Satellite > HughesNet Satellite > [DW7000] New FAP is NOT COMPATIBLE with routine internet usage.

[DW7000] New FAP is NOT COMPATIBLE with routine internet usage.

Re: [DW7000] New FAP is NOT COMPATIBLE with routine internet us

reply to charlie92
Hey Charlie,
Not sure how Nero allows updates but cant you download the updates once and use them twice?????
Ed
--
DirecPc SRS on G11, 1370mhz, XP Pro P4 3.0 DPC v4.0.39 1.024G RAM

This was posted by someone called "TheFapinMinstrel" recently:

*********************************

FAPpin' HugeNet gotta go

They advertize its goodness
And boundless bandwidth flow
FAPpin' HugeNet gotta go

But all you get's restriction
And service that 'aint so
FAPpin' HugeNet gotta go

If you 'aint a heavy user
They'll fix it so you don't know
FAPpin' HugeNet gotta go

You thinks you is their customer
But respect's a word they don't know
FAPpin' HugeNet gotta go

They's just tryin'a fill their pockets
With an upgrade cheatn' show
FAPpin' HugeNet gotta go!

*********************************

(I think the moral of this tale is go if you can...)

reply to charlie92
I think someone needs to define the word "routine". The residential service really wasn't designed to network multiple computers...that would be more along the lines of a small office plan. Of course you can do it but what do you expect if you download multiple updates @ 184MB?? As another user said you probably either have to save the update to a file that you can then use on multiple systems or manage your updates better. (Do one the first day and the other the second day.) It might be a hassle to do it that way but it's better than worrying about going over the limit.
--
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

Along with your definition of "routine", let's define "residential".

In today's world a residence is more than one computer, frequently one for Dad, one for Mon and one or more for the kids.

Splitting hairs about how we should handle a single product upgrade totally misses the point (though it perhaps serves the interests of the Hughes cheerleaders here).

Typical family internet usage, including keeping thing up to date, significantly exceeds the "Residential" and "Pro" plans and is marginal for the "Business" plans.

For proof, look at what other providers of non satellite systems offer.

reply to charlie92
If you downloaded three copies to three machines, you've obviously got a home network (LAN). Perhaps Charlie you don't realize you can share files - and therefore launch executables - across your LAN. You've got three computers; let's call them A, B, and C.

First you configure which drives on which computers you want to share files over your LAN. Then download your big updates to ONE computer, let's say computer A. Store it on a shared Computer A drive. From that point, Computer B will be able to access that file on Computer A. Simply execute it as if it actually resided on Computer B. It will perform the update on Computer B just as if it had been downloaded on computer B. Repeat as required for Computer C

//greg//
--
HN7000S/1.2Ghz Tualatin/1GB PC133 - W2K Pro/SP4 - G11/1410H - RSL78/ACP82 - v4.2.1.10C - RWIN 513920/MTU 1500 - Gateway/66.82.10.xx/DNS66.82.4.8 plus rollovers - Firefox 2.0.0.3/proxy switch - TrendMicro AV/firewall

Greg, for a generic file what you are saying is valid, but for product upgrades things are not always that easy. I stopped using Nero some time ago, but I remember it as one of many programs where installation and upgrade is tied to the installed program in order to make piracy difficult.

A prime example is Microsoft, whose deliberately bloated code is not only large, but unavailable to the typical non technical user except under operating system control.

People become computer savy over time, and lack of experience should not cross usage boundaries and penalise them, which is what this post is about.

What it's really about is a practical balance between the real world limits and costs of using satellites, and real world customer needs... and a supplier who is honestly trying to make it work for everyone, as opposed to manipulating things in their favour with a blatant disregard for their customer.

A sense that Hughes is doing this for other people too would make all the difference...

reply to charlie92
Before my system was installed I received email notifications from HN detailing the TOS and conditions. A part of one of these emails spelled out networking. It's not like HN didn't advise of the implications of networking on my account.

Home Networking:

Home networking equipment is not included with your HughesNet System. For network setup, support and configuration, contact your network hardware manufacturer and/or operating system software developer (HUGHES is not responsible for home network configuration or management).
Please note that all computers on a home network will be sharing a single connection. Simultaneous use of high bandwidth applications by multiple users may result in degradation of download and surfing speeds, and are subject to the Fair Access Policy.

I disagree with you on HN is not compatible with routine internet use. I also use 2 computers both with auto updates and have never come close to the FAP limits. Trying to force a system to do things it was never designed to do is IMO "NOT ROUTINE USE OF THE INTERNET".
--
HN7000S/Satmex6/1150/0.78/pro/Sig level: 60

reply to Arion

reply to charlie92
I network 6 computers just fine with the CE plan. I just limit everyone to 30MB in 6 hours. If they go over the limit it drops them to a to 100kbps connection. Never had a problem, even with the new fap even know I must say it sucks ass.
--
Hughesnet | HN7000S |SM5, 117 West, 970 MHz | 3.2GHZ Intel | BFG GF 6800 OC | Win XP Pro SP2/98SE/ Macbook Pro OS X Tiger | PCs connected via Linksys WRT54G | DD-WRT firmware: DD-WRT v24 Beta (01/18/07) std

reply to charlie92
All the pontificating from both opposite spectrums aside it comes down to one simple issue. The chances of you getting Hughes to change their policy is slim to none. The only thing that will change the policy is a massive exodus of subscribers which would be apparent when the next quarter runs around.

What you are left with is two basic choices... a) learn to manage the system and live within the parameters in order to avoid the fap. For the networked computers a shared folder where you dl the updates for most products and then share them among the computers is one option. Going to manual updates for all your programs and restricting the big updates to one computer at a time is another option, it might be a pain but it's the reality of your situation, or b) since hughes isn't working for you then leave them. If you don't have a contract then pack up and go. You can go to WB or one of the higher performance providers like I-Direct, or if your fortunate enough you have a wireless option and have never had the shove under your rear to go that direction before...now you do. If you are under contract then you have two other choices a1) break the contract and pay the penalty or b1) going back to "a" learn to manage your system and live with it until your out of contract and then leave.

It's the American way to have a good old fashioned bitch fest and we all do it from time to time in different areas but it accomplishes nothing except to raise your blood pressure. Either learn to live with it or get rid of it. Doesn't seem to be many other options.
--
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

Arion I am fully aware of file sharing via LAN. However as someone pointed out to you many software products force registered users to update through their own app-specific
client program.

Another company that is exactly likewise is Stardock
(WindowBlinds,Object Desktop..etc)

Moreover "going to manual updates" is not available on many apps as they do not offer a "save" function but limit one to "run" or "install" and do not always offer a "pause/resume" button either. In addition Nero Update did not disclose the total MB size till the update was already underway. They probably assumed anyone on "broadband unbound" could handle a 184M file. They obviously feel users are accustomed to these file sizes and typically have no artificial restraints (like FAP) and do not need to offer alternative update methods.

So I stand by my opinion from real-world experience that the new so-called "Fair Acces Policy" often prohibits and certainly impedes many run-of-the-mill and ordinary tasks we all need to perform.

None of this Hughes BS would be necessary had HNS not continually oversold and overcrowded their own internet resources.

reply to Arion
Arion,

there is nothing to bitch about, Hughes uses the fear and scare tactic, now it is up to the user to :

a) pay to much
b) play the game and optimize
c) going somewhere else

I do currently b) and looking into c) ...

but that changes nothing with how Hughes conduct business and that is also no bitching
--
DW7000 release 5.4.0.33, 117W:1230, pro, router 66.82.158.77, rate code 256k 2/3 (TC), signal usually 80

Valid points one and all but in the end it comes down to the same issue. Were not going to be able to change how Hughes does business so your either going to have to learn how to live with it or move to a different internet source which meets your needs better.
--
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

My son put our CE service into FAP several times after 4/18 until he got the word that he was in the dog house if he didn't start using a DL mgr. No problems since then and if he can do it anybody can.

reply to charlie92
A routine update that is 184Mb.. Holy smokes! You can bet I will not be using Nero anytime soon.

reply to Arion
I agree with your last post. I just did not agree with your first. Also the 375MB limit for 24hours is wrong. Hughes never sold that and it is higher... how much they sold me actually? Don't know, but I need to rephrase that, they sold ME a known refill rate and changed the rules without telling me the rules, but that aside the 24 hour limit is still higher then the threshold.

So there is what I call fear and scare tactic. The topic starter paid for more bandwidth and could use more bandwidth without getting faped. But they are scared to use the service they paid for because they get nothing to monitor how much they really used of their paid for bandwidth.

All this has nothing to do with bitching, that is the game Hughes plays currently and some of us try to play it well. But thats another topic .... and will it work in hughes advantage ... we will see.
--
DW7000 release 5.4.0.33, 117W:1230, pro, router 66.82.158.77, rate code 256k 2/3 (TC), signal usually 80

reply to Arion
Just this little bit of "bitching" has got them doing serious damage control, hasn't it? (Just look at the amount of it in the above posts!)

And thanks for the confirmation guys:

"The only thing that will change the policy is a massive exodus of subscribers which would be apparent when the next quarter runs around."

That says it all, doesn't it?. (Translation: We don't give a hoot about you unless you affect our income.)

People who become consumed with self interest also become very vulnerable. Don't be so confident that Hughes won't change.