dslreports logo
site
 
    All Forums Hot Topics Gallery
spc

spacer




how-to block ads


Search Topic:
uniqs
6697
share rss forum feed

ricky_005

join:2012-01-17
united state

4 edits
reply to chances14

Re: Dish Network Said to Plan Nationwide Satellite Broadband

Took over 3 Min to perform each download test!


===================================================
8:03 PM Eastern time / location near Atlanta GA
ALL TEST WHERE PERFORMED WITHIN A 12min WINDOW ...It takes time running these test when your provider operates like the Mafia selling bandwidth he doesn't have.

Heres HughesNet Bowser Experence

Keep in mind there are 6 images downloaded for this test.
45.82KB + 15.32KB + 35.14KB + 16.34KB + 36.08KB + 38.88KB = a Total of 187.58KB LMAO.....

Test Completed Successfully

The following information was gathered.
Download Time 10.8 seconds
IP Address 00.000.000.000
Browser Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1; WOW64; rv:14.0) Gecko/20100101 Firefox/14.0.1
Language en-us,en;q=0.5

Took 10.8 seconds to load 6 tiny Images totaling 187.58KB!
===================================================

Heres HughesNet Download Experence

Transfer Results
Download = 2,249 kbps
Upload= 133 kbps

I find the numbers above from HughesNet inhouse speed test nothing more than Deceptive lies, just as anything else which comes from there lips.

As for my Computer system, I'm running a HP Z800 workstation w/Xeon W3680 12GB ram and 2 intel 320's SSD.

Over the past 8 months the service has deteriorated severly..... I use to get a true 1MB to 1.2MB on the down, prime time would slow up to around 600 to 800 or so KB on the down. As you can tell now its just AWFUL!

SpeedTest.net is what you call Reality Son! The browsing experiences sucks like Dial-Up!

Iowa Cowboy

join:2012-08-16
Monticello, IA
reply to cheesey1

I have heard that speed test is a joke, I can now see why


chances14

join:2010-03-03
Michigan
reply to ricky_005

nobody is denying that you might be suffering from slow speeds. But just because you are getting slow speeds doesn't mean everyone else is

p.s. the only true way to measure your speed is to download a real file and time it out.


ricky_005

join:2012-01-17
united state

1 edit

Most everyone has anywhere from 250mb to 450mb of daily usage allocated. The mb allocated for the day people use it for Web Browsing! If I need to download a 400mb file for the day...Your pretty much screwed for the rest of the day .... Other words the speed you can Download a zip file or this file is pointless.

ITS HOW FAST YOUR FREAK-EN BROWSING SPEED IS!


chances14

join:2010-03-03
Michigan

browsing speed will always seem sluggish on satellite because of the latency. no amount of speed will fix that.

like i said, downloading even a 25mb file will give you a more accurate test of your connection speed.

but if it's browsing speed you want, then you are going to be disappointed with any satellite connection


ricky_005

join:2012-01-17
united state

4 edits

@ chances14
If you only are given 250mb a day or what ever, the majority of American use there rationed out bandwidth for Browsing the web....

Do you think people sign up for HughesNet so they can download a 250mb zip file than log off? lol

No they use it for web browsing...How does a web page end up in your browser window ... Well the files are downloaded into your browser! Pathetic download Speed = Pathetic Web Browsing. Whats so difficult to understand about this?

Main intent is to Browse the web, so your answer is Irrelevant.


Iowa Cowboy

join:2012-08-16
Monticello, IA

said by ricky_005:

@ chances14
If you only are given 250mb a day or what ever, the majority of American use there rationed out bandwidth for Browsing the web....

Do you think people sign up for HughesNet so they can download a 250mb zip file than log off? lol

No they use it for web browsing...How does a web page end up in your browser window ... Well the files are downloaded into your browser! Pathetic download Speed = Pathetic Web Browsing. Whats so difficult to understand about this?

Main intent is to Browse the web, so your answer is Irrelevant.

ok, if it take me 3 seconds to open a web page, whats my speed?

ricky_005

join:2012-01-17
united state

2 edits

Total website page data can range wildly:
This Forum Page 390.95KB
Googles search page 25.95KB
A simple business home page 500KB
Most sites 1Mb+ home page
Graphic intense page 4mb+

Is it running on windows or Linux shared server, VPS, Dedicated server ... network connection speed ... number of server request ..the list is endless................

So go figure...


DrStrangLov

join:2012-03-28
reply to Iowa Cowboy

said by Iowa Cowboy:

ok, if it take me 3 seconds to open a web page, whats my speed?

Times were measured over cable modem (~2.5 mbps).




»yuiblog.com/blog/2007/01/04/perf···-part-2/

zeddlar

join:2007-04-09
Jay, OK
Reviews:
·exede by ViaSat
·McDonald County ..
reply to cheesey1

For web browsing, anything over 1Mb/s in download speed will not affect website loading times unless it is really really laden with graphics like multiple flash adds and pictures. The time it takes for a webpage loads depends mostly on compression, computer performance (in the case of flash adds or video loads) and Latency. To relate this, I recently switched from HN to Verizon via Mediacom which took me from 4Mb/s download speed, 250KB/s upload speed and a latency of 1000 to 1500ms on HN to 1 to 1.2 Mb/s download speeds, 500 KB/s upload speeds and around 100ms latency times. My webpage loads went from 3 to 10 seconds on HN to instant or 1 or 2 second loads on Verizon and then I switched to 3Mb/s dsl with 30ms latency and all but secure sites load instantly and secure sites within 3 seconds.

BTW, as for speed tests, some don't play nice with satellite and I will be the first to tell you that, but dedicated speed test websites like speedtest.net (not satellite friendly), testmy.net and the like are very dedicated to suppling as accurate a test as possible. With my DSL I can tell you with .05 Mb.s what they will rport for my speed because my line is extremly stable and those sites are that accurate. With that said, HN went through a period just befor I left that they were experimenting with compression and there wasn't an accurate speed test for thier service including thier own but they have fixed thier own speed test since then to my understanding.

To get an accurate line speed, you need to locate a test file to download or just pick a large file to download like video card drivers or something in at least the 100MB range and let the download get at least a quarter of the way through and see what your download progress window is reporting as the actual download speed of the file and then take that number times 8 to get your line speed in Mb/s. it should look like this:

file downloading at 328 KB/s 328 x 8= 2624, now move the decimal point to the right 3 places and you get 2.62 Mb/s

It's as simple as that.
--
HughesNet elite plan/.74 dish w/1watt trans. / 9000 modem / 3 computers on a linksy's wired network



Heh213

join:2012-06-16
Reviews:
·HughesNet Satell..

said by zeddlar:

For web browsing, anything over 1Mb/s in download speed will not affect website loading times unless it is really really laden with graphics like multiple flash adds and pictures.

Mostly agree, it'll have some effect, but in most cases the difference will be nearly unnoticeable, I think if a webpage loads in a second or so most people don't care.
said by zeddlar:

testmy.net and the like are very dedicated to suppling as accurate a test as possible.

Testmy.net seemed inaccurate while turbo page was on, told me I had 9Mbps if I remember correctly. Without turbo page it seemed about what I expected due to the downloads I have been getting (Well, for obvious reasons given how the site works).

I've noticed without segmenting speeds have often (maybe 50% of the time) been 100KB/s (even from fast servers) while segmented usually gets me in the 300KB/s range.

Iowa Cowboy

join:2012-08-16
Monticello, IA
reply to cheesey1

just used testmynet, took 2 test download and upload. I have the mid plan for 1.5Mbps my test download speed was 3.6Mbps and upload 245Kbps

Expand your moderator at work

DrStrangLov

join:2012-03-28
reply to Heh213

Re: Dish Network Said to Plan Nationwide Satellite Broadband

said by Heh213:

Testmy.net seemed inaccurate...

That was months ago...use 1 Mbyte payload first, then it should discard that size, and up the payload to around 12 Mbyte size.

DrStrangLov

join:2012-03-28
reply to ricky_005

said by ricky_005:

SpeedTest.net is what you call Reality Son!

Sites who offer SpeedTest do not have dedicated bandwidth, and some don't even have big pipes. When their primetime hits, many sites can't deliver the bandwidth.

As Speedtest.net says "To get your most accurate result try to find the server that provides the fastest and most consistent results." Which is just another way of saying some ISPs suck big time cause they ain't got the bandwidth.

Here is a "feel good" speed test site:

»www.att.com/speedtest

»ATT Speedtest Accuracy

One should try to find a site that is near your operation center, when using an ISP that offers a speed test. Wichita, KS is not a good site to use.


Heh213

join:2012-06-16
Reviews:
·HughesNet Satell..
reply to DrStrangLov

said by DrStrangLov:

said by Heh213:

Testmy.net seemed inaccurate...

That was months ago...use 1 Mbyte payload first, then it should discard that size, and up the payload to around 12 Mbyte size.

Think that's probably what I ended up doing, was a week or two ago. The automatic testing was a bit wonky iirc, and that's what most people would probably click on.

Either way it's just another thing the turbo page proxy likes to mess with I guess, most of the time I just have it off because I get fairly little benifit from it with my usage.

Iowa Cowboy

join:2012-08-16
Monticello, IA
reply to DrStrangLov

I know that the AT&T speed test is a crock, it is a scam to get you to buy their product.


cheesey1

join:2012-08-16
Juneau, AK
reply to cheesey1

Wow...ya' all know how to hijack a thread don't ya??? Out of 36 replies, there was a one or two actually related to the thread's topic and then.....

Having re-read the original news stories, and better absorbing the fact that Dish and Hughesnet (HN) are both part of the Echostar empire, it is interesting that Dish has been selling Viasat/Exede service, even though Viasat is a direct competitor to Echostar. So Dish must operate as a fairly autonomous company. It seems they just want to be able sell the best satellite internet service available in rural areas, and bundle it with their Dish TV service. Currently, Viasat's new 12 mbit service is only available east of the Mississippi and on the west coast, leaving a large gap in the western desert, mountain states and pacific northwest (where I live). In the gap areas, Viasat has upgraded some legacy customers to 5mbit service (using the capacity from freed up legacy satellites), but due to capacity issues, they are currently not upgrading legacy customers or taking new customers (like me). The news story seems to imply that Dish will soon have available a more robust nationwide service.

It remains to be seen how the new Echostar 17 satellite will be utilized, and what packages will be offered to what customers, and by what companies, at what price. I was previously under the impression that the Echostar 17 satellite was similar to that of Viasat, that is to say, it would be primarily for the benefit of eastern customers and the west coast. But based on the wording of the news story, it leaves room for hope that it will be targeted to the gap areas described above. Whether the new service will be marketed/branded as Dish or Hughesnet Gen4, or something else, doesn't matter I guess, as long as I can finally get 5mbit or better service in my river canyon cabin by the end of September!

P.S. to all you thread hijackers, you don't need to tell me that these advertised speeds are not real world speeds, nor do I want to see your speed tests. Thanks.


silbaco
Premium
join:2009-08-03
USA
reply to cheesey1

said by cheesey1:

Wow...ya' all know how to hijack a thread don't ya??? Out of 36 replies, there was a one or two actually related to the thread's topic and then.....

Having re-read the original news stories, and better absorbing the fact that Dish and Hughesnet (HN) are both part of the Echostar empire, it is interesting that Dish has been selling Viasat/Exede service, even though Viasat is a direct competitor to Echostar. So Dish must operate as a fairly autonomous company. It seems they just want to be able sell the best satellite internet service available in rural areas, and bundle it with their Dish TV service. Currently, Viasat's new 12 mbit service is only available east of the Mississippi and on the west coast, leaving a large gap in the western desert, mountain states and pacific northwest (where I live). In the gap areas, Viasat has upgraded some legacy customers to 5mbit service (using the capacity from freed up legacy satellites), but due to capacity issues, they are currently not upgrading legacy customers or taking new customers (like me). The news story seems to imply that Dish will soon have available a more robust nationwide service.

It remains to be seen how the new Echostar 17 satellite will be utilized, and what packages will be offered to what customers, and by what companies, at what price. I was previously under the impression that the Echostar 17 satellite was similar to that of Viasat, that is to say, it would be primarily for the benefit of eastern customers and the west coast. But based on the wording of the news story, it leaves room for hope that it will be targeted to the gap areas described above. Whether the new service will be marketed/branded as Dish or Hughesnet Gen4, or something else, doesn't matter I guess, as long as I can finally get 5mbit or better service in my river canyon cabin by the end of September!

I have heard rumors that the spot beams on Hughesnet XVII are larger, allowing them to cover more area with the same number of spot beams. If that is the case, then Dish will be able to offer service better than that of Exede in areas Viasat-1 does not cover. At slower speeds of 5mbps, congestion should be less of a concern. I would imagine Dish would try to top Exede and Verizon on caps. If they would give discounts on bundling TV and Internet, they could make their service quite attractive. I guess we will see.

DrStrangLov

join:2012-03-28
reply to Heh213

said by Heh213:

Either way it's just another thing the turbo page proxy likes to mess with I guess

Both satellite providers can/will "slam" a site at full speed ahead if bandwidth is available. When doing the one meg payload first, Testmy should reject it, and then flip you to a higher payload.

Testmy went to a seven second download requirement, and 12 Mbyte payload does take more than seven seconds.

If in doubt, try a 50 Mybyte plus payload.

DrStrangLov

join:2012-03-28
reply to silbaco

said by silbaco:

I have heard rumors that the spot beams on Hughesnet XVII are larger....I guess we will see.




»www.dailywireless.org/2012/07/06···aunched/

zeddlar

join:2007-04-09
Jay, OK
Reviews:
·exede by ViaSat
·McDonald County ..
reply to cheesey1

Any thread that goes 2 or more pages is going to wander off topic. Granted this one wandered a little soon but its not to surprising when people are comparing oranges to apples.

The AT&T test site was pretty close, it should have read close to 2.77 Mb/s down and it hit at 2.86 but thats splitting hairs and not enough to worry about, was the same with upload speed only a bit slower instead of faster.
--
HughesNet elite plan/.74 dish w/1watt trans. / 9000 modem / 3 computers on a linksy's wired network


Iowa Cowboy

join:2012-08-16
Monticello, IA

apples and oranges?? I rather compare boobies myself



compuguybna

join:2009-06-17
Nashville, TN
Reviews:
·Millenicom
·HughesNet Satell..
·ooma
·Virgin Mobile Br..
·Charter

so so so so so so OFF TOPIC! lol

said by Iowa Cowboy:

apples and oranges?? I rather compare boobies myself


One More Too

join:2010-09-09
Galena, IL
reply to silbaco

said by silbaco:

I have heard rumors that the spot beams on Hughesnet XVII are larger, allowing them to cover more area with the same number of spot beams.

From looking at the map provided by DrStranLov and comparing it to the map for Spaceway 3, the beam footprints for the new satellite actually appear to be somewhat smaller than those for Spaceway 3.

»www.satelliteguys.us/attachment.···05204215

DrStrangLov

join:2012-03-28
reply to zeddlar

said by zeddlar:

The AT&T test site was pretty close

I run Networx, and using its speed tester, one can see how fast and amount coming in. Just have to click on it when one thinks test will start.

That's how I confirmed that Testmy was OK...double check.


dbirdman
Premium,MVM
join:2003-07-07
usa
kudos:5
reply to One More Too

said by One More Too:

said by silbaco:

I have heard rumors that the spot beams on Hughesnet XVII are larger, allowing them to cover more area with the same number of spot beams.

From looking at the map provided by DrStranLov and comparing it to the map for Spaceway 3, the beam footprints for the new satellite actually appear to be somewhat smaller than those for Spaceway 3.

»www.satelliteguys.us/attachment.···05204215

He posted a link that shows both Spaceway3/Exede and Viasat/WB. He attached/displayed the latter one, not the Hughes one.
--
Motosat self-pointing dishes: 1.2-meter XF-3 on 93W, .74 meter G74 on 127W, SL-5 HD DirecTV|idirect 3100|Hughes HN7000S|Verizon UMW190 Air Card|1990 Blue Bird Wanderlodge Bus "Blue Thunder"|Author of hnFAP-Alert, PC-OPI and DSSatTool

cheesey1

join:2012-08-16
Juneau, AK
reply to DrStrangLov

According to the map, my cabin would be in area 12 (no colors). I am going to assume that means the service offered would be nothing fancy (hopefully 5mbits at least).


cheesey1

join:2012-08-16
Juneau, AK
reply to DrStrangLov

DrStrangLov: thanks for providing the map and link. the link provides the best explanation of what is really going on, and dovetails closely with the Dish Network story.



dbirdman
Premium,MVM
join:2003-07-07
usa
kudos:5
reply to cheesey1

said by cheesey1:

According to the map, my cabin would be in area 12 (no colors). I am going to assume that means the service offered would be nothing fancy (hopefully 5mbits at least).

Are you clear that the map was a ViaSat map, and not a Hughes map?
--
Motosat self-pointing dishes: 1.2-meter XF-3 on 93W, .74 meter G74 on 127W, SL-5 HD DirecTV|idirect 3100|Hughes HN7000S|Verizon UMW190 Air Card|1990 Blue Bird Wanderlodge Bus "Blue Thunder"|Author of hnFAP-Alert, PC-OPI and DSSatTool