dbirdman
Premium,MVM
join:2003-07-07
Eureka, CA
| reply to v8rail
Re: Anyone else thinking WildBlue?
When comparing ping tests, you have to be careful not to compare apples with oranges. The WB test on page one was with the Windows standard 32 bytes, while the HN tests were done with 64 bytes, possibly on Linux boxes. 64 byte packets will usually get responded to more slowly, as shown by these two back-to-back:
C:\>ping www.yahoo.com -l 64
Pinging www.yahoo.com [69.147.114.210] with 64 bytes of data:
Reply from 69.147.114.210: bytes=64 time=979ms TTL=46
Reply from 69.147.114.210: bytes=64 time=1047ms TTL=46
Reply from 69.147.114.210: bytes=64 time=939ms TTL=47
Reply from 69.147.114.210: bytes=64 time=958ms TTL=46
Ping statistics for 69.147.114.210:
Packets: Sent = 4, Received = 4, Lost = 0 (0% loss),
Approximate round trip times in milli-seconds:
Minimum = 939ms, Maximum = 1047ms, Average = 980ms
C:\>ping www.yahoo.com
Pinging www.yahoo.com [69.147.114.210] with 32 bytes of data:
Reply from 69.147.114.210: bytes=32 time=818ms TTL=47
Reply from 69.147.114.210: bytes=32 time=896ms TTL=46
Reply from 69.147.114.210: bytes=32 time=725ms TTL=47
Reply from 69.147.114.210: bytes=32 time=784ms TTL=46
Ping statistics for 69.147.114.210:
Packets: Sent = 4, Received = 4, Lost = 0 (0% loss),
Approximate round trip times in milli-seconds:
Minimum = 725ms, Maximum = 896ms, Average = 805ms
--
W2K Server|Toshiba Satellite XP Pro|HughesNet IA8/1410/7000 2-watt Business Internet on .98 meter fixed | Datastorm .98 XF2 2-watt on 1990 Blue Bird Wanderlodge "Blue Thunder" 22 tons of rolling steel! |
|
DickDastardl
join:2005-10-10
Port Republic, VA
1 edit | reply to hjriver
said by hjriver  :Instantly my speeds were what my plan calls for all day not just early in the morning and crap the rest of the day. Why? Because HN had to do something to regulate the 5 percent of their subscribers tying up 50 percent of HN bandwidth. I would say those 5 percent are the ones whining and bitching. The other 95 percent now have the speeds they were promised. I've read in some area's even cable companies are having to FAP or disconnect some users for excessive use. Verizon EVDO is another with strict FAP. FAP is the only way to get the message to some who think they are entitled to do whatever they want regardless. Hughesnet is not likely in the near future to put up new satellites to increase capacity so they IMO will manage what they have for the benefit of all. Not just a few heavy users who are trying to use the system for something it was never intended to do. Boy, oh boy, what are you thinking?
What the hell is a "heavy user" anyway? Do you really think that people want to download GB's of data every day? I'll bet the patterns are the same for all but 5 percent of Internet users. Most downloads are relative for most of the month. Anywhere from 1-100mb's a day - max. But there are times where we want a big file - a game, a movie, google video, YouTube. This is not everyday of the month but maybe a given week. Or just sporatic days when we feel to do this.
Now, for those giving Hughesnet more money for extra bandwidth and stating that they never hit FAP, and their speeds are better, and yadda yadda yadda - go ahead, walk around filing your nails on your shirt thinking that your special that you're such a good Hughesnet customer. "That's how I stay away from Hughesnet problems. I just give them more money and they leave me alone." One day you'll find your head in the lions mouth saying, "but I gave you all that I had."
WAKE UP!!! Us whiners and bitchers don't want to be punished with dialup speeds for using a moderate amount of bandwidth. If I want to get a game once a month, I should be allowed to. If I want to get a movie a time or two a month, I should be allowed to. This FAP system cannot be justified ever, by anyone.
The reality is software is increasing in size every year, and a lot of times the Internet is where to get it. Am I abusing? I think not. Internet companies expect you to do this. Internet downloading is expected behavior, even in an automatic sense (software updates). I just downloaded general updates for my computer that cost me 150mb's. Well, that just about finishes me off for the day. Thanks Hughesnet. Thanks for the thimble full of water to fill my glass.
Damn, I'm so disgusted! |
|
dMarks
Melting Faces For Fun
join:2007-02-09
Leslie, MI
 ·Millenicom
 ·HughesNet Satellit..
| Part of the issues with having crappy speeds on Hughes is that they use flow controlling on some transponders really heavily. My guess would be on transponders that are overcrowded. I was on one such transponder. I found out about it after going through the attorney general to get a response from Hughes about my crappy speeds, even after the new FAP was implemented (there was no improvement with the new FAP. Still had sub 150 download speeds for major portions of the day). Hughes executive customer care put me on a different transponder and now I've got speeds that I should have.
No, not defending Hughes here. I still hate the FAP. I upgraded to pro because I anticipate at least one day of the week I'll be doing some big downloads. However, satellite can only do so much before being overwhelmed, so having a FAP is required to get any service at all. I think Hughes could have found a different way to do it though.
--
HN7000S G16 - 1230 MHz|Pro Plan|Windows XP Pro SP2|AMD Athlon 64 FX-57|2GB Dual Channel RAM|2x GeForce 7950 GT 512MB|250GB HDD |
|
v8rail
join:2003-10-13
Ash Fork, AZ
·HughesNet Satellit..
1 edit | reply to DickDastardl
said by DickDastardl :Boy, oh boy, what are you thinking? He?.... not much, but you need to know that he needs the internet just to run some speedtest ... 
said by DickDastardl :What the hell is a "heavy user" anyway? He does not understand that HN made rules before (IMHO better rules) and you could not get more then you paid for under the old rules. New rules HN tries the scare scare the users to get close with usage to what they paid for .... but both does not affect him, he can still run the HN dyno sheets and that makes him happy  Just because he has no other use for the internet he thinks any HN user is the same way ........  |
|
Fed Up2
@direcpc.com | The Hughes cheerleaders / wolves in sheep's clothing are really active on this thread aren't they?
Maybe the topic touched a nerve...? |
|
challass
join:2007-04-17
Sanders, KY | reply to corvettez06u
If we touch the right nerve, maybe we'll make the frog's leg jump!
--
HN7000S 113:W:0990 Firm Ware:5.4.0.33 Pro+ Vista Home Premium |
|
hjriver
hjriver
join:2006-12-03
North, VA
| reply to dMarks
said by dMarks :Part of the issues with having crappy speeds on Hughes is that they use flow controlling on some transponders really heavily. My guess would be on transponders that are overcrowded. No, not defending Hughes here. I still hate the FAP. I upgraded to pro because I anticipate at least one day of the week I'll be doing some big downloads. However, satellite can only do so much before being overwhelmed, so having a FAP is required to get any service at all. I think Hughes could have found a different way to do it though. However, satellite can only do so much before being overwhelmed, so having a FAP is required to get any service at all
That's my point also. Some think satellite should be able to do what cable does and it just can't happen. If you notice it's only a dozen maybe that whine, complain and scheme on here every day 7 days a week because HN has found a way to reel their usage in a bit. They seem to resent others might just want to use the internet at whatever low or moderate rate that suits their need and HN has found a way to level the playing field for all. Not just a select few. I even notice that some list EVDO and are still on HN or just lurking keeping the pot stirred. If HN is so bad and EVDO or DSL is available why?
--
HN7000S/Satmex6/1150/0.78/pro/Sig level: 60 |
|
challass
join:2007-04-17
Sanders, KY
| reply to corvettez06u
Bubble, bubble, toil and trouble,
Fire burn and Hughesnet bubble!
Heee, heee, heee, heee!
--
HN7000S 113:W:0990 Firm Ware:5.4.0.33 Pro+ Vista Home Premium |
|
v8rail
join:2003-10-13
Ash Fork, AZ
·HughesNet Satellit..
| reply to dMarks
said by dMarks :No, not defending Hughes here. I still hate the FAP. I upgraded to pro because I anticipate at least one day of the week I'll be doing some big downloads. However, satellite can only do so much before being overwhelmed, so having a FAP is required to get any service at all. I think Hughes could have found a different way to do it though. I think here is not much disagreement with that, and most do not have a problem with FAP (just Fanboy tries to put all of us in that corner, he maybe better goes and makes another speed test) and most know/see what the problem is here.
BTW HN still tries to sell me :
Pro Plan ($69.99/month)
- up to 1Mbps downloads
- up to 200kbps uploads
- 350Mb Download Threshold 2
- 50kbps Recovery Rate 3
2 Download Threshold is the volume of data that can be downloaded continuously before the Fair Access Policy may restrict the download speed. Several variables affect this number including speed of download, duration of download, and the plan's Recovery Rate.
3 Recovery Rate is the speed at which a service plan recovers the Download Threshold
this is the HN7000S upgrade offer I got from HN today and this is just wrong advertising. When I follow that rule (the old FAP) I will be faped pretty soon.
--
DW7000 release 5.4.0.33, 117W:1230, pro, router 66.82.158.77, rate code 256k 2/3 (TC), signal usually 80 |
|
corvettez06u
join:2007-01-15
New Richmond, OH | WOO HOO! The thread I started got posted in a news article on the website. |
|
Piggie
I Actually use Windstream
Premium
join:2005-11-23
Orange Springs, FL
·HughesNet Satellit..
 ·Windstream
1 edit | reply to hjriver
said by hjriver :Hughesnet is no different than any number of companies now. I agree we have let this happen but bitching on a forum does nothing but maybe let you feel better from venting. That is not completely true. Discussing on the forum is the same as the old discussing at the local pub. All revolutions started by the common people talking first among themselves. Granted, the average joe today in the US is so busy making a living, doing in his little free time what he wants to do, that revolutions may be a thing of the past.
To say something like its just like all the other companies does imply that it's now become acceptable to out source CS.
People here can write the FCC and FTC and say they are not happy. BBB mainly works for the business community. Look at the number of "resolved" issues presented to the BBB by Hughes customers. I have a hard time believing the ratio of satisfied customer is so high.
said by hjriver :I really don't have issues with HN right now. I did at first as I quickly realized I was not receiving the performance promised. I found this forum and read the posts complaining about speeds, having to reboot modems, tweaks, "fingering" the coax, etc. I have never had to do any of these "fixes". Out of nowhere comes the new FAP. Instantly my speeds were what my plan calls for all day not just early in the morning and crap the rest of the day. Why? Because HN had to do something to regulate the 5 percent of their subscribers tying up 50 percent of HN bandwidth. I would say those 5 percent are the ones whining and bitching. I see we have something in common. I too used what I was sold. Actually, the way DirecWay then was advertised to me I used what they gave me. No one byte more as the old FAP even stopped that.
I even read when I signed up that the reason for the FAP was to stop the 5% that used 50% of users that would "hog" the system if not for the FAP. That was 3 years ago.
Ok, what conclusion does this give? That you can use up to what they sold me and I would not load the system as they had already figured out how to limit me so I would not be a 5% person because of the old FAP. I never used one byte more than what they allowed. That is why the people that were using all that bandwidth are screaming, because dude, they were sold that and it was taken back, with no warning , no announcement, no nothing except they find out once they hit the new FAP.
So this is round two of them getting rid of the 5% people. Which means to me this will not be the last time they tighten the FAP. And it took them almost 10 years in business to figure out the FAP needed to be tighter? I see more bottom line motivation here after Hughes bought the system than they cared about your speeds.
Well, lets assume it was all about taming the 5% people.
Then why are the moderate users leaving in droves? These are NOT the people that used 50% of the bandwidth. First common sense tells me tells me that those were not the people. The ones I know used to always FAP a one to 4 times a month. They old FAP was no big deal, they just waited a few hours. But they all had very slow days they didn't use the net much. Another thing that points this out is it is taking almost a month of the new FAP for the moderates to really start popping out of the wood work and posting here with stuff like what happened? 3 of my neighbors fit this profile to a tee. It took all of them more than a week to hit one of the new FAP limits. One them posts here and was aware of the FAP so just cut back their usage, but that person is the exception to the system, not the norm. Probably less than 1% of Hughes customers ever post here even once.
So you and several other's touted the new faster prime time speeds within days of the new FAP. Long before these moderate users ever even hit or found out about the new FAP!
Let me repeat as that is important.
So you and several other's touted the new faster prime time speeds within days of the new FAP. Long before these moderate users ever even hit or found out about the new FAP!
Hence, within the first few weeks of the new FAP, these moderate users were going along fat, dumb and happy, unaware anything had changed, until........ they hit their first FAP.
So the moderate users being there didn't hurt your better new evening prime time speeds, because at the time you first noticed a tremendous increase up to advertised speeds, most moderate users were totally unaware of a new FAP.
But now those are the ones leaving in droves, or upgraded using even more bandwidth and paying attention to get their money's worth.
This is why I say Hughes went too far with the FAP. They hit users that they didn't need to jostle, but did.
Maybe that clarifies my point about they lame decisions on top of not handling the public relations on the new FAP.
Hence, and maybe my biggest point, is the other 95% is NOT HAPPY!! Only the 100m a day and under users are happy. 100 m a day is not the typical daily use of at least the next generation that lives on U-Tube, etc...........
--
| Speedstream 4200 Modem - 3m/386 plan | W98-W2KSP4-XPSP2 - All AMD | Buffalo WHR G54S with OpenWRT WR0.9 | 2 downstream switches feeding 5 total clients (no wireless)| |
|
Arion
join:2006-07-09
Marquette, MI
·HughesNet Satellit..
| reply to corvettez06u
quote:
But now those are the ones leaving in droves
Is there any data to back up that contention?? I think it's too soon to issue such a sweeping pronouncement. Perhaps in another quarter or so Hughes will see an impact on their subscriber base but it's too early at this point. Hughes and WB of course are the major providers for bottom end residential sat internet service and the pendulum swings between the two as far as which one is better. It will swing back in Hughes direction when WB starts to tighten up again.
Regardless of how it's marketed Hughes isn't true broadband and we all know it. It's a bottom line business. We are told we have a bucket of 200mb or 375mb ect, but the bandwidth doesn't exist to even give each customer that much on a day in and day out basis. They have these things modeled very precisely. Most of the customers stay well below the fap limit. If Hughes customer base continues to grow although perhaps slower than before they will be happy. I don't think they will be disappointed at all to see the heavier users to to wireless or a different provider. It just gives them more room to add the more "economical" users and that gives Hughes a larger bottom line.
For every subscriber that quits who uses a full 200mb a day they can replace that one subscriber with two 100mb users. For every subscriber that uses a full 375mb a day they can replace that person with 3 or 4 who use the 100mb a day. It will shake out the heavier users who have another option and the rest of us will watch our useage much closer or upgrade to a larger package. The tightrope they are walking is to avoid pissing people off enough to avoid a wholesale exodus to the door. Since they make very little money off the sub $100 a month accounts, (obviously these accounts generate volume but if they even come close to using there plan limits Hughes isn't making money off of them...bandwidth is expensive.)if a portion of these hits the door for greener pastures it probably won't disappoint Hughes very much.
quote:
So the moderate users being there didn't hurt your better new evening prime time speeds, because at the time you first noticed a tremendous increase up to advertised speeds, most moderate users were totally unaware of a new FAP.
If that's the case then where did the speed increase come from?? Just happenstance, or did hughes open the faucet more?? It wasn't happenstance as the transponders were running flat out at capacity. I have a separate dvb card in the computer and thru software can monitor null packets in the stream. The very day they started with the new fap the transponder loadings decreased especially during prime time. It could be that people were getting fapped and it took them a few days or so to figure out what was happening but the proof is in the pudding, there was a dramatic difference in speed.
It all boils down to this. The policy was a strategic decision by Hughes to allow an increase in customer base utilizing existent bandwidth and to allow an increase in prime time performance which was the number one gripe on all the forums. Somethings got to give as it's a zero sum game. If you want speed then you can't download as much. If you want to download more then the speeds are going to have to come down. Some of us like it and some of us hate it. But I come back to the same point...I sure can't grouse about the overall performance gains I have experienced since the policy implementation.
--
HN7000S IA-8 1270 / 8-PSK 3/4 (14) / Router:67.142.140.95 /.74 1 watt / Pro / Pentium 3.2ghz, 1gb ram / WinXP Pro/ Firefox 2.0.0.3 |
|
Brad R
join:2007-05-06
Collingwood, ON
| reply to Piggie
said by Piggie :BBB mainly works for the business community. Look at the number of "resolved" issues presented to the BBB by Hughes customers. I have a hard time believing the ratio of satisfied customer is so high. Well, look at my case. I wrote the BBB, Galaxy Broadband made an (unaccpetable) offer, I rejected their offer. The BBB said they can't do anything more (true enough) and then marked the case "Bureau judged complaint resolved." If they try and fail I guess that means "resolved."
It's still worth writing to them, though. They keep these cases on file. Enough cases like this and they'll begin to get a clue.
I even read when I signed up that the reason for the FAP was to stop the 5% that used 50% of users that would "hog" the system if not for the FAP. That was 3 years ago.
Ha, you need to look at that 1998 lawsuit. HN has been using that exact same line for almost ten years now. I quote:
Recent analysis of DirecPC system usage patterns indicates that the top five percent of the DirecPC subscriber base is responsible for approximately 53% of the total DirecPC service traffic.
How much do you want to bet they're still relying on that same old research in their current FAP propaganda? And after nine years, shouldn't they have a handle on the problem by now? |
|
Fed Up2
@direcpc.com
| Yes, the Hughes cheerleaders are getting a bit desperate and this thread aren't they? - as they try to down play the discontent and excuse the outcry as just a few making all the noise etc.
Wild Blue has become an attractive alternative because of Hughes' FAP policy and their general abuse of good customer relationships.
They are correct in identifying our reaction as a serious problem. All it takes is the right person at Wild Blue to read this thread and the many others like it and Wild Blue has a powerful new way to advertise their now superior service and sway lots of new customers in their direction.
Forums like this have a lot of influence.
Hughes were no doubt betting on new sales in places like Mexico where there is a language barrier, and reaching people in rural areas by TV advertising before they wake up to reality. But other factors can sway the balance, like giving their competition a powerful edge. A powerful competition is capable of upsetting the apple cart down the road.
Hughes, you are reading this, so please read carefully: *** TREATING YOUR CUSTOMERS AS UNFEELING DATA TERMINALS IS NOT CLEVER ***
The cheerleaders are very active on this thread for good reason. |
|
dMarks
Melting Faces For Fun
join:2007-02-09
Leslie, MI
·Millenicom
·HughesNet Satellit..
| reply to Arion
said by Arion : quote:
So the moderate users being there didn't hurt your better new evening prime time speeds, because at the time you first noticed a tremendous increase up to advertised speeds, most moderate users were totally unaware of a new FAP.
If that's the case then where did the speed increase come from?? Just happenstance, or did hughes open the faucet more?? It wasn't happenstance as the transponders were running flat out at capacity. I have a separate dvb card in the computer and thru software can monitor null packets in the stream. The very day they started with the new fap the transponder loadings decreased especially during prime time. It could be that people were getting fapped and it took them a few days or so to figure out what was happening but the proof is in the pudding, there was a dramatic difference in speed. The only part of your post I wish to address Arion is the part I put in bold and underlined. Not all transponders were / are operating at capacity if what Hughes told me is to be believed. I was on a transponder that was heavily flow controlled, meaning Hughes intentionally cut back bandwidth during the time when it experiences heavy traffic. That is why, when the new FAP came out, I saw absolutely no perceivable difference in my speed. Now, Hughes probably had a reason to do that to that particular transponder, but I'm not a heavy user and was on it. On average I use about 30 - 50 MB a day, occasionally going above 100 during patch days for some of my programs.
How many other transponders are being controlled that bad? Just thought I'd throw that out there. Gotta remember that there are more angles to look at than the obvious ones.
--
HN7000S G16 - 1230 MHz|Pro Plan|Windows XP Pro SP2|AMD Athlon 64 FX-57|2GB Dual Channel RAM|2x GeForce 7950 GT 512MB|250GB HDD |
|
Brad R
join:2007-05-06
Collingwood, ON
| reply to Arion
said by Arion :It all boils down to this. The policy was a strategic decision by Hughes to allow an increase in customer base utilizing existent bandwidth and to allow an increase in prime time performance which was the number one gripe on all the forums. The former, I'll grant you. HN had to change something if they're adding 10,000 new customers per month. But if they wanted to improve prime time performance, they could have come up with a new policy that works to shift more load to off-hours. Instead, they did the opposite: there used to be a larger "bucket" from 2 am to 5 am. Now it's the same, 24 hours a day.
Best theory I've heard so far is the "stealth price increase." If customers are locked into price contracts, pressure them to upgrade to a higher plan. |
|
v8rail
join:2003-10-13
Ash Fork, AZ
·HughesNet Satellit..
| reply to Arion
said by Arion :Regardless of how it's marketed Hughes isn't true broadband and we all know it. It's a bottom line business. We are told we have a bucket of 200mb or 375mb ect, but the bandwidth doesn't exist to even give each customer that much on a day in and day out basis. They have these things modeled very precisely. Most of the customers stay well below the fap limit. If Hughes customer base continues to grow although perhaps slower than before they will be happy. I don't think they will be disappointed at all to see the heavier users to to wireless or a different provider. It just gives them more room to add the more "economical" users and that gives Hughes a larger bottom line. For every subscriber that quits who uses a full 200mb a day they can replace that one subscriber with two 100mb users. I agree most likely that is what HN wants, but I disagree that this happens, not with the advertising they are running. HN sells themself as broadband provider and they sell themself as an alternative to EVDO or WISP. We know they are not, but I'm pretty sure most of the 10000 new subscribers a month don't know. I think thats why we already have the prime time slow downs back. Most moderate users that left are replaced with "heavy users"....
And my prime time slow downs are worst then before the new FAP. That tells me that you are just lucky that you get in the moment faster speeds, enjoy it, it will not last long
--
DW7000 release 5.4.0.33, 117W:1230, pro, router 66.82.158.77, rate code 256k 2/3 (TC), signal usually 80 |
|
bumwolf
join:2007-04-21
Florence, AL
| Word of mouth will eventually bite them in the @$$. I've already talked a few neighbors out of HughesNet not to mention some fellow students of mine who are trapped out in the sticks like I am. If this is a ploy to get rid of the heavy customers and rake in some more dunderheads it's not going to work. Not to mention the 500+ equipment cost pricetag that scares more people away than the FAP does. Besides just regular surfing and doing anything on the net you dance with the devil with Fappage. When does the next quarter begin I want to wait and see if they make any changes then. Wonder if the executive who thought this little thing up gets fired.
--
Hughesnet | DW7000 | Pro Package | Windows XP SP2 | AMD Athlon 64 3000+ | 1GB RAM | ATI Radeon 9550 256MB | 250GB HDD |
|
Just Rachel
occasional optimist
Premium
join:2003-07-10
Mccloud, CA
·HughesNet Satellit..
| You know what?? Some of us have no other options. Works fine for what I use it for. If I ever have the need to download large files, I suppose my daughter's dsl would be my option.
It would sure be nice if all of the negative Hughesnet customers would quit complaining here (does no good), write or call Hughes, drop the service if they have options, etc.
Whiners are annoying.  |
|
v8rail
join:2003-10-13
Ash Fork, AZ
·HughesNet Satellit..
| Rachel,
Good thing there are not many whiners
about the complaining... I see not many complaining
but when you hate that many of us talk about problems and try to make the service better for us... sorry when you have a problem with that then don't read it
dang need to go back stream more music, currently just running at 300MB in the last rolling 24 hours
bumwolf,
surely I talk anybody out of HN... other service avaible then go for it.
Two days ago I nearly hit FAP. A picture site had not made real thumbnails, they was just small displayed full size pictures. Lucky they loaded slow and I catched it... This is also why I started running the FAPmonitor...
--
DW7000 release 5.4.0.33, 117W:1230, pro, router 66.82.158.77, rate code 256k 2/3 (TC), signal usually 80 |
|
