dslreports logo
site
 
    All Forums Hot Topics Gallery
spc

spacer




how-to block ads


Search Topic:
uniqs
4952
share rss forum feed

corvettez06u

join:2007-01-15
New Richmond, OH

Anyone else thinking WildBlue?

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.

IzzyJG99

join:2007-04-28
Deland, FL
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.

corvettez06u

join:2007-01-15
New Richmond, OH
reply to 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.


Arion

join:2006-07-09
Marquette, MI
reply to corvettez06u
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

corvettez06u

join:2007-01-15
New Richmond, OH
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.

DickDastardl

join:2005-10-10
Port Republic, VA
reply to corvettez06u
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.


Sircolby45

join:2005-11-26
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

Brad R

join:2007-05-06
Collingwood, ON
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

IzzyJG99

join:2007-04-28
Deland, FL
reply to corvettez06u
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

CMoore2004
Premium
join:2003-02-06
Jonesville, MI
What modem is that with?


Sircolby45

join:2005-11-26
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

IzzyJG99

join:2007-04-28
Deland, FL
reply to CMoore2004
HN7000S with ProPlan. I got 500-800ms pings with the DW6000.


Arion

join:2006-07-09
Marquette, MI
reply to IzzyJG99
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


Fed Up2

@direcpc.com
reply to Sircolby45
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.


Sircolby45

join:2005-11-26
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


Fed Up2

@direcpc.com
Then we have work to do, don't we...


Sircolby45

join:2005-11-26
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


Mokey2000
Mokey

join:2001-02-22
Dixie
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

CMoore2004
Premium
join:2003-02-06
Jonesville, MI
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


Sircolby45

join:2005-11-26
reply to Mokey2000
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

corvettez06u

join:2007-01-15
New Richmond, OH
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?


Piggie
I Actually use Windstream
Premium
join:2005-11-23
Orange Springs, FL
reply to Sircolby45
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)|


Sircolby45

join:2005-11-26
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


Piggie
I Actually use Windstream
Premium
join:2005-11-23
Orange Springs, FL

1 edit
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?


Sircolby45

join:2005-11-26

1 edit
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


Piggie
I Actually use Windstream
Premium
join:2005-11-23
Orange Springs, FL
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)|

corvettez06u

join:2007-01-15
New Richmond, OH
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.


dMarks
Melting Faces For Fun
Premium
join:2007-02-09
Jackson, MI
reply to Fed Up2
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

mrpepsi

join:2006-05-22
reply to corvettez06u
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


Fed Up2

@direcpc.com
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.