dslreports logo
 
    All Forums Hot Topics Gallery
spc
Search similar:


uniqs
114415

mcspaddin
@wildblue.net

mcspaddin to hdman

Anon

to hdman

Re: New Exede customers, please post

can anyone that has exede service post a ping result? I currently have WB and I am considering the upgrade depending on the latency (please just something I could play a basic MMO on)

grohgreg
Dunno. Ask The Chief
join:2001-07-05
Dawson Springs, KY

grohgreg to DogT

Member

to DogT
said by DogT:

I've been using Hughes for years now since May of 06 HNS7000 ProPlus plan. Downloads in AM are around 250KBps and around 50KBps in evening and some (not many) evenings useless. Pings are over 1Sec.

Sounds like you're getting what you pay for, as the $79.99 ProPlus was originally an "up to" 1500/200 plan. Assuming you have your bits and bytes straight that is. 250KBps (KiloBytes) equates to roughly 2000 kbps (kilobits), and 50KBps to roughly 400 kbps. Your pings are marginally longer than typical for that plan.

I too see a pretty consistent 2000k on my ProPlus, with exception of peak hours (which I simply try to avoid). Pings are typically within a 580-770ms window. But just in case you've got KB and kb mixed up, you might want to bring up the issue over in the HughesNet forum. 250 kbps and >1000ms PINGs ain't normal, but are usually fixable.

//greg//

wvforu
@wildblue.net

wvforu to hdman

Anon

to hdman
I love my new exede service I just tested and got 19mb/s down and 2.35mb/s up. I wish there was a larger data cap though, I am afraid I will eat through 25 gigs in no time with this amount of speed and not even realize it.
DialTone301
join:2012-01-30
Paris, IL

DialTone301 to hdman

Member

to hdman
My pings have been running close to 700ms.

When I tested speed with Toast I was getting less than 1 meg. I tested at work (300Meg connection that I control and can watch) and it only showed 9 Meg...actual download was closer to 84 Meg (which is what speedtest.net showed too).
DogT
join:2009-11-12
Hume, VA

DogT to grohgreg

Member

to grohgreg
greg,
Well I always get bits and bytes screwed up, so let me put it this way. In the AM I can download 10MB/min, in the evening it goes down to about 1MB and sometimes less. In the 2-7AM period it's always about 600MB/hr which corresponds to 10MB/min. When it's working right, I don't have any problems except with the DNS errors which is probably a result of my over 1S pings. I notice that exede has a 15MB/mo plan which is what I'm paying for hughes for the same limit but at orders of magnitude less speed. I think I'll call hughes and see what they want to do. Of course if I switch, it's another $380 installation fee and what do I do with the hughes junk?

DrStrangLov
@12.189.32.x

DrStrangLov to DialTone301

Anon

to DialTone301
said by DialTone301:

tested speed with Toast

Considering their servers are few, that some sites are not even close to internet access points geographically, and that Toast is not a dedicated server for a test, I really doubt Toast is a reliable predictor, except in middle of the night maybe.

Testmy.net on the other hand, has the bandwidth....but apparently, both Hughes/ViaSat users can get skewed scores.

I'd say as long as non https web pages load smoothly, and Youtube videos don't buffer, who cares! But, I've seen Youtube videos buffer on "fast" cable.

bobbin
Gone Fishin
join:2001-08-15
Lynchburg, VA

bobbin to dbirdman

Member

to dbirdman
said by dbirdman:

said by bobbin:

It would be odd for WB to have Ku stuff on their web pages. Are you sure you saw some? They've been Ka since the beginning.

Sorry, my mistake. I was trying to differentiate the via sat exede from the earlier WildBlue system. My system is the single coax version SurfBeam 2, RM4100 1-IFL, Ka.

When I called the 866-945-3258 it was answered as Via Sat. We were able to initiate a log in and password for temporary access to my account. The tech advised me that the wild blue optimizer was not to be downloaded or installed with my system. He did recommend the Firefox browser, but so far I've had no problems with the 64 bit Safari.

In one day of browsing I've used .5 of the 15 Gb data allowance.

He recommended speediest.com as a defined measurement tool for satellite internet.

I also received an email showing $100.89 payment against my credit card with a link to "view your monthly bill..." that link doesn't seem to work yet.

Browsing is prompt and fast (compared to my old WISP).

sign me, Still Bobbin

GadgetGuitar
@173.84.33.x

GadgetGuitar to hdman

Anon

to hdman
Just got Exede (everything still branded WildBlue) installed last week. Single coax, Surfbeam 2, 25Gb plan. Very impressed.

I was a Hughes net user for 3 years. Went to a Verizon card over wifi (Cradlepoint wifi box), no download limit (special corporate account), still plan to keep for emergency. I do not streaming of Netflix, only occasional DirecTV On-demand movie. Average month was 15gb over the Verizon card. LTE is coming to our area but still several months away. I use LTE for my business travels and it is impressive.

Exede is just as impressive. The latency is the only issue I have going back to the satellite, but the fast speeds make up for it. Was able to do all my updates to my computer very quickly this morning.

Toas.net vary in speeds with max up to 19Mbits and as low 7Mbits but it has been consistent on the 4meg jpeg test.

Speedtest.net has been around the same, upload around 3-4Mbits
chances14
join:2010-03-03
Michigan

chances14 to hdman

Member

to hdman
it will be interesting to see the speeds and pings posted in here a year from now

grohgreg
Dunno. Ask The Chief
join:2001-07-05
Dawson Springs, KY

4 edits

grohgreg to DogT

Member

to DogT
said by DogT:

greg,
Well I always get bits and bytes screwed up, so let me put it this way. In the AM I can download 10MB/min, in the evening it goes down to about 1MB and sometimes less. In the 2-7AM period it's always about 600MB/hr which corresponds to 10MB/min. When it's working right, I don't have any problems except with the DNS errors which is probably a result of my over 1S pings. I notice that exede has a 15MB/mo plan which is what I'm paying for hughes for the same limit but at orders of magnitude less speed. I think I'll call hughes and see what they want to do. Of course if I switch, it's another $380 installation fee and what do I do with the hughes junk?

FWIW, your 10MB/min example comes out to about 1300 kbps. Which means 1MB/min equates to ~130 kbps. That's slow for a ProPlus plan, but is often easily fixed. Pointing error, substandard cable or cable path are the usual culprits. Both easily diagnosed and remedied by a competent installer/tech. But before you do that, you really need to come up with some real world numbers to determine if you really even HAVE a problem Hughes tech support won't take any speed test results (or guesses) from other than »consumer.performancetest ··· net.com/ . Start there. For comparison purposes I just tested there with my ProPlus (high usage time already started here) and got 1600 down/200 up.

But now you're getting transmission speed and data caps mixed up. The Exede plan to which you refer does not have 15MB throughput speed, rather the plan permits 15GB (GigaBytes) of data per month; that's upload and download combined. How fast you can do that on the other hand, is be determined by where you live; up to 5Mbps in some locations, up to 12Mbps in others. Your current ProPlus plan gives you a daily 475MB allowance during the 19 hours between 0700 and 0200 (eastern). By itself, that comes out to 14.25GB/mo. On a typical ProPlus system, you can ALSO get an additional few GB daily during the 0200-0700 unlimited period. Plus HughesNet allowances count against downloads only. Uploads are essentially unlimited around the clock.

DNS errors cannot usually be blamed on 1000ms latency. Although if it's consistent to one site, they might have their server timeout period set too tight. A DNS error is usually little more than a notice that manual retransmission is required. They're more often the fault of something out of whack with your transmit signal. Again, that's something that can usually be fixed too.

As far as what to do with the Hughes hardware, you can try eBay or CraigsList. But as more and more folks switch to Ka-band, there's less and less demand for used Ku-band hardware. I'd use it till it breaks, and THEN take a look at whether or not switching to WB/Exede/ViaSat might be in your best interests

//greg//
DogT
join:2009-11-12
Hume, VA

DogT

Member

greg,
Yes, I shouldn't have put the download speed and download limits in the same paragraph. I understand about that. I just have a big problem with kbps, Kbps, Mbps, etc. The numbers are real confusing and I have read it and I even have a list, but it doesn't help my ancient brain. Plus I get such conflicting speeds and numbers with any of the free checks.

Hughes now is letting us add up unused daily limits for 2-3 days and give me the possibility of downloading about 900MB in one day, which is nothing to sneeze about for what I have been getting for $80/mo with my 475MB daily limit. But it's hard to find that limit, their meter only shows % which doesn't mean much if you don't know what the actual MB numbers are.

I'm not jumping into exede real quick, there will undoubtedly be some competition going on here since things are changing.

I just checked on hughesnet, my download and upload speeds, here in the East, about 150 kbps up and down. I've seen it at 1200 kbps early in the mornings for download, so it's pretty typical about 1/10 speed in the evening compared to mornings or during the 2-7 window. It's real interesting at 2 am the speed jumps right up there if you get my drift.

If you think I am getting bad speeds, I would appreciate it if you could point me to the direction to find out why, like I say sometimes in the evenings and weekends it's almost useless, but that's pretty rare. I did have some trouble a couple of years ago, but that got straightened out with a modem upgrade through the help center, but not easy.

Thanks.
micwa
join:2009-01-13
Seminary, MS

micwa to grohgreg

Member

to grohgreg
Everyone on the Wildblue forums use Testmy.net. If I recall, the mods have suggested using that site for test results.

dbirdman
MVM
join:2003-07-07
usa

dbirdman to DogT

MVM

to DogT
said by DogT:

But it's hard to find that limit, their meter only shows % which doesn't mean much if you don't know what the actual MB numbers are.

Hopefully I can be forgiven for touting my own program, but give hnFAPalert a try. Free, no strings, and easy to install and uninstall. It will read % or MB, your choice. Caveat: Must be using Windows. See »www.datastormusers.com/h ··· lert.cfm

grohgreg
Dunno. Ask The Chief
join:2001-07-05
Dawson Springs, KY

grohgreg to DogT

Member

to DogT
said by DogT:

If you think I am getting bad speeds, I would appreciate it if you could point me to the direction to find out why, like I say sometimes in the evenings and weekends it's almost useless, but that's pretty rare.

As previously suggested, simply post your speed concerns on the HugheNet forum here: »HughesNet Satellite . We'll pick it up from there

//greg//
micwa
join:2009-01-13
Seminary, MS

micwa to hdman

Member

to hdman
Here's another test result from Exede:

»www.facebook.com/photo.p ··· 1&ref=nf

ExedeBlue
@comcast.net

ExedeBlue to hdman

Anon

to hdman
I just got my first install in. It was in a noisy spot next to a busy road and chirping blue jays it was hard to hear the tons and beeps. Only seen the video and read how to aim this thing. Took a few try to learn how the dish react when tighten the nuts and bolts.

After that it went smooth.

Ping time are about 600-700ms just like how When WB start it on AnikF2. Speed is fast as they say.

I downloaded 50MB file from fastest place that I know and I was getting 2.2MB/sec sustained!! faster than my cable modem at home!!! That means you can exede your bandwidth extremely quick!!

Regular HTTP sites load up extremely quick. HTTPS pages are still slow but a lot better than WB1 or F2.

Wildblue.net is still the slowest site on the internet.

Modem's IP Address is 192.168.100.1 you can look at some technical goodies in there.

Well see what happen when it get loaded with customers.

When WB came years ago, I compare to hughesnet offering and it was the best thing. No long after they over sold and system went to crap. WB1 came along, it was only OK for 1 month and also went to crap. I hope they learn from previous two satellites and not make the same mistake.
Spice300
Premium Member
join:2006-01-10

Spice300

Premium Member

Since the Viasat 2 modem has an IP address, can it be pinged? That would help when using a ping test to troubleshoot.

Sircolby450
join:2005-11-26

Sircolby450 to ExedeBlue

Member

to ExedeBlue
said by ExedeBlue :

When WB came years ago, I compare to hughesnet offering and it was the best thing. No long after they over sold and system went to crap. WB1 came along, it was only OK for 1 month and also went to crap. I hope they learn from previous two satellites and not make the same mistake.

Not likely. :/

DrStrangLov
@12.189.32.x

DrStrangLov

Anon

said by Sircolby450:

Not likely. :/

.
Let's see, Spaceway 3 (Hughes) went live around April 8, 2008, and by around July of 2010, zeddlar indicated in a later dated post,
...the best ping I ever got was 567 and usually stayed in the 600 to 800 range until the last 6 months when the service went to crap.
.

But, ViaSat-1 has 14 times the capacity of Hughes’ Spaceway 3 satellite, which was considered a high-capacity spacecraft in its day.

Since ViaSat-1 is a quantum leap in throghput, I fail to see how this bird will be overloaded any time soon. It took Hughes about two years for inferior service, but ViaSat's CEO has indicated this will not happen. ViaSat has no intentions of following the Hughes management style.

Sircolby450
join:2005-11-26

Sircolby450

Member

said by DrStrangLov :

said by Sircolby450:

Not likely. :/

.
Let's see, Spaceway 3 (Hughes) went live around April 8, 2008, and by around July of 2010, zeddlar indicated in a later dated post,
...the best ping I ever got was 567 and usually stayed in the 600 to 800 range until the last 6 months when the service went to crap.
.

But, ViaSat-1 has 14 times the capacity of Hughes’ Spaceway 3 satellite, which was considered a high-capacity spacecraft in its day.

Since ViaSat-1 is a quantum leap in throghput, I fail to see how this bird will be overloaded any time soon. It took Hughes about two years for inferior service, but ViaSat's CEO has indicated this will not happen. ViaSat has no intentions of following the Hughes management style.

Mmmm...What flavor is that Kool-Aide?
zeddlar
join:2007-04-09
Jay, OK

zeddlar to DrStrangLov

Member

to DrStrangLov
HN keeps saying mid summer and the last time there was a time on the launch scedules for Jupiter it was set to launch from Kazikstan in April, the last ime I looked however it just said spring 2012. I will try and remember to look at it again today and see if it has changed. They changed their website and I kind of took it by looking at things that they didn't have all the schedules up there and accurate the last time I was there. I will post a link as well to that site. I can't remember the name atm or I would post it now. Well it might be tomorrow cause I have company comin and still have my work to do, but either way I will get it.
zeddlar

zeddlar

Member

»www.flysat.com/launches2012.php They are still showing mid 2012 and the launch rocket has changed and Lyngsat is reprting the launch location has changed as well.

dbirdman
MVM
join:2003-07-07
usa

dbirdman to DrStrangLov

MVM

to DrStrangLov
Well, let's see - you get a satellite with 14 times the throughput, but you give each customer as much as 24 times the speed (varies with what account you compare). Now what do you expect to happen in prime time?

Sure, you hope that FAP will keep them away, but prime time is called that because it is the time that most users, including those that husband their allowance, want to be on.

And that would only be with the same number of customers, not the projected 100s of thousands more.
Spice300
Premium Member
join:2006-01-10

Spice300

Premium Member

Viasat claims the data is also being compressed which would further increase the effective data rate.

Because the customers would hit their usage cap before they consume 14 times more data, I would expect prime time slowdown to disappear. Also the Network Management Policy would cripple the speed of anyone trying to download or stream during a congested period. 12 Mb/s download speed would slow to a crawl rather quickly.

I suspect the number of upload time slots will determine the maximum number of customers that can be packed onto a spot beam. Wildblue claims that Viasat-1 can support 1.5 million customers. Based on their previous exaggerations about the number of customers that Anik-F2 and WB-1 could support, I suspect the actual number will be about 1/3 or 500,000 customers for Viasat-1.

grohgreg
Dunno. Ask The Chief
join:2001-07-05
Dawson Springs, KY

2 edits

grohgreg

Member

said by Spice300:

Viasat claims the data is also being compressed which would further increase the effective data rate.

Means nothing. That's like Ford bragging that their cars come with wheels. ALL cars come with wheels. ALL satellite providers use compression, it's an basic matter of satellite economics.

But X2 on your spot beam speculation. Anybody but me find it curious that there are no 12 meg spotbeams covering 40% of the US? (see »/r0/do ··· eas2.bmp ) I'd call it sorta coincidental that those are the areas where Wildblue couldn't fill up beams in the past.

//greg//

Sircolby450
join:2005-11-26

Sircolby450

Member

said by grohgreg:

said by Spice300:

Viasat claims the data is also being compressed which would further increase the effective data rate.

Means nothing. That's like Ford bragging that their cars come with wheels. ALL satellite providers use compression, it's a matter of economics.

But X2 on your spot beam speculation. Anybody but me find it curious that there are no 12 meg spotbeams covering 40% of the US? (see »/r0/do ··· eas2.bmp ) I'd call it sorta coincidental that those are the areas where Wildblue couldn't fill up beams in the past.

//greg//

Lol all of their beams are covering the must populated areas that already have Cable/DSL! You just made a very good point. A very large portion of us are going to be stuck with WB-1, which can't handle the load of that many people pulling 5 megs.

Dr Laredo
@anonymouse.org

Dr Laredo

Anon

said by Sircolby450:

...beams are covering the must populated areas that already have Cable/DSL!

Objective is to lure those on inferior DSL to 12 mbps ViaSat-1; no, not P2Per crowd, but those with light surfing needs. Telcos in many US markets are not investing in DSL infrastructure...its Wireless, where they roll in the dollars, not DSL!

With time, I would not be surprised to see plans/prices change...lower prices with same FAP-Quota bucket sizes.
said by Sircolby450:

stuck with WB-1, which can't handle the load of that many people pulling 5 megs.

Most Western beams will have 5 mbps service on Anik F2. ViaSat-1 beams goes in rough approximation North/South of Kansas City and eastward, and then on Western Coast.

As more convert to 5 mbps, or as new installs to 5 mbps come about, this will lessen load, which will increase bandwidth. Further, with WiMax 'compression,' less bandwidth is required, so this increases total bandwidth available.

Keep in mind that there are two channel streams, one DAMA and one WiMax, being mixed into one uplink transport stream. It has been suggested that WiMax is much more effective....at in 8 to 10 times more effective for non compressed data...which means if both streams are fed equally in the "mix," then 5 mbps folks would be getting a higher data throughput for non compressed data, which is most common for web surfers.

Thus, 5 mbps WiMax users will see increase in speed from DAMA users, and with time, overall speeds will increase.
Dr Laredo

Dr Laredo to dbirdman

Anon

to dbirdman
said by dbirdman:

Well, let's see...Now what do you expect to happen in prime time?

Not the best map,

»www.satlaunch.net/2011/0 ··· aps.html

but, examine Florida. With Anik F2, there are two beams there, now with ViaSat-1, there are four beams. Note: I have ViaSat's map, and there are four beams in Florida.

I do not have web stats as ViaSat would, but I suspect most people are browse the internet when FAP-Quotas exist; so, they spend time on each web site. Translation, for web crusiers, actual uplink/downlink time is peanuts for each user.

Mathematically, I'd venture to say as throughput is increased, this decreases overall network congestion....when people have limited bandwidth.

I really don't see ViaSat returning to 'dark ages' of satellite...they want to entice DSL users to come onboard.

dbirdman
MVM
join:2003-07-07
usa

dbirdman

MVM

said by Dr Laredo :

I really don't see ViaSat returning to 'dark ages' of satellite...they want to entice DSL users to come onboard.

I wonder if you have any concept about the expectations of a DSL user - especially one so unhappy with their DSL (150GB per month minimum) that they would go to satellite?

Even slow DSL (which would be in the range of 758K down) is near instant for most web pages, including secure. The unhappy DSL user is one downloading files slowly, and wanting to do it fast, so 12Mbps sounds wonderful.
chances14
join:2010-03-03
Michigan

chances14 to Dr Laredo

Member

to Dr Laredo
said by Dr Laredo :

but those with light surfing needs

a light web surfer on a dsl connection would not be at all happy with this service due to the fact that web pages and https will still load slower on satellite than their "old and slow" dsl connection

and it doesn't appeal to heavy users due to the low caps

so we're back at square one for satellite users and that is a "last resort" connection