Anyone else thinking WildBlue? in HughesNet Satellite

Anyone else thinking WildBlue? in HughesNet Satellite http://www.dslreports.com/forum/r18344842 en Tue, 01 Dec 2009 00:15:15 EDT Tue, 01 Dec 2009 00:15:15 EDT Re: Anyone else thinking WildBlue? http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,18371198 Piggie : Now that is getting close to a good blues song!!! I may do an arrangement on the lighter side thread if it hasn't also been taken over but people comparing numbers.]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,18371198 Mon, 21 May 2007 13:37:33 EDT Re: Anyone else thinking WildBlue? http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,18371025 hjriver :

said by Piggie

:

upgrading.
Fanboys Banboys, what ya gonna do, when FAP reaches you?

Gloom...Dispair...Agony...over me...Deep...Dark...Depression...Excessive...misery...If I didn't have Hughes FAP...I'd have no FAP at all...Gloom...Dispair...Agony...over me...
--
HN7000S/Satmex6/1150/0.78/pro/Sig level: 60]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,18371025 Mon, 21 May 2007 13:09:52 EDT Re: Anyone else thinking WildBlue? http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,18370668 Arion :
said by v8rail

And you have a problem with us that we try to figure out how much bandwidth we lost and how we can get most of the little HN left us.

V8

Find even once where I have criticized you for trying to find out a way for you or anyone else to maximize bandwidth or figure out how the new fap is working and I'll apologize to you. Even one instance!! I have stated a number of times even up to a comment I made last night that it's impossible to "abuse" the system. That's what the fap is for.

And neither have I criticized anyone else for experimenting to see what you can get out of the system. That's as valid of an experiment as the speed tests that I've been criticized for doing. I think you have me confused with someone else on those points.

What I object to is the anger that has been directed at times towards me and others for daring to say that we like the system and the performance increase that were seeing after the fap policy change. I'll never defend how Hughes has done it because they are providing a moving target that's impossible to hit. But, even as you and others have freedom of speech to say that the new system sucks and Hughes is taking advantage of you I also have freedom of speech to say that the result is beneficial to me in my experience with the system. There should be room for both viewpoints to be expressed without the unnecessary anger that has been displayed by some towards us who have been benefited by the change. :)
--
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]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,18370668 Mon, 21 May 2007 12:07:35 EDT Re: Anyone else thinking WildBlue? http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,18370388 v8rail :

said by Arion

:

If you've been lurking on the forum for awhile you would of noticed that most of the "technical" help offered to people here before was in troubleshooting their systems as to why things were running so slowly. People where wondering if there was something wrong with there systems. And many of us offered our help in troubleshooting. Perhaps there is a reason why in the last month we have not had to help people as much with troubleshooting unexplainable system slowdowns....hmmmmm.

And you have a problem with us that we try to figure out how much bandwidth we lost and how we can get most of the little HN left us. So there is no difference, just that for you speed is important, for many of us the bandwidth.
And again that there are slowdowns is in the fatprint and in the HN advertisement. That they cut down bandwidth is only in the fineprint and they still advertise the old bandwidth numbers :mad:
--
DW7000 release 5.4.0.33, 117W:1230, pro, router 66.82.158.77, rate code 256k 2/3 (TC), signal usually 80]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,18370388 Mon, 21 May 2007 11:07:31 EDT Re: Anyone else thinking WildBlue? http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,18370381 DickDastardl : YEA! And me too, what v8rail said. :uhh: Hear! Hear! :D]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,18370381 Mon, 21 May 2007 11:06:08 EDT Re: Anyone else thinking WildBlue? http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,18370236 Arion :

quote:
At least we now know who you are! The number of different member names Hughes is using is amazing, and the dates they joined indicate Hughes has been sneakily trying to sway opinion here for years.

Wow,,,Hughes must be all powerful and I guess I must be a Hughes plant!! I must be on their payroll or something. LOL Maybe the mods should look into this. I've heard of conspiracies before but that's ridiculous. Few users of Hughes, WB or the other providers even post on such forums and I doubt that they care enough about the end users that they are willing to devote resources to infiltrate the forums. Wow...I thought I heard it all. If I was on the payroll then why am I paying $69 a month for my service. Maybe I ought to call them and ask for free service.

Seriously though, it's obvious that they care little for the end user. It's a numbers game of trying to balance an acceptable level of service on one hand and trying to keep as many customers as possible on the other hand and continue to grow.

This fap flap will probably die down after awhile and hopefully things will settle down. If you've been lurking on the forum for awhile you would of noticed that most of the "technical" help offered to people here before was in troubleshooting their systems as to why things were running so slowly. People where wondering if there was something wrong with there systems. And many of us offered our help in troubleshooting. Perhaps there is a reason why in the last month we have not had to help people as much with troubleshooting unexplainable system slowdowns....hmmmmm. ;)

I do however fully agree that these forums cause people to consider whether or not it's worth the hassle to try satellite service. It's not just the hughes forums either. Go to any of the WB forums or the one way forums and a potential user is left with mainly complaints and dashed expectations.

It's human nature to primarily complain and grouse when things are not going as expected and these forums are a lightning rod for such discussions. People rarely go to them and post that things are going well and that they are happy and satisfied with there systems.

I think that the "average" user of 150mb a day or so is pretty content with their system regardless if it's got a hughes sticker or a WB sticker on it. I would be perfectly content with recommending WB or having a WB system if it met or exceeded the performance I get with my system.

Of course sat internet is more expensive than it's terrestrial cousins and the performance is less due to latency and bandwidth limitations so I would certainly advise anyone reading these forums trying to explore if it's right for them to carefully look at all available options and if wireless or DSL is an option in your neighborhood you would probably not be smart to go with Hughes, WB or the offshoots.

But for those of us who have no other options, the systems work and work well within their limitations. If someone does their homework before getting the systems, does the research by visiting the forums and doing some reading of the manuals and is around when the system is installed and knows what to look for for making sure you get a good install I would tell them that these systems work and work well.

It's yet to be seen how much of a "mistake" Hughes has made with this new policy. The WB people were ganging up on their provider last fall when the packet scheduler modules were changed out which resulted in the latency almost doubling and WB had to put up with a lot of bad press over it. People vote with there feet and if there is a wholesale exodus from the Hughes subscriber rolls over the next quarter then Hughes will have it's answer. I consider myself an "average and moderate" user of the service. My system works well, it performs above the design specifications and I'm happy with it even after the fap change. If that changes I certainly am willing to add my voice to the naysayers.
--
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]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,18370236 Mon, 21 May 2007 10:33:04 EDT Re: Anyone else thinking WildBlue? http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,18370092 Siryak :

said by dino195

:

I hear you there Arion. I live where I can step out my back door and fish, lots of deer and wild game around and I love it. I was very happy with the service before they put the new FAP in place but I can't see being Fapped twice in a week for just browsing the web. The old FAP was reasonable and it really irks me that they would flip the script on us only 2 weeks after installation. If I had had that info before hand, I would have gone with Wild Blue. Not only were they deceitful about the FAP but they also hit our credit card for the full amount of the installation when the payments were supposed to be spread out over 15 months. They have lost all credibility with me.

I just got back from fishing lol. :o
--
Wildblue Pro Pack / Beam 40 / Laredo NOC / Windows MCE SP2]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,18370092 Mon, 21 May 2007 10:05:11 EDT Re: Anyone else thinking WildBlue? http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,18369797 anon : This is a clean, professional forum that used to be dominated by technically experienced people willing to help other folks keep their systems running.

All of that changed around four weeks ago when Hughes stupidly and blindly changed the rules. It is now almost entirely dominated by annoyance and frustration from normal, non-criminal people who feel cheated and insulted, with Hughes trying to smooth things over under various disguises. At least we now know who you are! The number of different member names Hughes is using is amazing, and the dates they joined indicate Hughes has been sneakily trying to sway opinion here for years.

And at the same time refusing to discuss their self serving policies openly.

Someone observed around 100 years ago: "Power corrupts, and absolute power corrupts absolutely." Very appropriate. With more new rural or under serviced customer areas than they can currently handle, Hughes is making the fateful mistake of treating small customers like dirt.

But small customers are a substantial and necessary portion of their income.

Little do they seem to understand that each one they insult, restrict, lie to, or refuse to openly communicate with, when suddenly faced with a car that tries to run over the driver, will no longer tell their neighbours, friends, relatives, business associates, churches, and a formidably broad spectrum associations and groups in nearby towns that Hughes has its problems but overall it works.

Instead they will advise everyone to stay away at all cost.

Just as the hornets nest on this forum is a powerful negative message to anyone who strays here, rural areas will become saturated with the same thing.

If they let that happen, Hughes' over abundant new customer base will look very different.

I've been there. With an engineering, not sales background, I have run a company with technical products and non technical users. I learned a lot.

The basic problem, beyond just plain greed and uncaring for our fellow humans, is that ALL of Hughes' top dogs are engineers. None of them understand PEOPLE, and it shows in their self serving, secretive actions. ]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,18369797 Mon, 21 May 2007 08:57:40 EDT Re: Anyone else thinking WildBlue? http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,18369680 Arion :

said by IzzyJG99

:

Get this...

Just got off the phone with a friend of mine in the United States Army. HughesNet and a number of other companies were contacted by the US Military. They're going to contract HughesNet and other Satellite ISP's to give support/coverage to in the field to soldiers. So we may see a massive slow down that's bogged down by all the new potential users. According to my friend..they're going to have several dishes per F.O.B. in Iraq and Aghanistan sometime in 2008.

This shouldn't effect us Izzy. The satellites that we use are not even visible to those overseas in the middle east. Our satellites are below the horizon from their perspective. The only issue would be what noc are they going to be using?? But since Hughes has been active overseas for quite a few years they must have some noc's on the other side of the pond to handle the traffic over there.
--
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]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,18369680 Mon, 21 May 2007 08:15:46 EDT Re: Anyone else thinking WildBlue? http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,18369447 Brad R :

said by Piggie

:

Some of the pages they go to force feed advertisements that are videos they can't even stop.

I know this is off-topic, but...two words: Opera Browser. It has superb ad-blocking tools. I have most ads blocked now.]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,18369447 Mon, 21 May 2007 05:49:24 EDT Re: Anyone else thinking WildBlue? http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,18368998 v8rail : Arion,

I agree with a lot you are saying. I love the place I live, no power company to pay, no water and sewer company, no landline, just a private dirt road ...

I had a good running DSL line before I moved and needed to sign up with HN. I still had no problem and got most the time the service I needed from HN.

But actually I have not much a problem with you, again I understand your standpoint and I also think when you are a little longer customer with HN you will understand why I don't believe that HN did the FAP change to give the customers a better speed. Like Piggie said, they never did it before and I'm sure they did it not now.

I have a problem with fanboy. In the topics where some of us try to figure out what hughes did, and he is just posting his BS that we did not read the fineprint and that we are bandwidth hogs. Most of us did read the fineprint and most did it better then him. Also most of us was just normal regular users. He tells us we are whiners, but in near every post he whines about prime time speed. I know he uses just the tactics of a troll and I should not feed the trolls ... but sometimes it happens ;)

Then WB, most likely I would switch. I don't need the HN speed anyway, I throttle all downloads anyway, gives me more time to react when something does not look right. Also I decided in the beginning that the pro plan fits my bandwith need and I was for six years not in the 5% HN stopped "hogging" with the FAP. But hopefully I have broadband in four months, so it is just to big of a investment for this short time.

I posted before, the new FAP was FOR ME also partially positive.
- I pay $20 less a month, before april 18th HN did not let me switch.
- Got on a new router, have more prime time slow down, but it lets me listening to streaming radio. Before I could not listen and HN TS told me the problem was on my side ... yeah right :mad:

But all this makes it not correct what they did april 18th and I also disapprove that TS lies everytime they open their mouth (I know, they don't know it better ...it is HN fault).
--
DW7000 release 5.4.0.33, 117W:1230, pro, router 66.82.158.77, rate code 256k 2/3 (TC), signal usually 80]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,18368998 Mon, 21 May 2007 00:57:15 EDT Re: Anyone else thinking WildBlue? http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,18368836 IzzyJG99 : Get this...

Just got off the phone with a friend of mine in the United States Army. HughesNet and a number of other companies were contacted by the US Military. They're going to contract HughesNet and other Satellite ISP's to give support/coverage to in the field to soldiers. So we may see a massive slow down that's bogged down by all the new potential users. According to my friend..they're going to have several dishes per F.O.B. in Iraq and Aghanistan sometime in 2008.]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,18368836 Mon, 21 May 2007 00:12:54 EDT Re: Anyone else thinking WildBlue? http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,18368822 dino195 : I hear you there Arion. I live where I can step out my back door and fish, lots of deer and wild game around and I love it. I was very happy with the service before they put the new FAP in place but I can't see being Fapped twice in a week for just browsing the web. The old FAP was reasonable and it really irks me that they would flip the script on us only 2 weeks after installation. If I had had that info before hand, I would have gone with Wild Blue. Not only were they deceitful about the FAP but they also hit our credit card for the full amount of the installation when the payments were supposed to be spread out over 15 months. They have lost all credibility with me.
--
HN7000S 93 West 1086 WRT54G XPpro/Debian Sarge
]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,18368822 Mon, 21 May 2007 00:07:30 EDT Re: Anyone else thinking WildBlue? http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,18368732 Arion : What is going on since april 18th is just too much. Arion I hope for you that HN has really implemented a sophisticated system, but most likely you are throwing your $$$ out the window for nothing.

I'm Dutch though...You've probably heard about how copper wire was invented?? Two Dutchmen fighting over a penny. I sure don't feel like I'm being taken advantage of or throwing away my money.

I have never had true broadband. I have lived in the boonies for the last 15 years and have been stuck with 28.8 dial up, and that with noisy lines to boot. Perhaps if I had ever experienced a cable connection then I would have a better frame of reference.

While typing this I just DL the latest copy of apple quick time (20mb) in order to view the graphics package about the Hughes fap patent. I DL at 1mb speed. About 2 minutes and I had the file. That would of taken me at least an hour with my old dial up connection. I guess it's all in how you look at it. The performance I'm getting living out in the sticks seems like a real bargain to me even though it's costing me $69 a month. I couldn't really do what I do now on dial up...at least that's how I look at it.

BTW since the thread was about WB, if I had WB and was getting this sort of performance I would certainly be a fan of WB. I have no love for Hughes or their employees. It's just that the system works and fulfills my expectations and yes...if something comes along either cheaper or more performance for the same $ then I would be a fool to stay with Hughes. But that's the price I pay for living in the sticks. I saw a 300# bear the other day by me. I can't do that in the city. :)
--
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]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,18368732 Sun, 20 May 2007 23:46:34 EDT Re: Anyone else thinking WildBlue? http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,18368704 Piggie : I was on G11, 1350 and more of the time on 1410, for 30 months of service. Evening slow downs were minimal. Slowing to 600kbps or so from peaks of 1.1mbps which held most of the time. It was obvious from my good fortune of being on G11 and listening to the SatMex people that SM bird was way way over sold. So were a few others. So why in 2.5 years was G11 never oversold? Was I just dumb lucky?

The other comment is fine, Hughes promised high speeds and a bucket and refill rate. Which now is apparently diametrically in opposition.

But the new rules affect everyone 24/7, where as the slow downs mainly affected people for a few hours a day. The slow downs were isolated to a few birds, which means they didn't manage those birds, as other people didn't have the problem. Some slow down but not modem speeds at prime time.

From the customer service chats I saw posted here, the one common thing now is not reset your modem, but why don't you upgrade.

It was not done for the light users, it was done to increase profits.

I find it interesting that Arion would by a 350 meg bucket for 100m a day habit. That is exactly what they wanted him to do, and obviously he has the extra money that it's a good game to play.

So they should say on their sign up page. If you expect to be considered an economical user and actually get these speeds advertised, please buy a bucket size 3 times your normal daily expected usage.

The other thing I can't get over was they said when I signed up they already had the top 5% under control with the FAP I was totally aware I had bought into. But now they say again, it's the top 5%.

When do they stop saying it's the top 5%? Probably never. Why?

Well think about this. It has been 6 or 7 years since their last change in FAP policy. The internet is with out a doubt a lot more bandwidth intensive (except those only reading text pages).

Hence, those 6 years ago that didn't really change their internet habits, now probably use 3 to 4 times more bandwidth than they did in the past. So more of the people, or at least the people up near the top of usage, that didn't both them before , are now HOGS, though basically they didn't change much in their habits. Sure they watch maybe more movies than they did. Some of the pages they go to force feed advertisements that are videos they can't even stop. But they spend about the same amount of time and visit about the same amount of sites as they did 6 years ago. It's the sites that have changed.

Now, since Hughes can't change that part, they punish their customers. This is why I say it's the top end of the moderate users that are being really affected. And now due to limited refills from non economical users (something 99% of them don't even know about cause they don't read this forum).

So really it was the heavy surfers that were giving Hughes the problem this time. Not so much the huge down loaders. Now the heavy web surfers are part of the NEW 5%, the Problem sector.

Ok, if you keep extrapolating this into the future, there will be an another reduction in FAP in another so many years. And so on and so on.

Another thing not to forget, since the fanboys tell the haters that instantly they saw a prime time speed increase, then indeed it was because so many hater hogs were FAPped.

But most of the heavy moderates had not yet hit their first FAP from 8th level of the underworld. A few did, but if my 3 neighbors are typical it took them a week or so to have that really heavy day that nailed them. So it was not the heavy moderate user that was were using the bandwidth, but indeed they are the target now, and told to just upgrade.

It's all bottom line, not to benefit anyone but Hughes, and reward those that have the money to spend to buy 3 times the actual band width they need. If the old FAP got rid of the 5% bad boy, then now they found yet 5% more, it would seem that it's more like they don't want 10% of the users so they can load the transponders higher.

Other's say they will not now load more people on, hog wash! They did in the past, so what would stop them now? A company that would take away 66% of your bandwidth over night with a 24 hour penalty should have no qualms or any scruples to load those transonders and gateway's again.

After all, they say, in plain English, they don't guarntee their advertised speeds.................

They never have said they want you buy 3 times as much. You look at a 200 M bucket and say cool. Then find out if you use more than 50 to 60 of that a day and you're not an economical user. You call to complain, they suggest upgrading. That sound just like bait and switch to me.

Fanboys Banboys, what ya gonna do, when FAP reaches you?
--
| 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)|]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,18368704 Sun, 20 May 2007 23:39:35 EDT Re: Anyone else thinking WildBlue? http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,18368317 v8rail :

said by Brad R

said by Arion

:

I hope you are able to dump your service, get out of your contracts and find an alternative...but don't worry, something else will pop up to get you mad. :)

Same here, six year direcway customer. As long as the service is not as bad as HN I don't see it happen. HN had never great customer care in this six years, I tolerated their abuse. What is going on since april 18th is just too much. Arion I hope for you that HN has really implemented a sophisticated system, but most likely you are throwing your $$$ out the window for nothing. I base that conclusion on the usage page, that is so simple to program it is just laughable that it is still not running error free.

BTW I like that:
"There's really no way you can take advantage of the service or the system. That's what the fap is for. When you go over that "point" whatever the magic number is that's when the brakes go on."
hopefully fanboy reads that, that was true before april 18th and is still true.
--
DW7000 release 5.4.0.33, 117W:1230, pro, router 66.82.158.77, rate code 256k 2/3 (TC), signal usually 80]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,18368317 Sun, 20 May 2007 22:17:31 EDT Re: Anyone else thinking WildBlue? http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,18368259 dino195 : "There's really no way you can take advantage of the service or the system. That's what the FAP is for. When you go over that "point" whatever the magic number is that's when the brakes go on."

Fine, but that magic number is not arbitrary. I signed up for one magic number and ended up with another. That is breech of contract.

An 82% reduction in bandwidth is unacceptable. Bottom line. They have oversold their capabilities and existing customers are paying the price. If they want to reduce the new subscribers by 82% fine, as long as they say so up front. However, When I signed on it was for a different agreement plain and simple.

If an 82% reduction in agreed upon service is OK with you then more power to you. I'm just glad your not managing my finances.
--
HN7000S 93 West 1086 WRT54G XPpro/Debian Sarge
]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,18368259 Sun, 20 May 2007 22:06:49 EDT Re: Anyone else thinking WildBlue? http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,18368099 Brad R :

said by Arion

:

I hope you are able to dump your service, get out of your contracts and find an alternative...but don't worry, something else will pop up to get you mad. :)

Perhaps, but I doubt it. I was content with HN for 23 months, including an entire day when AMC9 was out of service, countless lesser outages, and many stupid blockages of their SMTP server. I lived with it quietly. And I've never once complained about slow speeds.

But I did sign up for a certain amount of bandwidth, and now they want to cut me to 40% of that amount for the same price. And slap me with a 24-hour "time-out" if I accidentally go over. And adding insult to injury, try to convince me that this is a benefit to me.

Maybe my new service will offer that much provocation. But I think probably not.]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,18368099 Sun, 20 May 2007 21:34:05 EDT Re: Anyone else thinking WildBlue? http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,18368003 Arion : Us fanboys though aren't the ones grousing about the service lately. I mean lets be realistic. Everyone looks at the policy as to how it effects them and their level of service, right??

Those of us who like the way it is have been benefited since the change in policy...those who don't like it feel that they are being shortchanged in what they are paying for.

There's really no way you can take advantage of the service or the system. That's what the fap is for. When you go over that "point" whatever the magic number is that's when the brakes go on.

As far as speed test's happen to go why does it matter to anyone if we use part of our bucket to run speed tests as opposed to those of you that use yours to dl youtubes, files or whatever?? I go back to the same point time and time again but I think it's relevant. The #1 complaint before the new policy was the abysmally slow prime time speeds. For some it was as bad as dial up. Click on a graphics intensive website and go get a cup of coffee. Post after post of folks asking if there was something wrong with their system, ect.

Like it or not the evidence shows that the prime time speeds started to go way up for a lot of us at the same time the new policy was implemented. Is it too great of a stretch of logic to conclude that the new fap policy had eased up the congestion somewhat during prime time?? I think that's a reasonable assumption.

Your mileage may vary but I use the internet primarily for going to my favorite sites and doing various research activities. Because most of what I do is text based I don't run through a large amount of bandwidth normally. In addition after reading through the fap patent I upgraded to the pro plan to make sure that the system saw me as an economical user. The system rewards me by giving me a good download speed...even during prime useage hours most of the time.

I enjoyed the service before the change as I had good performance most of the time. Since the change has been even better. I don't find anyone approving of how Hughes implemented this, the quality of their technical or customer service support or for that matter about anything that has to do with "big business" of which Hughes definitely is. I just continue to find myself somewhat bemused by the ire us "fanboys" seem to earn from those of you on a continual rant fest. It really seems to bother some of you that their are those of us out here who like the service, the speeds and are not frothing at the mouth. Those of you "haters" (I guess I can say that if I don't mind being a fanboy) I hope you are able to dump your service, get out of your contracts and find an alternative...but don't worry, something else will pop up to get you mad. :)
--
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]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,18368003 Sun, 20 May 2007 21:14:32 EDT Re: Anyone else thinking WildBlue? http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,18367738 v8rail : six years ago when I signed up with hughes this was already there:

Actual speeds vary based on the amount of traffic on the Internet, content on a particular Website, or by the overall performance and configuration of your computer. Stated speeds and uninterrupted use of service are not guaranteed. Actual speeds will likely be lower than speed indicated during peak hours.

and they whine about speed :huh: yeah right.....
--
DW7000 release 5.4.0.33, 117W:1230, pro, router 66.82.158.77, rate code 256k 2/3 (TC), signal usually 80]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,18367738 Sun, 20 May 2007 20:18:32 EDT Re: Anyone else thinking WildBlue? http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,18367589 Piggie :

said by v8rail

:

But for me it is also clear why some of the fanboy's/gal's hate it that much that we talk about bandwidth. They did not read the bolt print on the contact they signed. :huh:
contract clearly shows that the advertised speeds are not guaranteed, better it did even tell them that there will be peak slow downs. They whined long enough and believe now that HN made the new FAP to help them (sure.... ;)). It's sad but they fight US because they believe that we moderate users will bring their daily speed tests down. ;)

They also don't read the really bold print of new 200 or 375 bucket that allows more downloads, photos, etc etc.

Just as they sold high speeds they also sold a bucket. No one has ever been able to use over their bucket.

All I hear from the FanBoys is the same thing over and over. The FAP helps me because I only use a tiny bit.

So if they only use a tiny bit of the bandwidth they are sold, what is the difference in only getting a tiny bit of the speed they were sold. As stated, they don't promise those top end speeds.
--
| 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)|]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,18367589 Sun, 20 May 2007 19:46:56 EDT Re: Anyone else thinking WildBlue? http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,18367316 dino195 : I finally got FAPed twice this week. Only happened to me once before the new FAP was put in place and that was from DLing updates when I first got the service. I am by no means a "power user" and the old FAP policy worked fine for me. Anyone who says that there are only a handfull of whiners on here needs to look at the Hughes reviews. The numbers speak for themselves. To throttle bandwidth even more so with ever increasing content on the web is a huge step backwards and not what we agreed to when we signed our contract. There is no justification for this and it's a slap in the face for them to be signing ten thousand new customers a month without investing more into their infrastructure and not being able to properly service the existing customer base. I hope the government steps in and FAPs Hughes around a little!
--
HN7000S 93 West 1086 WRT54G XPpro/Debian Sarge
]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,18367316 Sun, 20 May 2007 18:47:33 EDT Re: Anyone else thinking WildBlue? http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,18364989 v8rail : Brad,

hopefully soon I can join the "ex hughesnet club" too, can't wait.

But for me it is also clear why some of the fanboy's/gal's hate it that much that we talk about bandwidth. They did not read the bolt print on the contact they signed. :huh:
contract clearly shows that the advertised speeds are not guaranteed, better it did even tell them that there will be peak slow downs. They whined long enough and believe now that HN made the new FAP to help them (sure.... ;)). It's sad but they fight US because they believe that we moderate users will bring their daily speed tests down. ;)
--
DW7000 release 5.4.0.33, 117W:1230, pro, router 66.82.158.77, rate code 256k 2/3 (TC), signal usually 80]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,18364989 Sun, 20 May 2007 10:32:27 EDT Re: Anyone else thinking WildBlue? http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,18363305 v8rail :

said by sovtman

:

Over last 200 hours:

Slacking! I can do better than that!

sure you can :D

For a couple hours I got weak today, but I'm back at 375 MB. :D

Actually hopefully HN does cut the guys (and gals) that run useless speedtest during peak time .... I'm sure without them my streaming radio would work better :o ... but it is not bad with maybe aone reboot every five hours ;)]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,18363305 Sun, 20 May 2007 09:26:26 EDT Re: Anyone else thinking WildBlue? http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,18364506 Brad R :

said by Just Rachel

:

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.

Write or call Hughes: done both, waste of time.
Drop the service: I'm getting new service this week; not everyone can.

After I get the new services I'm going to post the results of some FAP tests, and then I'll be outa here. My very sincere condolences to those who don't have an alternate service to switch to....keep complaining, it's your only hope.]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,18364506 Sun, 20 May 2007 06:31:41 EDT Re: Anyone else thinking WildBlue? http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,18363200 sovtman :

said by v8rail

:

Rachel,
dang need to go back stream more music, currently just running at 300MB in the last rolling 24 hours :D :D :D :D :D

375MB, day in and day out, baby!

A full bucket for more than an hour is a waste of resources!

{added}

Over last 200 hours:

Slacking! I can do better than that!]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,18363200 Sat, 19 May 2007 21:32:22 EDT Re: Anyone else thinking WildBlue? http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,18363186 hjriver :

said by Just Rachel

:

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. :hmm:

I think you will find it works fine for the majority of HN users. It's just a handful of diehard whiners here and it's the same old thing day after day. If they really are that dissatisfied then they would have been long gone. I think some just like to bitch. HN is not that bad except for their customer service. It now since the new FAP does exactly what it was advertised to do. I researched and got expert advice and read the fine print. It's not cable, it's not DSL, it's not EVDO and it's a hell of a lot better than dialup.
--
HN7000S/Satmex6/1150/0.78/pro/Sig level: 60]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,18363186 Sat, 19 May 2007 21:27:24 EDT Re: Anyone else thinking WildBlue? http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,18362442 v8rail : Rachel,

Good thing there are not many whiners :D

about the complaining... I see not many complaining :D

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 :D :D :D :D :D

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]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,18362442 Sat, 19 May 2007 18:33:08 EDT Re: Anyone else thinking WildBlue? http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,18362388 Just Rachel : 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. :hmm:]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,18362388 Sat, 19 May 2007 18:14:30 EDT Re: Anyone else thinking WildBlue? http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,18361740 bumwolf : 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]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,18361740 Sat, 19 May 2007 14:59:37 EDT Re: Anyone else thinking WildBlue? http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,18360710 v8rail :

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 :huh:
--
DW7000 release 5.4.0.33, 117W:1230, pro, router 66.82.158.77, rate code 256k 2/3 (TC), signal usually 80]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,18360710 Sat, 19 May 2007 10:41:00 EDT Re: Anyone else thinking WildBlue? http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,18360393 Brad R :

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.]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,18360393 Sat, 19 May 2007 08:52:02 EDT Re: Anyone else thinking WildBlue? http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,18360340 dMarks :

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]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,18360340 Sat, 19 May 2007 08:30:47 EDT Re: Anyone else thinking WildBlue? http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,18360288 anon : 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.]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,18360288 Sat, 19 May 2007 07:59:58 EDT Re: Anyone else thinking WildBlue? http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,18360206 Brad R :

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?]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,18360206 Sat, 19 May 2007 06:56:55 EDT Re: Anyone else thinking WildBlue? http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,18360054 Arion :

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]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,18360054 Sat, 19 May 2007 04:17:50 EDT Re: Anyone else thinking WildBlue? http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,18359996 Piggie :

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)|]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,18359996 Sat, 19 May 2007 03:10:14 EDT Re: Anyone else thinking WildBlue? http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,18359756 corvettez06u : WOO HOO! The thread I started got posted in a news article on the website. :D]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,18359756 Sat, 19 May 2007 01:11:51 EDT Re: Anyone else thinking WildBlue? http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,18358208 v8rail :

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]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,18358208 Fri, 18 May 2007 20:28:43 EDT Re: Anyone else thinking WildBlue? http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,18357945 challass : Bubble, bubble, toil and trouble,
Fire burn and Hughesnet bubble!

Heee, heee, heee, heee! :D
--
HN7000S 113:W:0990 Firm Ware:5.4.0.33 Pro+ Vista Home Premium]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,18357945 Fri, 18 May 2007 19:32:39 EDT Re: Anyone else thinking WildBlue? http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,18357918 hjriver :

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]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,18357918 Fri, 18 May 2007 19:27:25 EDT Re: Anyone else thinking WildBlue? http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,18357858 challass : If we touch the right nerve, maybe we'll make the frog's leg jump! :D
--
HN7000S 113:W:0990 Firm Ware:5.4.0.33 Pro+ Vista Home Premium]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,18357858 Fri, 18 May 2007 19:17:22 EDT Re: Anyone else thinking WildBlue? http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,18357836 anon : The Hughes cheerleaders / wolves in sheep's clothing are really active on this thread aren't they?

Maybe the topic touched a nerve...?]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,18357836 Fri, 18 May 2007 19:13:35 EDT Re: Anyone else thinking WildBlue? http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,18357816 v8rail :

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 ... :D

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 ........ :huh:]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,18357816 Fri, 18 May 2007 19:09:50 EDT Re: Anyone else thinking WildBlue? http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,18357799 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. 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]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,18357799 Fri, 18 May 2007 19:06:48 EDT Re: Anyone else thinking WildBlue? http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,18357690 DickDastardl :

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!]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,18357690 Fri, 18 May 2007 18:44:05 EDT Re: Anyone else thinking WildBlue? http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,18357468 dbirdman : 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!]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,18357468 Fri, 18 May 2007 18:00:14 EDT Re: Anyone else thinking WildBlue? http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,18357379 v8rail : Piggie,

I agree absolutly. Also to many people do not care about others. As long as they see on their speed monitors good numbers they are happy....

said by hjriver

:

...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. The other 95 percent now have the speeds they were promised.

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.

whaaaa what a joke :uhh:...

...but anyway need to go back playing "power user" .... :D :D]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,18357379 Fri, 18 May 2007 17:40:37 EDT Re: Anyone else thinking WildBlue? http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,18357066 hjriver :

said by Piggie

said by hjriver

:

Where have you been? Customer Service in the U.S. is long gone! Hughesnet is no different than any other company.

I don't "assume" anything. I have been fighting the battle for years. My mortgage company outsourced to India so I have to demand for them to put someone on who can speak English and get transferred to Florida, HP computers CS is mostly offshore, again I demand someone who speaks English and get transferred. The list goes on and on. Verizon here in Virginia is a nightmare for CS as it's in Jacksonville Florida and their CS people have heavy spanish accents. It's a good thing that the service is excellent as most of their workers here are from the old GTE phone system and are locals. Their customer service sucks.

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.

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. 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.
--
HN7000S/Satmex6/1150/0.78/pro/Sig level: 60]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,18357066 Fri, 18 May 2007 16:36:02 EDT Re: Anyone else thinking WildBlue? http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,18356566 Piggie :

said by hjriver

:

Where have you been? Customer Service in the U.S. is long gone! Hughesnet is no different than any other company.

One of Windstream's company policies is to keep their customer service stateside. And they do have good CS.

HJ, I think the world could take everything away from you and you would just assume it was the way of the future.

In my opinion that is 99% what is wrong with this country now. People are just taking it, even when they have an alternative and for now we still have a voice.
--
| 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)|]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,18356566 Fri, 18 May 2007 14:52:06 EDT Re: Anyone else thinking WildBlue? http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,18356093 IzzyJG99 : Hughes doesn't respond to any complaints because they know we've got nothing better to use for an internet connection. We need them if we want to browse at all, really. Where I live you can't even dial-up anymore. Firstly because Bellsouth has deactivated the little switchers that allow data over phone line and because the speeds were only 14.4kbps.]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,18356093 Fri, 18 May 2007 13:19:07 EDT Re: Anyone else thinking WildBlue? http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,18356078 Arion : Different strokes for different folks. When they changed the Fap policy I saw an immediate performance increase. Although I wouldn't like to be down for 24 hours instead of just 4 or 5 it has caused me to be more judicious in my downloading and I also spent another $10 a month for a bigger bucket and an extra 300kbps in speed. (from 700 on home to 1000 on pro) Although there have been some slowdowns during prime time along with a few days of sub 400kbps speeds during prime time the performance overall for me has been vastly improved.

Now on WB. They have their new satellite in orbit and for a while until the transponders fill up the subscribers are going to have pretty good speeds (although I guess latency still sucks) and WB can afford to back off on their fap just a little bit.

Fast forward to when the satellite fills up then they will be in the same boat as Hughes and will have to again restrict either speeds or tighten up the fap policy or both. Later on this year I believe that Hughes new satellite will be launched and some users and business will transfer over to the KA band spot beam technology and Hughes system will probably loosen back up a little. Tit for tat. It will go on and on.

However one last thing. Hughes is the only company showing even a consistent minimal profit from quarter to quarter and this is only within the last year or so. The division was operating at a loss before then and WB and others have not shown a profit as of yet. If you can't be profitable you sink. Sooner or later the investors at WB are going to start squeezing management to tighten things up so they can be profitable...the result will be either a) the packages will become more expensive...expect the base package to cost what Hughes base package costs, b)the prices of the other packages will go up c) and/or the fap level will again become more restrictive.

I know there is a lot of grousing going on but these companies are not going to operate forever at a loss. If you compare sat internet to wireless or cable then the sat internet will come up at a disadvantage every time. The sat internet mainly is for the big enterprise customers and government that are willing to pay heavy for survivable infrastructure and for us residential and small business customers that have no other high speed option. It is what it is and we cant make it what it isn't. Ya can't pound the square peg into a round hole and expect it to fit well. :)
--
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]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,18356078 Fri, 18 May 2007 13:16:29 EDT Re: Anyone else thinking WildBlue? http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,18355891 hjriver : Where have you been? Customer Service in the U.S. is long gone! Hughesnet is no different than any other company.
--
HN7000S/Satmex6/1150/0.78/pro/Sig level: 60]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,18355891 Fri, 18 May 2007 12:40:17 EDT Re: Anyone else thinking WildBlue? http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,18355854 DickDastardl : It seems like customer service has become a passing fad.

I personally don't think adding more money to the plans just to enable a monthly allowance type FAP is in our best interest. Don't give Hughesnet any ideas to take any more advantage of us. I think we're already paying too much for far too little. I'm glad to see others in my boat. My download behaviors would be better served with a monthly FAP system as well.

Think about it people - Wildblue can do this and Hughes can't? There shouldn't be mercy for Hughes and understanding of their tactics. They have the money to make things better for us not worse. Just look at their commercials. They've monopolized every tv station in the nation with these commercials. I don't even know why they need all these commercials. But having the extra money for so much advertising does show that they do have the funds to make their customers Internet experience better.

There's a mindset here. And it should be to provide a better experience for the customers. But it's not. It just consistently looks as bitter as I feel. Has anyone heard from Hughes about our dissatisfaction? Why hasn't there been a response from them? Doesn't it make you wonder? But the true question is - what can we do about this? I really wish WildBlue could get their technical issues in place because I really do want to jump ship. But not if I'm about to jump in a smaller leaky boat.]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,18355854 Fri, 18 May 2007 12:33:16 EDT Re: Anyone else thinking WildBlue? http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,18355113 InTheSticks3 : Also, WB claims post-FAP speeds of 128 down / 28 up, so you can still use the internet moderately while coming out of it. WB also emails you when you exceed 80% of your FAP, so you do get some warning, and can take appropriate action.

I wish HN would adopt the rolling 30 day, it would fit my internet usage patterns much better than HN's..........
--
| R16 1250 99W | HN7000S 5.4.0.33 | Pro Plan | Windows XP
]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,18355113 Fri, 18 May 2007 10:03:53 EDT Re: Anyone else thinking WildBlue? http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,18350880 IzzyJG99 : If HughesNet was smart they'd add an option for 10 or 20 bucks added a month to your bill to allow you to have monthly allowance of FAP and not daily.]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,18350880 Thu, 17 May 2007 14:54:22 EDT Re: Anyone else thinking WildBlue? http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,18350692 bumwolf : Hindsight is 20/20 but when I bought my system I figured to go with who was in the business the longest. You'd think 10 years the company would have grown invested in better technology increased throughput for everybody maybe kept with internet trends. Boy was I wrong it's sad that we even have a fap bucket in this day in age on any service.
--
Hughesnet | DW7000 | Pro Package | Windows XP SP2 | AMD Athlon 64 3000+ | 1GB RAM | ATI Radeon 9550 256MB | 250GB HDD]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,18350692 Thu, 17 May 2007 14:21:34 EDT Re: Anyone else thinking WildBlue? http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,18349911 anon : The point is that Wild Blue's FAP is usable and flexible for respectful users.

Large downloads can be undertaken to fit YOUR schedule, not Hughes'.

Reasonable management can easily avoid being FAPped for everyone except those with insatiable appetites who are trying to milk every last drop from the system. This means the penalty is a lot less of a concern.

Hughes new FAP is annoying and inconvenient. It causes you to re-shape your life around downloads. Their limit is now unworkably low for many of us. Their refusal to cleanly and openly communicate rubs salt into the wound.

Wild Blue is now miles ahead for responsible users. ]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,18349911 Thu, 17 May 2007 11:58:24 EDT Re: Anyone else thinking WildBlue? http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,18349515 mrpepsi :

said by corvettez06u

:

I think it goes if you download 10GB at day 1, by day 31 (rolling 30 days remember?) you get 10GB back in your bucket. Straight up, no trickle.

Exactly how it works. On Jan 1st if you download 100mb, on Jan 30th you get back that 100mb.

Wildblue's FAP and bandwidth capacity are it's bright shining stars. I've never seen a speed test below 450kbps on my 512kbps plan. If only they'd give us sub 1-second latency. :(
--
Cheyenne : Beam 34]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,18349515 Thu, 17 May 2007 10:48:59 EDT Re: Anyone else thinking WildBlue? http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,18348670 dMarks :

said by Fed Up2 :

Anything interactive, like gaming, is not viable on satellite systems because of the inherent satellite delay, so I am not convinced ping alone is a big issue.

After going through the Attorney General and getting things looked at by Hughes Executive Customer Care, I can do gaming on Satellite. I play EQ2, LOTRO and Vanguard. Even during prime time I can game with only a slight bit of latency (Note: if you PvP, then satellite is definitely not good).

Before I went to the AG though, gaming was indeed impossible on Satellite. I still use my dial-up for gaming though unless I'm using Ventrillo or TeamSpeak at the same time, or am raiding since, with at least EQ2, raiding requires slightly more burst bandwidth than dial-up can provide.

If you're really into gaming and want high speed, find a one-way satellite provider. That's what I used for a long time before switching and kinda wish I didn't, but that's all in the past now.
--
HN7000S G16 - 1230 MHz|Home Plan|Windows XP Pro SP2|AMD Athlon 64 FX-57|2GB Dual Channel RAM|2x GeForce 7950 GT 512MB|250GB HDD]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,18348670 Thu, 17 May 2007 06:27:09 EDT Re: Anyone else thinking WildBlue? http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,18348527 corvettez06u : I think it goes if you download 10GB at day 1, by day 31 (rolling 30 days remember?) you get 10GB back in your bucket. Straight up, no trickle.]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,18348527 Thu, 17 May 2007 04:33:50 EDT Re: Anyone else thinking WildBlue? http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,18348056 Piggie : So that means if you downloaded 17G/30days or 567 Megs a day, everyday exactly, then you would just FAP toward the end of the month. Or lets say you download an extra 5 megs every day to be sure you FAP before 30 days passes.

Then would it then take 6 days to get out of the FAP to get back to below 80% ??
--
| 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)|]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,18348056 Thu, 17 May 2007 00:24:58 EDT Re: Anyone else thinking WildBlue? http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,18347910 Siryak : Ok let's say you downloaded 17 gigs all in one day and got FAPped. You will be throttled for 30 days until that 17 gigs rolls off. Basically you will stay FAPped until you drop back below 80%.
--
Wildblue Pro Pack / Beam 40 / Laredo NOC / Windows MCE SP2]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,18347910 Wed, 16 May 2007 23:52:35 EDT Re: Anyone else thinking WildBlue? http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,18347874 Piggie : Ok, so if you FAP , how long are you now FAPed on their relatively new rolling monthly FAP?

That doesn't mean if you didn't download anything exactly one month ago, then you have to wait longer to get out of FAP?]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,18347874 Wed, 16 May 2007 23:46:57 EDT Re: Anyone else thinking WildBlue? http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,18347682 Siryak :

said by Piggie

:

The way I understand Wildbull's FAP. If you hit FAP then you are FAPed until you refill 20% of your monthly bucket. If you figure they have a flat refill rate (which I have no idea how it works), then that would take 20% of the days of one month to come out of FAP. I have never asked a WB users, just reading their site and trying to figure it out.

If that is true they one would be FAPed for about 6 days?

Can that be true?

No flat refill rate. You are credited back what you downloaded 30 days ago and nothing more. If you downloaded 1mb you get 1mb back. If you downloaded 10gb you get 10gb back.
--
Wildblue Pro Pack / Beam 40 / Laredo NOC / Windows MCE SP2]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,18347682 Wed, 16 May 2007 23:06:41 EDT Re: Anyone else thinking WildBlue? http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,18347599 Piggie : The way I understand Wildbull's FAP. If you hit FAP then you are FAPed until you refill 20% of your monthly bucket. If you figure they have a flat refill rate (which I have no idea how it works), then that would take 20% of the days of one month to come out of FAP. I have never asked a WB users, just reading their site and trying to figure it out.

If that is true they one would be FAPed for about 6 days?

Can that be true?
--
| 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)|]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,18347599 Wed, 16 May 2007 22:48:51 EDT Re: Anyone else thinking WildBlue? http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,18347433 corvettez06u : Ping really doesn't have too much to do with downloading programs and stuff. I have a dial up account for my World of Warcraft. Wild Blue's Fair Access Policy is FAIR. 17GB in a rolling 30 day period is generous as all heck for the same price I'm paying monthly for HNS. If anyone complains about that being over a 30 day period is just insane, as if you went over that amount you definately are an "abuser", as these companies coin it. I don't download pirated movies, I don't download movies at all really. I don't download ISOs or such things like that, but what I DO download from time to time can easily go over 400MB. I'd say within a month I'd probably download 2-3GB at MOST in WORST CASE SCENARIO. This new FAP doesn't handle abusers, it mucks up the whole service for EVERYONE. The old policy was doable, as with my example in the beginning of the thread, but now it is just stupid. It's like buying a brand new car but the company says you can only drive it on certian days during certian hours but they still want their 25 thousand dollars anyway. If Hughes wants to take this approach, what's the difference than just doing a "pay for what you use" system instead?]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,18347433 Wed, 16 May 2007 22:18:25 EDT Re: Anyone else thinking WildBlue? http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,18346862 Siryak :

said by Mokey2000

:

I know WB has high ping times, but do you have prime time slowdowns like this?

:::.. Download Stats ..:::
Download Connection is:: 138 Kbps about 0.1 Mbps (tested with 2992 kB)
Download Speed is:: 17 kB/s
Tested From:: »testmy.net/ (Server 2)
Test Time:: 2007/05/16 - 5:33pm
Bottom Line:: 2X faster than 56K 1MB Download in 60.24 sec
Tested from a 2992 kB file and took 177.36 seconds to complete
Download Diagnosis:: May need help : running at only 13.03 % of your hosts average (direcpc.com)
D-Validation Link:: »testmy.net/stats/id-CKBMHYTAV
User Agent:: Mozilla/4.0 (compatible; MSIE 5.5; Windows 98; AT&T CSM6.0) [!]

That is one plus for me. No prime time slowdown :). My only problem with Wildblue is the pings because pings are very important to me.

:::.. Download Stats ..:::
Download Connection is:: 1736 Kbps about 1.7 Mbps (tested with 2992 kB)
Download Speed is:: 212 kB/s
Tested From:: »testmy.net/ (Server 1)
Test Time:: 2007/05/16 - 5:45pm
Bottom Line:: 30X faster than 56K 1MB Download in 4.83 sec
Tested from a 2992 kB file and took 14.114 seconds to complete
Download Diagnosis:: Looks Great : 17.62 % faster than the average for host (wildblue.net)
D-Validation Link:: »testmy.net/stats/id-LR8TKY34V
User Agent:: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 6.0; en-US; rv:1.8.1.3) Gecko/20070309 Firefox/2.0.0.3 [!]
--
Wildblue Pro Pack / Beam 40 / Laredo NOC / Windows MCE SP2]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,18346862 Wed, 16 May 2007 20:46:45 EDT Re: Anyone else thinking WildBlue? http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,18346839 CMoore2004 : You can come get my dish and DW6000 modem and get rid of that slowdown. Even in primetime, with the new FAP, I was getting 800kbit. Free, if you pick it up. No idea where "Dixie" is.
--
Sprint Mobile Broadband PX-500 | Windows XP MCE SP2 | Mobile AMD Athlon 64 4000+ | 1.5GB RAM | ATI Mobile Radeon X600 128MB | 120GB HDD]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,18346839 Wed, 16 May 2007 20:43:44 EDT Re: Anyone else thinking WildBlue? http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,18346825 Mokey2000 : I know WB has high ping times, but do you have prime time slowdowns like this?

:::.. Download Stats ..:::
Download Connection is:: 138 Kbps about 0.1 Mbps (tested with 2992 kB)
Download Speed is:: 17 kB/s
Tested From:: »testmy.net/ (Server 2)
Test Time:: 2007/05/16 - 5:33pm
Bottom Line:: 2X faster than 56K 1MB Download in 60.24 sec
Tested from a 2992 kB file and took 177.36 seconds to complete
Download Diagnosis:: May need help : running at only 13.03 % of your hosts average (direcpc.com)
D-Validation Link:: »testmy.net/stats/id-CKBMHYTAV
User Agent:: Mozilla/4.0 (compatible; MSIE 5.5; Windows 98; AT&T CSM6.0) [!]
--
Hybrid System, DW3000 Modem, AOL+ Grey Dish, SatMex5 1250, 4.2.1.10, Win98se]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,18346825 Wed, 16 May 2007 20:41:39 EDT Re: Anyone else thinking WildBlue? http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,18346447 Siryak :

said by Fed Up2 :

Then we have work to do, don't we...

*sigh* EVDO can not get here fast enough lol.
--
Wildblue Pro Pack / Beam 40 / Laredo NOC / Windows MCE SP2]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,18346447 Wed, 16 May 2007 19:38:27 EDT Re: Anyone else thinking WildBlue? http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,18346423 anon : Then we have work to do, don't we...]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,18346423 Wed, 16 May 2007 19:33:54 EDT Re: Anyone else thinking WildBlue? http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,18346347 Siryak : Wildblue and Hughesnet are a lot alike in how they treat their customers. They both have a "You have no other options therefore I don't haft to respect you" attitude.
--
Wildblue Pro Pack / Beam 40 / Laredo NOC / Windows MCE SP2]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,18346347 Wed, 16 May 2007 19:24:09 EDT Re: Anyone else thinking WildBlue? http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,18346251 anon : Wild Blue has done something technically stupid to get such awful ping, there's not doubt about that. But it is inherently fixable.

I have seen pings of 2 seconds and beyond many times on Hughes, and their hopeless DNS lookup response in the past made Wild Blue's ping look like a Sunday School Picnic.

When you use a decent browser (Opera) that displays time and amount downloaded while a page is loading, and you see Hughes consistently take upwards of 3 seconds before ANYTHING happens, ping becomes a bit of a non issue, doesn't it? Many web pages do nothing for up to and beyond 10 seconds. This isn't something in the past, it's all the time!

Anything interactive, like gaming, is not viable on satellite systems because of the inherent satellite delay, so I am not convinced ping alone is a big issue.

I'll happily take a ping a second if the needless delay and overall sluggish response is removed.

Interestingly, when something is changed, like forcing DNS addresses out on the net somewhere, HUGHES RUNS LIGHTNING FAST with minimal delays.

For a short while.

The delays are gone until whatever bloated, "fair" or sinister thing they are doing catches up. Then their system becomes sluggish again. But those few seconds of good performance prove that there is nothing preventing the signal getting out onto the net almost immediately. Only whatever "processing" they are doing in the NOC. This is not a frivolous claim. I've seen this happen many times.

So is Wild Blue's ping really a problem when compared to the overall response of Hughes that constantly wastes seconds, not milliseconds? I don't know, but unless something changes soon I suspect I'll find out...

But this whole unpleasant experience is coming down to integrity. Both companies have technical flaws and aggravations, but who can I trust more to fix things honourably and treat their customer with respect?

When Hughes repeatedly treats their customers like dirt most of us lose the ability to trust them. This ignorant new FAP policy has pushed a bad situation over the edge. The more they act like dictators, the greater the tendency to overlook flaws in another company's product.]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,18346251 Wed, 16 May 2007 19:08:20 EDT Re: Anyone else thinking WildBlue? http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,18346227 Arion : Here's pinging apple as well. These are actually a little slow for me. This was pinged thru the utility built into the modem.

------------------------------------
Network Time: WED MAY 16 19:02:19 2007
------------------------------------
Ping test completed
Host 17.112.152.32
Test status Successful
Error code None
Maximum ping response time 890ms
Average ping response time 802ms
Minimum ping response time 720ms
Ping requests sent 10
Ping responses received 10
Ping requests timedout 0
--
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]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,18346227 Wed, 16 May 2007 19:03:39 EDT Re: Anyone else thinking WildBlue? http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,18346209 IzzyJG99 : HN7000S with ProPlan. I got 500-800ms pings with the DW6000.]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,18346209 Wed, 16 May 2007 18:59:46 EDT Re: Anyone else thinking WildBlue? http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,18346203 Siryak :

said by CMoore2004

:

What modem is that with?

What he said ^^^^. I have heard that the HN7000S gets better latency. I have also heard that a lot of it depends on which transponder you are on as well.
--
Wildblue Pro Pack / Beam 40 / Laredo NOC / Windows MCE SP2]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,18346203 Wed, 16 May 2007 18:58:55 EDT Re: Anyone else thinking WildBlue? http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,18346134 CMoore2004 : What modem is that with?]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,18346134 Wed, 16 May 2007 18:44:02 EDT Re: Anyone else thinking WildBlue? http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,18346124 IzzyJG99 : Hughes Pings are just as bad if not worse than WB's. There's no real difference.

PING www.apple.com (17.112.152.32): 56 data bytes
64 bytes from 17.112.152.32: icmp_seq=0 ttl=240 time=1606.609 ms
64 bytes from 17.112.152.32: icmp_seq=1 ttl=240 time=1696.186 ms
64 bytes from 17.112.152.32: icmp_seq=2 ttl=240 time=2114.629 ms
64 bytes from 17.112.152.32: icmp_seq=3 ttl=240 time=1734.426 ms
64 bytes from 17.112.152.32: icmp_seq=4 ttl=240 time=1154.378 ms
64 bytes from 17.112.152.32: icmp_seq=5 ttl=240 time=1224.159 ms
64 bytes from 17.112.152.32: icmp_seq=6 ttl=240 time=2386.489 ms
64 bytes from 17.112.152.32: icmp_seq=7 ttl=240 time=1557.124 ms
64 bytes from 17.112.152.32: icmp_seq=8 ttl=240 time=1126.034 ms
64 bytes from 17.112.152.32: icmp_seq=9 ttl=240 time=1105.857 ms]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,18346124 Wed, 16 May 2007 18:41:16 EDT Re: Anyone else thinking WildBlue? http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,18346090 Brad R : Not so very much worse than I commonly get from HN:

PING yahoo.com (66.94.234.13) 56(84) bytes of data.
64 bytes from w2.rc.vip.scd.yahoo.com (66.94.234.13): icmp_seq=1 ttl=51 time=1149 ms
64 bytes from w2.rc.vip.scd.yahoo.com (66.94.234.13): icmp_seq=2 ttl=50 time=766 ms
64 bytes from w2.rc.vip.scd.yahoo.com (66.94.234.13): icmp_seq=3 ttl=50 time=1114 ms
64 bytes from w2.rc.vip.scd.yahoo.com (66.94.234.13): icmp_seq=4 ttl=50 time=1160 ms
64 bytes from w2.rc.vip.scd.yahoo.com (66.94.234.13): icmp_seq=5 ttl=50 time=1536 ms]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,18346090 Wed, 16 May 2007 18:35:56 EDT Re: Anyone else thinking WildBlue? http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,18345385 Siryak : Better make sure you can handle pings like this(on a good day). Believe me they get much worse than this. Usually average in between 1300-1700ms.

Pinging yahoo.com [216.109.112.135] with 32 bytes of data:

Reply from 216.109.112.135: bytes=32 time=1220ms TTL=46
Reply from 216.109.112.135: bytes=32 time=1233ms TTL=46
Reply from 216.109.112.135: bytes=32 time=1215ms TTL=46
Reply from 216.109.112.135: bytes=32 time=1224ms TTL=46
Reply from 216.109.112.135: bytes=32 time=1191ms TTL=46
Reply from 216.109.112.135: bytes=32 time=1233ms TTL=46
Reply from 216.109.112.135: bytes=32 time=1053ms TTL=46
Reply from 216.109.112.135: bytes=32 time=1176ms TTL=46
Reply from 216.109.112.135: bytes=32 time=1158ms TTL=46
Reply from 216.109.112.135: bytes=32 time=1267ms TTL=46

Ping statistics for 216.109.112.135:
Packets: Sent = 10, Received = 10, Lost = 0 (0% loss),
Approximate round trip times in milli-seconds:
Minimum = 1053ms, Maximum = 1267ms, Average = 1197ms
--
Wildblue Pro Pack / Beam 40 / Laredo NOC / Windows MCE SP2]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,18345385 Wed, 16 May 2007 16:27:43 EDT Re: Anyone else thinking WildBlue? http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,18345200 DickDastardl : Boy, I'd like to get in on this one. I personally can't afford to deal with the upfront costs of a new sat system. However, If I knew that I could have 17gb's in a months time that would work out great for me. On a daily basis I don't download much, but there are times where I would want to download a large game, or even an operating system or two. These are things I do rarely, but I do want to have the freedom to do that.

I was going to relinquish command to the Borg and commit to downloading just 100 megs a day even though I'm entitled to 200. However, not long ago I downloaded about 50mb's and got FAPed, with the Borg stating I did much more. With this type of BS behavior from a supposedly reputable company (Hughesnet) WB is looking more and more like something I might be able to justify breaking the piggy bank for. I'll be reading up on WB to see how dysfunctional they are, and we'll see what happens from there.

Some people here think that I should be grateful and bow to the mercy of the revered Hughsnet. "How can you be so selfish," I'm told. "You have no other way to get broadband Internet service, and now you're asking for all this bandwidth from this poor company?" You bet your booty I am. I feel I'm giving them plenty of money for a service that I've been promised, and now that same service doesn't exist. The all powerful Hughesnet can sign me up for a contract and then change it, and tell me that if I don't like it I still can't leave because I have to fulfill my contract with them? Boy, that's fair. Hmmmm, promise me a service, and then change it to something I have no interest to have. Now with the new limitations they've released, they won't allow me to give back their blasted equipment and let me have the option to move on.

There's just something very wrong with this whole thing. I just hope the justice dept. gets on their case for all this aggravation.]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,18345200 Wed, 16 May 2007 15:58:32 EDT Re: Anyone else thinking WildBlue? http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,18344969 corvettez06u : 30 day rolling FAP is much more managable than 1 day. 17GB is a LOT for me. Trust me. HUGE. I can manage that easily.]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,18344969 Wed, 16 May 2007 15:13:42 EDT Re: Anyone else thinking WildBlue? http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,18344957 Arion : Better check out the wildblue forums and the problems that their users are experiencing. You can download more with WB without being fapped...you can dl complete iso's and not get bit with the fap bug. However if you get fapped with WB your down til your 30 day rolling average catches up with you. Look before you leap the grass isn't always greener on the other side of the fence. You also have to be prepared for pings which are much longer than with Hughes.
--
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]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,18344957 Wed, 16 May 2007 15:11:33 EDT Re: Anyone else thinking WildBlue? http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,18344945 corvettez06u : I hope so, because the old FAP was FAIR, this is just rediculous. Like today, I saw the Forza Motorsport 2 demo at 600MB. Before this crap, I could download it if I chunked it 300 a piece over the span of two days. Now, if I chuncked it, I'd only have 75MB to last me the next 24 hours. When my contract is up and this isn't fixed, I'm going WildBlue or saying screw it and sticking with my 10 dollar a month dial up service. I have a friend with cable I can mooch off him.]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,18344945 Wed, 16 May 2007 15:08:32 EDT Re: Anyone else thinking WildBlue? http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,18344904 IzzyJG99 : Judging by how many people are contacting the Better Business people and local lawyers in regards to the new and unannounced FAP change...I wouldn't be surprised if a judge at a circuit court eventually makes HughesNet disclose their methods for determining FAP once and for all or making them do away with it.]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,18344904 Wed, 16 May 2007 15:01:33 EDT Anyone else thinking WildBlue? http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,18344842 corvettez06u : With this new FAP crap, I'm seriously considering WildBlue now. I can deal with slow peak time speeds, but this 350MB download per day is silly. I did the math, and with what I'm paying for Hughesnet I could get 17GB per month FAP (roughly 566MB per day in a 30 day month period) and I definately don't download THAT much. If they wanted to enact a daily fap, they should have really adjusted the numbers to much higher amounts. Atleast 500 for the pro plan.]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,18344842 Wed, 16 May 2007 14:51:15 EDT