher speeds, but help maintain the highest speeds possible when an external hard drive is, or almost is, full.

Do I Need A USB 3.0 ExpressCard?
Definitely not, if you do not have an ExpressCard slot. If you already have native USB 3.0 ports, then probably not. But if you have several USB 3.0 devices and do not want to strangle your USB bandwidth with a USB 3.0 hub, it could come in quite handy to maintain high speeds across-the-board.

The biggest advantage is for circumstances like mine where you have no USB 3.0 ports. And spending less than $12 for it is analogous to spending money on your car's exhaust system to get more horse power for the least amount.

Maybe most important (at least to myself) is that despite every article I read on ExpressCard USB 3.0 ports, the speeds did not degrade to USB 2.0 when not using the external USB power adapter. This is truly amazing in my eyes. It is even more helpful now that I know can avoid wasting a USB 2.0 port, as well as being able to leave the ExpressCard in the laptop as if it is just a part of it. Granted, the speeds do seem to dwindle slightly, much moreso when a HDD is close to being full, but the speeds it can still attain are more than worthy enough for me to not be worried if I ever lose the USB power adapter.

Because this may not be the case for everyone, I should state that I am using an Alienware M17x R2, with an unlocked Intel CPU, and 16GB of DDR3 RAM. This may be important because high-end specs will likely provide better results than a low-end system, and maybe Dell did something different for the 54mm ExpressCard slot. Or maybe, I am just lucky!

Or not so lucky, as it turns out. About two weeks after constant use of the USB 3.0 ports, the ports have finally become faulty without the external power adapter. As elaborated below, the ports would only work for a minimal amount of time. Since using the external power adapter, this issue has not come up again. If I use the external power adapter, it also takes care of the VMware problem noted below.

In summation, my laptop does not require the external USB power adapter to give great performance boosts. But this does not mean a different laptop will not require it. You can only test with the external power adapter and see. The good thing is that it should be included with the ExpressCard (as with my purchase), so you will not be paying extra to get one.

Downsides (UPDATE)
The most obvious disadvantage was stated earlier, in that it will seem that the ExpressCard will pop out when trying to take out the external power adapter or a USB device connected.

During one instance, while doing something on the computer, I noticed the drives I had connected suddenly disappeared. I had to reinstall the drivers in order for them to reappear again.

But the biggest problem I have observed so far was when working with VMware. I needed to create a virtual machine (VM) and did so with VMware. It was not until later that I saw that every time I ran a VM, my USB 3.0 drives would go offline. What is worse is that a simple reinstall of the ExpressCard drivers would not fix it. I would have to do a full reboot of my laptop in order to get them recognized and running again. I am not sure if this is just a VMware problem, but I would be careful using any virtualization software. There was no problems if the drives were plugged into my native USB 2.0 ports.

This is by far the worst problem, but I am unsure if it is unrelated to the prior paragraph because it started happening during my time using VMware. Once I stopped using VMware and just wished to access my drives, I noticed that regardless if they were showing, they would suddenly stop after about 15 minutes. I would reboot and use them again, and again 15 minutes would go by before they would abruptly stop. I tried not doing anything to the drives, and also using the drives, but no matter what I did they would go offline without warning... This stopped for a small period of time, but began happening again. The ONLY solution to this was to use the external power adapter. This brought an additional cable to my setup that I did not want, but, on the plus side, my speeds should be marginally faster.

A more minor issue is that on my laptop the ExpressCard is on the left side. Because my mouse is also on the left side (as I suspect most people have it), the USB 3.0 wires stick out close to my hand and are often touched accidentally. While the wires for USB 3.0 are sturdier than what I find on most USB 2.0 devices, they have affected the connectivity of the drives at times. At first I could bump the wires without ensuing problems. But only about two weeks into this setup, my drives seem to go offline when my hand brushes up against them.

ExpressCard Send-Off
The ExpressCard solution is on its way out, but can still be very useful in situations like mine. While it will never be able to get USB 3.1 or Thunderbolt speeds, it will be some time before USB 3.0 is finally put out to pasture (heck, you can still find USB 2.0 ports on new devices!).

While many may not be able to enjoy this upgrade, there are still enough powerful laptops out there that were made with an ExpressCard slot. I am a person who loves older technology that can still be used in an advantageous manner in modern times. This is one of those things where older technology can be helpful in adapting to the present.

For now, I am greatly satisfied with my findings, and am happy that I can now take advantage of my external HDD's through my primary laptop.

ChargeDr USB, Is It Really Quick Charge 2.0? A ChargeDr Review & BENCHMARKS!

The ChargeDr USB is a small flash drive-sized USB device that supposedly allows "Quick Charge" speeds through a desktop or laptop PC. I recently purchased the item as I thought it was pretty ingenius, and often find myself scrounging for my phone charger while working on the computer. I tried to find some formal reviews or articles on the product, but found none. So I decided it best to create one for those who are curious if the product works


.ChargeDr vs. ChargeDr Pro
There are two versions of the ChargeDr USB. The differences are about a dollar (as of the time of this writing) and that the Pro version allows for the syncing of data while plugged in.

The regular ChargeDr does not allow syncing of data while charging. While the Pro would seem the better choice, it too disallows syncing of data while charging. It instead has a switch that can be flipped to change from a charging mode to a data sync mode.

I had no idea about the Pro version until after I purchased the regular version. However, to enable syncing I just need to unplug my cable from the ChargeDr and plug it directly into the USB port. So, in essence, you can spend the extra dollar and save a couple seconds of work...

The Setup
I wanted a fair comparison, so I performed a variety of tests. These involved charging with a Quick Charge adapter through an outlet, using a USB 2.0 port from my laptop, using the ChargeDr through a USB 2.0 port, using a USB 3.0 port, using the ChargeDr through a USB 3.0 port.

I was going to also charge from an outlet with an adapter that does not support Quick Charge technology, although the only adapter I had available has a quirk where it makes my phone think it is being continuously unplugged and re-plugged.

Forewarning
The only difference that may come from my findings and others (if others share theirs), is that my ChargeDr accidentally went through the washer and dryer. It seemed to function with no problems afterward, so I assume my experiments will still be valid.

I expect the device either works or it does not after a situation like this. However, it is possible that it works at a lesser capacity (but I am doubtful) and my findings could therefore be skewed as a result.

Testing
I did several tests in different variations just to see what results I could get and what provided the best results. Initially my tests began with my battery mostly charged. But because it should take longer to charge when the battery is closer to full, I eventually changed to running my tests from 9%.

The one thing that should be noted going into this is that I am using a LG G3, and therefore may have a different battery capacity than what others may have. It should also be said that because of this, gaining a single battery percentage will depend upon how big your battery is. Meaning, if I have a battery that is 2300 mAh, and another battery that is 4000 mAh, the percent scale is the same, 100%. But it also means that charging 1% on the 2300 mAh would be faster than charging 1% on the 4000 mAh (if charging draw is equal).

The good thing about this is because I have to find results by recording the time, it will give (somewhat) valid results. Please keep in mind that it is extremely hard to get accurate results because how can someone know they just reached a certain percentage? Interpreted easier, how do I know at what time the percentage was obtained and how long a new percentage will be procured? Put easiest, if it were to take a minute for each percentage of my battery, how do I know on what second I am currently on when recording the result? If I record at the 30 second mark, and the time changed during the 29 second mark, the findings I record will have a slight margin of error. So, remember that there is a margin of error to take into consideration in the following findings.

High-End Charging
I did not want to waste these results so I am first including the higher-ended percentage results that I did make. For a frame of reference, there is an article that shows that it took 96 minutes for a LG G4 to charge from 80% to 100% (the longest periods when Quick Charge is being used). This equates to 4.8 minutes per battery percentage.

PC USB 2.0

90% - 100% = 10% @ 41min.
1% = 4.1min.


PC USB 2.0 (ChargeDr)

94% - 100% = 6% @ 21min.
1% = 3.5min.


Quick Charge 2.0

88% - 100% = 12% @ 25min.
1% = 2.08min.

The first Quick Charge 2.0 result seemed to good to be true, so I did another...

Quick Charge 2.0

87% - 100% = 13% @37min
1 = 2.85min.

From these results, using the PC USB 2.0 as a base we can tell that each method is a little more than about half-a-minute apart in terms of a single percent. That may not seem like much, but if we look at the amount of time it took to charge each to 100%, it tells a different story.

For only 10%, PC USB 2.0 took 41 minutes to charge to the full 100%! It took the ChargeDr 21 minutes to replenish 6%. A definite advantage over PC USB 2.0, but still time-consuming. And Quick Charge 2.0 took 37 minutes to gain 13% and reach 100%.

If we take the amount it took for the ChargeDr and multiply it by 2 for 12%, that would take 42 minutes. Subtract the Quick Charge's 37 minutes from that and we get 5 minutes, not forgetting 37 minutes is actually 13%, not 12%. 5 minutes does not seem like a substantial amount of time, but over a much larger percentage that number would grow to something much more impressive.

Unfortunately, this also means that the ChargeDr was not able to match Quick Charge 2.0 capabilities. Even by using the second result I took with Quick Charge, the ChargeDr was still .65 minutes, or 39 seconds, longer for each percentage. This stands outside the margin of error, which means when needing a top-off, the ChargeDr is still far better than regular charging methods, but cannot match Quick Charge 2.0 speeds.  

Another reason I did not want to rely on these results is I find that from 99% to 100%, the time takes a lot longer than normal to gain that single percent...

Low-End Charging
This is the sweet spot for Quick Charge 2.0. It is where it should excel and get the best performance when needing a "quick charge".

As stated earlier, I did almost all these tests at 9%. Most results I recorded were from 9% until 14%, but there was one where I missed that marker. At this point I also decided to not do any tests using PC USB 2.0 (unless it was in conjunction with the ChargeDr) because it was already obvious that USB 2.0 would not be able to get results close to that of the ChargeDr. Instead, I performed some PC USB 3.0 tests.

The reason for this is that USB 3.0 (sometimes to referred to as USB 3.1 Rev. 1) can output more watts than USB 2.0, and therefore should provide better results when charging through said port.

PC USB 3.0 (Native)

9% - 14% = 5% @ 14min.
1% = 2.8min. 


PC USB 3.0 (ExpressCard)

9% - 14% = 5% @ 11min.
1% = 2.2min.


PC USB 3.0 (ChargeDr)

5% - 14% = 9% @ 12min.
1% = 1.3min.


PC USB 2.0 (ChargeDr)

9% - 14% = 5% @ 11min.
1% = 2.2min.


*9% - 14% = 5% @ 7min.

1% = 1.4min.


Quick Charge 2.0

9% - 67% = 58% @ 48min.
1% = .83min.


9% - 14% = 5% @ 4min.

1% = .8min.

These numbers may be a bit confusing, so I will interpret them one at a time starting with PC USB 3.0. I did three different tests. The "Native" test is with USB 3.0 built-in to the motherboard. The "ExpressCard" was with USB 3.0 that is through an ExpressCard. The "ChargeDr" was done with USB 3.0 through the ExpressCard. Oddly enough, the slowest result was with the native USB 3.0, followed by the ExpressCard, and then the ChargeDr. The jumps are quite different between the three, with 48 seconds and 54 seconds respectively. The ExpressCard without the ChargeDr actually matches the first result I obtained with PC USB 2.0 using ChargeDr. Impressive, if that were the only result I had made for PC USB 2.0. By far, the ChargeDr was the best way to charge the LG G3.

PC USB 2.0 actually had three results. However, two of the findings were the same, thus the asterisks (*). I had created more than one because one of my laptops has multiple USB 2.0 ports on both sides, and I wanted to see if it had any effect on the charging. The last two results were almost the same as the fastest charging speed using the ChargeDr speed on USB 3.0. Enough to be in the margin of error and can thus be considered the same finding.

The Quick Charge 2.0 yielded amazing results, as expected. It took less than 1 minute to gain a single percent on both tries. In comparison to the best ChargeDr speeds I encountered, the ChargeDr findings were close to twice as long (12 seconds short) compared to Quick Charge.

Yet again, the ChargeDr lagged behind Quick Charge. Not only that, this shows us that the ChargeDr actually gets an average of 9 seconds slower when compared to Quick Charge at higher battery percentages. What this means is that the ChargeDr's performance decreases at higher battery percentages, which is expected, but at even a slower pace than what would be expected. In essence, it should be able to maintain its "slower" speed when compared to Quick Charge, but testing shows that it gets even slower!

Better Findings?
It would have been better to make more passes for each test, but given the time it takes to set everything up and record results, my impatience got the best of me.

Again, I had an incident with ChargeDr that could have skewed results, but I honestly doubt it had any effect because I would think it would not have dipped in performance, but had no advantage at all (broken). I also was not able to properly use a regular charger without Quick Charge for testing, but I do not think that would have changed much of anything.

One great test that I was unable to perform was using MSI's Super Charge. On certain MSI motherboards they have a red USB connector called JUSB1. Setting this up properly will (supposedly) allow you to have Quick Charge speeds with a USB 3.0 port. Maybe one day...

Interpreting the Results
The obvious conclusion is that while the ChargeDr is a lot better than just a USB port, it does not live up to Quick Charge 2.0 expectations. Quick Charge through an outlet simply outperforms anything available as an alternative

During times of low battery life, the ChargeDr will be more than 2x as fast using a USB port. This is nothing to snuff at. And while diminished, at higher-end charging the ChargeDr will be slightly more than 1/4 faster than a USB port.

Should I Buy the ChargeDr?
This depends. If you are near an outlet most of the time, then it may be best to save your money. But if you are at a computer all the time and rarely get up, then it is a great buy. For myself, I have found it very useful, and have used it multiple times. I would normally just plug in my phone to my laptop if I needed a charge, even if I was close to an outlet. But now I can plug in my phone to my laptop and know that it will charge much faster.

But consider this, while you can buy Quick Chargers for the car, that Quick Charger normally only works for the car. It can be cheap, but has a solitary use. Maybe if you get lucky you can find a car charger that has an adapter for a wall outlet, but that will cost more, and you probably still have the manufacturer's Quick Charger that came with your phone or tablet. Even if not, it would still mean you have multiple adapters to look after. Or what about an airport? Sure they have charging bays for the most part, but what if only the USB ports are open and you need to make sure that your phone is fully charged when you step off your flight? Or in a similar fashion, what if you have no outlets available for the moment and you need your phone charged? Maybe even your USB ports are taken up with whatever peripherals? But you do have a USB hub that provides power output, that could be your saving grace!

The ChargeDr is a small simple unit, with a flush-sitting cap, and can be used in your car or anything else that has a USB connector. It will work on your laptop when you are on the go. It even makes for a great backup in case your Quick Charger goes faulty or missing. Not to mention it can survive a wash and still operate!

So while it is not necessary to get the ChargeDr, and it will not charge as fast as a Quick Charger, it could be a very (small and) useful tool that could end up saving you some headache when no other resolution is available.

Power Off
The ChargeDr is a neat device. I never really needed it, but it was a splurge item that has come in quite handy on occasion. I was upset when it got washed, but it seemed to make no difference, which also conveys how sturdy the device actually is. I did test before it got into the wash, and it did seem just as fast. I have washed a USB flash drive--by accident--before, and it did not fare as well. It eventually did work, but for how long afterwards I do not know as I had already moved on.

It is disappointing that it does not give true Quick Charge 2.0 performance as advertised, but I presently know of no other solution that does what it does.

One final mention, I did want to test this with an iOS device that has rapid charging, but unfortunately I do not have any iOS device that does. It would be interesting to see if the ChargeDr does have any affect since really it just acts like a mini power inverter to provide more power to devices.

Wednesday, December 30, 2015

Wirelessly Display Your PC/Laptop WITHOUT WiHD/WiDi/Allshare/Miracast!

The title will be a bit misleading, but I will explain more on that later. One of the "new" technology crazes widely available is being able to share the screen of a device with another, wirelessly. I would say that usually means showing something from a desktop or laptop PC on a large TV. The problem is that not all devices have the features necessary to do this. What I want to describe is a method to still achieve this with those desktop or laptop PC's that are void of the necessary hardware...


WiHD/WiDi/Allshare/Miracast
Essentially, these are all technologies that do the same thing. They allow you to transmit audio and visual data from one device to another. There are numerous names from different manufacturers, but I believe these are the most common in circulation at the moment.

Since the technology is still very young, it is not quite commonplace, yet. It is common enough that I would say that almost all new televisions and mid-range/high-end smartphones/tablets incorporate the technology.

Backstory
For the time being, I have two laptops at my disposal. Both are Alienware, with my primary using a first generation Intel i7 (Clarksfield), and the second using a third generation Intel i7 (Ivy Bridge).

My primary is too old to support Intel's WiDi as only second generation Intel-core processors (Sandy Bridge) and newer have the ability to use WiDi. My secondary laptop does have the ability to use WiDi, however, the hardware (a card and antenna) is sold separately. Furthermore, the same slot for the WiDi hardware is the same slot for the M.SATA, of which I am already using.

I considered buying a USB adapter or some other device that would allow my screen to be shared. And while there are some cheap devices out there (under $25), I felt that as expensive as these laptops are--or were--I should be able to accomplish mirroring my screen to my TV without buying extra adapters or devices.

Thus began my (successful) journey on how to mirror my laptop to my TV without having official WiDi support...

iOS Devices
While other platforms support Miracast, Apple has their own proprietary software called AirPlay. I have no experience with this technology, and as such, this may not work with iOS smartphones or tablets without the use of a third-party app or additional hardware.

A Mac, per my instructions below, will work as far as using a PC goes... 

Requirements
The requirements for this to be done are rather basic. And remember, I am using a laptop and a TV. You may be able to try this with other devices, but what I will be explaining is for my circumstances:

  • Desktop/Laptop
  • WiFi Card
  • TV (with Miracast support)
  • Smartphone/Tablet (with Miracast support)
  • Mirroring Software, i.e. AirDisplay (explained below)

First off, I am including a Mac as a PC, as it is a Personal Computer. The desktop or laptop PC you use can be of any age as long as it has WiFi capabilities [WiFi card]. Mind you, if it is not somewhat powerful, the results may not prove as smooth as desired.

Second, you need a TV with Miracast support. If you have a TV from the last few years, it likely does. If you do not, you can buy an adapter that will insert itself into the HDMI or USB port of your TV, but this requires two things: The purchase of an adapter, which defeats the purpose of this tutorial. And a TV with a HDMI or USB port, which you would probably have if you have a plasma or LED TV.

Third, you must have a smartphone or tablet that has Miracast capabilities. If you have a smartphone or tablet from the last few years, you probably have Miracast. There are some devices that have been hacked to support Miracast, but I have found the results finicky at best.

Lastly, you will need software that allows screen mirroring from your desktop or laptop PC to you smartphone or tablet. I mentioned AirDisplay as this will work on Windows, Linux, or OS X. But there are a lot of other options available that will achieve the same goal. AirDisplay is a paid software, so keep that in mind.

Now it may become clear as to why the title is a bit misleading. While your PC does not need to have Miracast support, you will need something that does. I am betting that people who would be interested in performing this will have a device that does.

How To Display Your PC On Your Device
The setup is rather simple if you have all the requirements:
  1. Ensure that your PC and smartphone or tablet is connected to the same WiFi network.*
  2. Download the AirDisplay software for your PC OS.
  3. Install the AirDisplay software on your PC.
  4. On your smartphone or tablet, purchase and install AirDisplay from your respective store.
  5. Open the app on your smartphone or tablet and proceed to the steps on how to connect. It will then wait for your computer to connect...
  6. Click the tray icon (possibly hidden through the arrow of the taskbar for Windows users).
  7. A menu of choices should appear with your device name.
  8. First click the "Options" to get a submenu.
  9. Select "Mirror Mode".
  10. Click your device name in the main area.

Note: If you skip step #8, your smartphone or tablet will act as an extended monitor to your PC.

The process is now complete and you should be able to see what is on your PC on your smartphone or tablet.

*No Internet?
If you do not have an Internet connection, you can still connect your PC and device by creating an ad-hoc network on your PC and connecting both devices to it. You can also connect via USB if desired.

Miracast is done without the need to use WiFi, however, it too requires WiFi Direct (WIDI) devices in order to work...
Fullscreen
Depending on your smartphone or tablet's display resolution, you may get black bars on the sides of your screen. This will happen on newer devices that are 2.5K, devices of an odd display resolution, or if your PC is on a display resolution that is not normal for smaller devices.

The simplest thing to do is change your PC display resolution to something your device can support. I was able to change my laptop to 1080p or 720p, and my 2.5K smartphone then mirrored my laptop screen in fullscreen.

The harder way to go about this would be to change the resolution of your device to what your PC has. This may be impossible for certain resolutions, and beyond that, you will need to root or jailbreak your device in order to attempt doing so. I would only even suggest this after trying different laptop resolutions, or if your device has an odd display resolution that is not supported by (or not a multiple of the resolution of) your PC.

How To Display Your Device On Your TV
The hardest part is done, now comes the simple part:

Once your device is mirroring your PC, simply use Miracast on your device and your TV to connect the two. You will now have your laptop showing on your TV.

For my Android device, I just had to slide down the notification menu and toggle on Miracast. In the event that you are unable to perform Miracast while your have your PC being mirrored on your device, perform the Miracast step FIRST, and then use AirDisplay afterwards.

Downsides
The only major downside is audio. By using AirDisplay, it is not possible to transmit audio to your device, and thus not possible to transmit audio to your TV. To remedy this, you can use a pair headphones (wireless if you are not near the PC), or use a nice speaker setup with your PC. A different software may have a way to transmit audio as well as video...

The minor downside is power drain. The device you use will likely drain quite rapidly because it has the task of taking a live image from a PC and sending it to the TV. It should be plugged into a wall outlet or large power source for long-term usage.

AirDisplay is a paid product. While still cheaper that an adapter or other device, it still costs. Searching out a free alternative may be a good option, but the most reliable will probably cost you.

Uses
I would imagine this would be most useful for playing games or running videos. Maybe you want to see YouTube, Netflix, or Hulu on the big screen. AirDisplay provides a small mouse pointer on your device that you can control with your finger. This makes it easy to change videos on a whim.

Personally, I have my laptop setup with a wireless controller so that I can play games on my TV.

Fade to Black
As stated above, you can buy an adapter or device, and that will likely be a much easier task. On a different note, if you have a newer laptop, you may already be able to accomplish this with the correct drivers and software. Be sure to check Intel's compatibility page and your PC's manufacturer page to see if WiDi is already a part of your hardware.

I should mention, again, that Miracast is just one name for screen mirroring; and that my use of the term Miracast encompasses all those names.

I really only did this to see if I could as I imagine others have come across the same situation and decided to give up. I doubt I will use it all that often, but now I have the peace of mind to know that I can.