Because it's not a big truck.
It's a series of tubes.
And with wifi, there's not even tubes in the series.
Seriously, your problem could be any of the following, and we need more info about your router, about how all the computers connect, about all the computer specs and amount of use, and about what you did when you changed from one laptop to an other with "the same problem."
Lets assume all the computers are on the same wireless connection. If the old and new laptops are 802.11b while the other computers are 802.11g that's a simple explanation. Even if it were reversed, it might explain it, because b has a little more range than g and maybe you're using the old and new laptops a tad far from the router.
Otherwise the old and new laptops could be always in the same location. There could be interference just there. Maybe from another appliance, or some wiring in the wall to that room. Common culprits are: Microwaves, Compressors (in an Air Conditioner or Refrigerator), fans (in anything from an air-filter, to a plasma TV), paper shredders, electric water boilers and in-sink garbage disposals.
It could be the OS or software. You might have replicated the same software to the new machine and been stuck with the same problem. E.G. I've found some virus scanners to run so frequently (daily) for so long (4 hours) while thrashing the disk so much, that general downloading that gets cached to disk or saved is definitely 1/4 regular speed.
Or it could be that all your computers are not treated equally by the router. It might be doing Quality of Service filtering, or it might be lacking proper QoS. In one case it might think that computer is low priority, or in the other case it should be throttling the up-streams of the other machines so that they allow ACK packets through uncontested.
Ciaran makes a good point in his comment; you have to know what the test is measuring, and this is not clear with a proprietary bandwidth tester.
Downloading a large file will give you a good idea of your TCP throughput, but this measurement will be very sensitive to your latency (Ping time) to the server, and may be affected by your TCP configuration settings (critically your TCP receive window).
Tools like IPerf and ixChariot are used by networking professionals , but these are not really suitable for casual use (IPerf does not work easily behind NAT for example). To gauge the ultimate capacity of your pipe you could flood your connection with a uni-directional stream of UDP datagrams using one of the above tools.
Online bandwidth tools use some tricks to try and push up the throughput beyond the performance of a single TCP connection. I find that speedtest.net generally gives you an average download speed ~30-40% higher than what you would measure by timing the download of a large file. I have confirmed this by timing downloads of the files used by speedtest itself.
Using Wireshark, I made the following observations;
- The speedtest client downloads two files simaultaneously while measuring bandwidth - this gives a slightly higher aggregate throughput than a single file
- The speedtest speedometer reports a high percentile (90-95%) of the per-second instantaneous throughputs - not the long term average
The speedtest GUI suggests that your download of an mp3 would proceed at the measured rate. This is slightly misleading as the measured rate is more representative of the peak throughput achievable on your link.
Best Answer
ISPs typically advertise in MegaBITS per second, you're measuring in KiloBYTES per second. And then, you never get everything you're paying for, so 100kB/s on a 1Mb line seems about right to me, unfortunately!
Example: I have an 8 megabit/s line, meaning I should get 1 megabyte/s. I get close, sometimes, but most of the time I get about 2-300kb/s.