[DW7000] Hit Hughes FAP limit and this is what happened Page 4

Author	All Replies
dbirdman Premium,MVM join:2003-07-07 Eureka, CA	reply to Argus P Re: [DW7000] Hit Hughes FAP limit and this is what happened said by Argus P : You can't tell me that hughes has not over-sold the bandwidth to a very serious extreme No, I can't and at the expense of long time customers. Yes, I can. The difference in the two answers is because they have ALWAYS severely oversold the bandwidth, and there is zero objective evidence that the overselling has changed. The fact that you may have been lucky enough to be on a gateway with just a bunch of e-mailers in the past, and now are on one with others who use it just as you do, does not change this premise. I also understand from reading your posts over the years that hughesnet has a large part in what you do for a livelihood Then you fully misunderstand. The Internet has a great deal to do with the way I make my livlihood. Satellite, whether by Hughes, iDirect, or UnaSat (had them for a short while) is simply my method for accessing the internet when it would otherwise be impossible. That is true for most here. The day I find a way to string a cable or phone line behind my bus I will be as happy as the next guy to drop satellite. I could also choose to travel only where there is EVDO, just as all of the others here could choose to move away from where they are. We weigh all factors, and for hundreds of thousands of us there are more important things, whether lifestyle or economic factors, that place us where only satellite will do. Now if you can show me someone where Hughes has placed a gun to their head and said "Live there" that will be a different thing entirely. On the hobby side I have chosen to support other mobile users, both with forums and with software. It happens that most have Hughes, so that ties me rather heavily to the Hughes modem and is why I am keeping a Hughes account even though I rarely need it for my own access. I doubt my hobby costs more than the hobbies of many here. In a thunder/wind storm here this evening in Cheyenne I did put my big dish down to protect it and used the Hughes account on the small dish - nice having a fallback. -- W2K Server\|Toshiba Satellite XP Pro\|iDirect 3100 on Datastorm 1.2 meter XF3 with 4-watt BUC\|HughesNet IA8/1390/7000s Pro on Datastorm .74 F1\|1990 Blue Bird Wanderlodge "Blue Thunder" 22 tons of rolling steel!
	to forum · permalink · · 2007-09-17 01:01:56 ·
CMoore2004 Premium join:2003-02-06 Jonesville, MI	reply to Argus P A public corporation HAS to be more concerned with their shareholders. In case you don't understand the concept, it is the shareholders that own the business. Before I argue some things you said, I'll agree with a few. Many people are seeing decreasing speeds, even the long-time customers I also agree that they somehow took bandwidth that was ours and gave it to someone else when they changed the FAP. In all reality, with the FAP-free time, it's much larger. But I think the people that were customers before the new FAP should have been able to stick with the old, where you could have a usable service by waiting 30 minutes or so. Now, you seem to have cited other technology advances and how their prices are going down while their quality is going up. In case you're forgetting, these operate on licensed frequencies. You can't just make more of these when you run out. Last I knew, satellites were also very expensive. I don't foresee the price of the satellite transponder leases to go down. I'm not any longer a HughesNet customer, but understand the frustrations. At the end of the day, I usually felt it was a lot better than dial-up. Reliability was around 99% (averaged all the years I had it). Some here on the forum think that HughesNet's residential market will fade over the next few years, while some will argue that the most remote areas still won't have coverage. I'm not sure about 2-5 years, but I can't imagine in 10 years what will be available. Perhaps they'll have towers with the 700MHz spectrum they're supposed to offer soon that will travel many miles. Maybe broadband by blimp. Maybe they'll have the very small satellites that sit just outside the atmosphere covering smaller areas with frequency reuse and lower latencies. Right now, Hughes has to please its investors. On another note, many people will download 2+GB/night with their FAP-free time. Give that a try with your Verizon card. They can terminate you JUST for watching a streaming video. How's that for an inherent right? My Sprint serves me well, and I wouldn't do business with a company like Verizon anyways. -- Charter 5M \| Windows XP MCE SP2 \| Mobile AMD Athlon 64 4000+ \| 1.5GB RAM \| ATI Mobile Radeon X600 128MB \| 120GB HDD
	to forum · permalink · · 2007-09-17 01:34:57 ·
hjriver hjriver join:2006-12-03 North, VA	reply to Argus P said by Argus P : said by dbirdman : said by Argus P : The real world to me is that Hughes has been selling of a portion of the service that I had been paying for to someone else, but didn't share the proceeds with me. And it will never matter to you that this is not true. Your performance went down, and it must be due to greed or a conspiracy. You are wrong, but unconvincable. This is why I have a Verizon BroadBandAccess package on the way and if it works it's bye-bye hughesnet. Do you expect to get an argument about that? The key is in "if it works" which it would not for an awful lot of people on satellite. If it does, do you think people, just because they are reasonably satisfied with their satellite connections, would tell you that you are crazy to jump ship? You are only crazy if that's what you think! The "if it works" is that the average throughput on Verizon looks to be around 800k which is the best that hughes has been able to deliver lately and if I get a reasonable/stable signal where I am. The coverage in my area for Verizon and Sprint is something newly available and according to Verizon's maps, their highest speed coverage ends just across the street from my new home, so I feel pretty sure it will work. For 2 years I have been getting a stable 1075/175 from hughes, pretty much 24/7. Lately that has not been the case, 750/140 is the best it gets and between 3pm and 12am central it's more like 105/120 which is absolutely ridiculous for this service. You can't tell me that hughes has not over-sold the bandwidth to a very serious extreme and at the expense of long time customers. They are also luring in new customers with the promise of speeds that they will not be able to deliver on even a reasonably consistent basis. That is actually fraudulent advertising, but hughesnet will pull out the fine print to prevent these people from doing something about it. I also understand from reading your posts over the years that hughesnet has a large part in what you do for a livelihood and/or hobby, but don't defend them to the extent that you overlook the fact that hughesnet is way more concerned with the shareholders of the corporation than the customers. What are you going to do when you reach Verizons' 5GB monthly limit? Their TOS plainly states the service is intended for internet browsing and email all other functions are prohibited. I looked into it as I can well get it and talked to their customer service. It ain't for me. Now it would be a different story if I could get Sprint EVDO. HN overall is not that bad most of the time as long as one doesn't have to deal with their customer service in India. I can't complain much about my speeds as they usually are up to par. I think some people just have misconceptions of how the service works. BTW, Hughesnets primary concern is the return on the shareholders investement, not making you happy. -- HN7000S/Satmex6/1190/0.78/pro-plus/Sig level: 65
	to forum · permalink · · 2007-09-17 10:03:20 ·
Arion join:2006-07-09 Marquette, MI ·HughesNet Satellit..	reply to kewaynco I can boil it down pretty easily I think. Satellite Internet is what it is and ain't what it ain't. They problem comes when people have had dsl/cable/wireless and expect the satellite internet to be the same level of performance at the same price and then complain bitterly when it isn't. A number don't get close to the performance that is advertised. Some of that comes from poor or shoddy installs and others from being on overcrowded gateways. The rare times I've had multi day slowdowns has been remedied when Hughes load balanced. In many rural areas were never going to see cable or wireless unless you want the congress to mandate it as an inherent right. It's just too expensive for companies to make the investment looking at how few customers there are to pay the bills in those areas. I could move back to the big city but no thanks. I'll stay in the boonies where I can watch the deer, bear, wolves and occasional moose while I sit by the fire and have a cup of coffee surfing the net at 1000kbps down most of the time. Pretty good trade off to me... -- HN7000S IA-8 1270 / 8-PSK 3/4 (14) / Router:67.142.140.95 /.74 1 watt / Pro / Pentium 3.2ghz, 1gb ram /Dual Boot WinXP Pro/LinxuS / Firefox 2.0.0.6
	to forum · permalink · · 2007-09-17 10:16:37 ·
Argus P join:2004-08-31 Lake Cormorant, MS	reply to kewaynco I was fully satisfied with Direcway/Hughesnet performance when I purchased it 3 years ago last month. I got close to what was advertised speeds day-in & day-out over those three years with an occasional hiccup, but understandable with this type of technology. I also came from town with previous internet service provided by RoadRunner Cable, so I do know the difference between the two, Hughesnet is inherently slower due to the technology, but I accepted it and learned to live with it, FAP and all. What I am unwilling to accept is the current slowness of browsing, email and just plain poor overall performance of a service I am paying $80/month for. If Hughes could continuously provide the level of service they did for 3 years on the money I paid them, I fully expect them to continue to do so now, even raise my rate if inflation makes it more costly to do this business these days. Below are the speeds I have been getting for the last week: September 17th, 11:22PM - 59/129 kbps September 17th, 08:38AM - 734/148 kbps September 16th, 11:17PM - 554/140 kbps September 16th, 08:24AM - 736/149 kbps September 15th, 10:16PM - 198/137 kbps September 15th, 09:03AM - 683/148 kbps September 15th, 12:02AM - 266/146 kbps September 14th, 11:27PM - 89/144 kbps September 14th, 08:44AM - 721/147 kbps September 13th, 06:36PM - 89/37 kbps September 13th, 12:30PM - 431/127 kbps September 13th, 12:07PM - 585/139 kbps September 13th, 12:05PM - 625/138 kbps September 13th, 08:59AM - 730/146 kbps September 12th, 09:23PM - 50/95 kbps September 12th, 04:44PM - 138/80 kbps September 12th, 04:40PM - 93/117 kbps September 12th, 03:29PM - 725/146 kbps September 12th, 02:09PM - 554/145 kbps September 12th, 01:05PM - 514/133 kbps September 12th, 08:58AM - 677/161 kbps September 12th, 01:49AM - 853/142 kbps September 12th, 12:49AM - 791/145 kbps September 12th, 12:46AM - 857/142 kbps September 12th, 12:43AM - 838/148 kbps September 12th, 12:20AM - 536/142 kbps September 11th, 11:26PM - 104/121 kbps September 11th, 11:25PM - 107/114 kbps Early morning has been fine, not what I used to get, but close enough to live with. Afternoons and evenings are a completely different matter. Just checked 15 mins ago and I had 59 down and 129 up. Everything slow as molasses. The Verizon modem came in late this morning and got it activated a few hours ago. Can’t get Broadband Rev A here at the house, but can close by. I went up on the roof after supper and got a Broadband Rev A signal there, weak, but stable with quick browsing. I guess I’ll order a roof mount external antenna and see if that helps as I have 30 days to cancel the service. I am aware of Verizon’s TOS and have looked at my monthly usage, could be a go. I also have Sprint EVDO as an option and they are truly unlimited usage from what I have read, just overall speeds appear to be slower, coverage looks better for my area though. If you don’t take care of your customers, the shareholders have no business to own. It’s called balance. -- Direcway-DW7000/Pro Dynamic, G4R - 1110 Mhz. XPpro/SP 2, 5 users (up to Six PCs) on Lynksys WRT54G Wieless Router - 1075 Down/180 Up consistantly
	to forum · permalink · · 2007-09-17 19:57:52 ·
CMoore2004 Premium join:2003-02-06 Jonesville, MI	Just out of curiosity, where do you get the idea that Sprint's speeds are slower? I've heard many claims about Verizon crippling their EVDO service. If you can get Sprint, I'd recommend going that way. And if you get an external yagi antenna, you're likely to lose much of the gain with the long cable. I'd recommend an amplifier instead. I'm still in disbelief that someone would say Sprint's speeds are slower than Verizon's. Perhaps some references would help me believe there are people crazy enough to make this claim. -- Charter 5M \| Windows XP MCE SP2 \| Mobile AMD Athlon 64 4000+ \| 1.5GB RAM \| ATI Mobile Radeon X600 128MB \| 120GB HDD
	to forum · permalink · · 2007-09-17 20:23:21 ·
Argus P join:2004-08-31 Lake Cormorant, MS	reply to kewaynco I have been researching the EVDO things for a week now and one website listed the pros and cons of the different wireless providers and one of the pros of Verizon was faster speeds across the board, the cons was the TOS/5 gig cap ( but read this: »www.evdoforums.com/thread5965.html ). I have been to a couple of hundred sites so I couldn't begin to tell you were this was that said Verizon was faster. Another plus for Verizon was that PC5750 modem was free and Verizon has dropped the price to $59 without a qualifing voice plan which it used to be $79. My buddy is a EE and used to maintain large commercial radio station transmiters for a living and he seems to think that the 20 ft or so of cable might not hurt that bad, particularly if I get an antenna with a fair amount of gain to begin with. One thing I noticed this afternoon driving around the area with a laptop is that I hit a Rev A broadband conection that only had one bar, but the testmynet test was 575 down and "UP", amazing to say the least after using Hughes. -- Direcway-DW7000/Pro Dynamic, G4R - 1110 Mhz. XPpro/SP 2, 5 users (up to Six PCs) on Lynksys WRT54G Wieless Router - 1075 Down/180 Up consistantly
	to forum · permalink · · 2007-09-18 00:14:19 ·
CMoore2004 Premium join:2003-02-06 Jonesville, MI	spcsdns.net - 815/279 kbit (726 samples last 14 days) »/mspeed?domains=1 Perhaps looking at more reputable sites is a good idea. -- Charter 5M \| Windows XP MCE SP2 \| Mobile AMD Athlon 64 4000+ \| 1.5GB RAM \| ATI Mobile Radeon X600 128MB \| 120GB HDD
	to forum · permalink · · 2007-09-18 00:24:46 ·


Friday, 04-Dec 13:41:00	Terms of Use \| Privacy Policy \| Hosting by www.nac.net - DSL,Hosting & Co-lo \| feedback \| contact over 10 years online! © 1999-2009 dslreports.com. page compression OFF