Bamboozled
@myvzw.com
| reply to anoner
Re: pantech um175 connection manager?
Hello everyone,
I too had Millenicom service with the Franklin CDU-680 modem (supplied by Millenicom). I work from home and when I attempted to connect to the Millenicom service, no service available. I then talked to B... at tech support and was told by him " There is a long list of customers who had the cellular line they were using dropped". From that point on the VM messages I had left with billing and tech support at Millenicom were never returned.
I think it is very poor customer service, on Millenicom's part, to not give any notice to their customers regarding the impending drop of their service.
I talked with J... at Millenicom in August and was told they were seeking a new cellular provider to partner with them. So, it seems they had plenty of notice that this would occur.
After this experience, I called Verizon, established service and received a new Novatel USB727 modem. The Novatel modem outperforms the Franklin CDU-680 modem hands down. I currently receive approximately 2 Mbps downstream and 586 Kbps upstream. Needless to say I am very pleased.
To anyone interested, I strongly suggest getting the Verizon plan for the same $59.99 |
|
Jack_in_VA
Premium
join:2007-11-26
Mathews, VA
| reply to T_Flight
Re: pantech um175 connection manager?
What happened to the "fantastic" CDU-680 speeds you were claiming a few months ago. Speeds I might add you never posted screen-shots of. Now you say you only saw speeds up to 350?
I would suggest that any speed gain realized is not because of the Pantech but the switch to Verizon Wireless Service. Therefore it is not an apples to apples comparison. |
|
rokntroll
join:2007-01-14
Columbus, PA | reply to anoner
Agree w/t_flight,This with Millenicom drivers and dial-up connection |
|
T_Flight
join:2007-12-30
 ·Millenicom
| reply to anoner
Here are actual pings. Sometimes Speedtest can be off by a great margin with Wireless.
Pinging yahoo.com [68.180.206.184] with 32 bytes of data:
Reply from 68.180.206.184: bytes=32 time=163ms TTL=44
Reply from 68.180.206.184: bytes=32 time=170ms TTL=44
Reply from 68.180.206.184: bytes=32 time=170ms TTL=44
Reply from 68.180.206.184: bytes=32 time=163ms TTL=44
Ping statistics for 68.180.206.184:
Packets: Sent = 4, Received = 4, Lost = 0 (0% loss),
Approximate round trip times in milli-seconds:
Minimum = 163ms, Maximum = 170ms, Average = 166ms
Pinging google.com [64.233.187.99] with 32 bytes of data:
Reply from 64.233.187.99: bytes=32 time=125ms TTL=238
Reply from 64.233.187.99: bytes=32 time=116ms TTL=238
Reply from 64.233.187.99: bytes=32 time=95ms TTL=238
Reply from 64.233.187.99: bytes=32 time=95ms TTL=238
Ping statistics for 64.233.187.99:
Packets: Sent = 4, Received = 4, Lost = 0 (0% loss),
Approximate round trip times in milli-seconds:
Minimum = 95ms, Maximum = 125ms, Average = 107ms |
|
T_Flight
join:2007-12-30
·Millenicom
| reply to anoner
Vitriol huh? Whatever man.
Anyhow here's a screenshot for the doubters.
This was just done. I'm well aware that Tower distance an other issues affect these things. Nothing is gonna work 100% of the time for everybody.
The posts I was responding to were not the ones with genuine concerns, but the ones in this thread calling the Pantech "junk" when it's obvious they haven't even tried this modem yet. That spreads bad information and causes more problems for these companies. They don't need trouble right now.
They had no control over what happened. it's believed that many modems were disabled, but it's not know for a fact yet. They had no control over it. They are replacing modems for free at their cost. You can't ask for any better service. For most people, they will end up getting a better modem and better speeds than what they had, and I didn't want naysayers causing people to send back Pantech's thinking they were Junk, because I'm already seeing that they are not.
People could very well stand to get better service. Some may not. Some may wish to stick with their Franklin and it may work better for them, but we nee to let them be the Judge of that.
I think it's clear by the above test that these modems are not "Junk", and should not be labeled that way. That's bogus info that has no place here. |
|
Mobility
join:2008-11-03
Beverly Hills, CA
| reply to T_Flight
said by T_Flight  :I've seen some slams already on the new modem that Millenicom has been replacing for FREE and want to straighten that out right NOW. People, before you slam stuff, why don't you try it first? Isn't that a novel idea? I just got this modem today, and am very impressed with it. First speed test showed my upload more than doubled. I would see ranges of up to 350 and no higher before with rthe CDU680, and first speedtest right out of the gate today showed 744 up. I'be NEVER seen that kind of speed up before with my franklin...not even burst speeds or freak speedtests. Becasue of the increased upload speeds, I get quicker rountrip times and my pages load faster. I will be flying online tomorrow to test it out with my flight sims, but from what I've seen already it's by FAR better. I had some issues recently with my lights on my Franklin doing strange things. MC is aware of this, and it's a common issue. I suspect Firmware issues with the Franklin, and also had issues with the software getting corupted on my onboard memory drive on my Franklin. Get one of these and try it first. It may or may not work for everybody, but my bet is most people will like them. I'm ina location very close to a Tower that is not saturated that either has Optical lines or multiple T1's. I saw download speeds in excess of 1200 down so i know the towers here are hot. I have not tweaked or even downloaded connection manager software yet. This is a box stock Pantech with only drivers loaded and using Dialup Networking. I have NO ISSUES with this device at all just the way it is. If that is all I get, I am very satisfied. It sure beats dialup or Satelite, and I can go anywhere with it. Remember, MC is sending these out for free, and they've had a hell of a last couple of weeks...cut them some slack. T_Flight,
Myself and others have made the same positive observations without being overly apologetic. If you are going to be realistic about the service of the new modem, you should be realistic about the poor, and in some cases intentionally dishonest, communication.
One should also be realistic that signal, thus performance, varies for different people.
The vitriol in your post is quite suspect. Quoted for posterity. Really - the demanding and defensive tone ("NOW" etc) is quite absurd. |
|
T_Flight
join:2007-12-30
·Millenicom
| reply to anoner
I've seen some slams already on the new modem that Millenicom has been replacing for FREE and want to straighten that out right NOW.
People, before you slam stuff, why don't you try it first? Isn't that a novel idea?
I just got this modem today, and am very impressed with it. First speed test showed my upload more than doubled. I would see ranges of up to 350 and no higher before with rthe CDU680, and first speedtest right out of the gate today showed 744 up. I'be NEVER seen that kind of speed up before with my franklin...not even burst speeds or freak speedtests.
Becasue of the increased upload speeds, I get quicker rountrip times and my pages load faster. I will be flying online tomorrow to test it out with my flight sims, but from what I've seen already it's by FAR better.
I had some issues recently with my lights on my Franklin doing strange things. MC is aware of this, and it's a common issue. I suspect Firmware issues with the Franklin, and also had issues with the software getting corupted on my onboard memory drive on my Franklin.
Get one of these and try it first. It may or may not work for everybody, but my bet is most people will like them. I'm ina location very close to a Tower that is not saturated that either has Optical lines or multiple T1's. I saw download speeds in excess of 1200 down so i know the towers here are hot.
I have not tweaked or even downloaded connection manager software yet. This is a box stock Pantech with only drivers loaded and using Dialup Networking. I have NO ISSUES with this device at all just the way it is. If that is all I get, I am very satisfied. It sure beats dialup or Satelite, and I can go anywhere with it.
Remember, MC is sending these out for free, and they've had a hell of a last couple of weeks...cut them some slack. |
|
Jack_in_VA
Premium
join:2007-11-26
Mathews, VA
| reply to cooljay
said by cooljay :said by Jack_in_VA : My problem here is the tower. I don't know how Sprint connects with the web from the tower. It seems to be the bottleneck. I've been looking at your speed tests that you've posted and it does seem to be a tower issue, especially seeing that high latency kick in at times. Not sure if it's something wrong with the towers hardware or just too many people on at once  . It's puzzling to me. All over the place. Below is latest speed test. Nothing changed on my end but big difference. I'm in a very rural area and don't think too many are on the tower. I could live with the lower speeds easily but the slow dialup browsing speed kills me.
 |
|
cooljay
join:2006-09-11
Franklinton, LA
| reply to Jack_in_VA
said by Jack_in_VA : My problem here is the tower. I don't know how Sprint connects with the web from the tower. It seems to be the bottleneck. I've been looking at your speed tests that you've posted and it does seem to be a tower issue, especially seeing that high latency kick in at times. Not sure if it's something wrong with the towers hardware or just too many people on at once .
--
Mobile Broadband EVDO Rev. A via Pantech UM175 (Millenicom) |
|
Jack_in_VA
Premium
join:2007-11-26
Mathews, VA | reply to caribconsult
I got my 680 reactivated and refused delivery on the Panteh. My problem here is the tower. I don't know how Sprint connects with the web from the tower. It seems to be the bottleneck. |
|
caribconsult
Premium
join:2003-03-19
Mayaguez, PR
 ·HughesNet Satellit..
·Millenicom
·Sprint Mobile Broa..
| reply to Jack_in_VA
Jack: try your mobile device in an airport or in a busy city or urban area where there might be towers with multiple T1 lines and you'll probably see speeds up in the high 1Mb to 2Mb range. Some of the posters here are lucky enough to have that service where they live.
As for you poor souls who got the Pantech and are experiencing miserable speeds, it's probably due to poor verizon coverage in your area, and maybe you are only connecting at RTT speeds, not EVDO. You can thank Millenicom's idiot techies at the call center for this, and partly blame MCom themselves for not jumping on this situation and leaving it in the hands of know-nothings. HQ knew fairly quickly what had happened, and many of us, including yours truly, were lucky enough to get our CDU's reactivated, instead of going for the swap, but even days later, people were still getting swapped by the GA team...didn't HQ tell them? It seems like a government operation more than anything!
--
Franklin CDU680/Assent MBR400 combo, Andrews T1900 Grid antenna, Millenicom, 4 XPPro stations, Mozilla everywhere. |
|
Jack_in_VA
Premium
join:2007-11-26
Mathews, VA
1 edit | reply to cooljay
said by cooljay
As for the "we're paying for 3.1/1.8 mbps" no you're not. As with any other ISP other there, you're paying for speeds "UP TO" which means you're not promised 3.1 mbps and says so right on their website "Speeds up to 3.1M/1.8M". Not all cell towers have more than 1 T1 line so it's not possible for some cell towers to even get over 1.2 mbps, not to mention tower crowding (over loaded towers).
A single T-1 limits me to ~1200Kb/s. My big problem is I have terrible browsing speeds even at 1200. Throughput is about the same as dialup. I almost think Sprint is throttling it. I've tried to run IE without add-ons but that doesn't do a thing.
I don't see anyone getting anywhere close to the 3.1 possible speed. Too much tower loading for that even when it's available. Perhaps some don't understand the technical limitations of wireless. |
|
cooljay
join:2006-09-11
Franklinton, LA
2 edits | reply to kuei
said by kuei :
The main problem is we are paying for a 3.1/1.8 mbps connection and this pantech is only achieving 115kbps.$60/mo for a dialup connection? What a ripoff! See the other thread on how to get your CDU reactivated if you don't have sufficient Verizon coverage.
As for the "we're paying for 3.1/1.8 mbps" no you're not. As with any other ISP other there, you're paying for speeds "UP TO" which means you're not promised 3.1 mbps and says so right on their website "Speeds up to 3.1M/1.8M". Not all cell towers have more than 1 T1 line so it's not possible for some cell towers to even get over 1.2 mbps, not to mention tower crowding (over loaded towers). |
|
kuei
@myvzw.com
| reply to anoner
I think Millenicom users (i included) just got shafted. It seems all franklin modems were disconnected and replaced with the pantech garbage without even so much as a heads up warning. The main problem is we are paying for a 3.1/1.8 mbps connection and this pantech is only acheiving 115kbps.
$60/mo for a dialup connection? What a ripoff! |
|
Rave4Keep
@myvzw.com
| reply to anoner
Got my UM175 and so far so good. Getting it up and working on Ubuntu was a snap too.
Just keep in mind (I believe anyway) the CDU-680 connected you to Sprint. The UM175 connects you to Verizon. So it's not apples to apples comparison for the two modems.
So far for me Verizon seems faster but the speed is flaky. Ping times go from 150ms to 3seconds for no apparent reason. But all and all (this is just day one) it seems FASTER.. |
|
caribconsult
Premium
join:2003-03-19
Mayaguez, PR
·HughesNet Satellit..
·Millenicom
·Sprint Mobile Broa..
| reply to dMarks
Yes I have that number but I have it under FAX numbers. I don't recall if I ever sent a fax to them. The 800 numbers that used to connect to HQ in Oregon now go to a callcenter in Georgia, and you have to ask them to elevate you and then a tech from HQ will call; just hope you are home when they do! Or leave a cell#.
--
Franklin CDU680/Assent MBR400 combo, Andrews T1900 Grid antenna, Millenicom, 4 XPPro stations, Mozilla everywhere. |
|
dMarks
Melting Faces For Fun
join:2007-02-09
Leslie, MI
·Millenicom
·HughesNet Satellit..
1 edit | reply to caribconsult
No, I don't. I've yet to get the UM175 to see if it will work for me, might be today I hope. If it doesn't, I'll just have to push my way through the call center and get transferred to the Oregon HQ. At least I'll be armed with the fact that others have been able to get the CDU680 reactivated.
EDIT: I did find a number using Google search for Millenicom in Portland, OR. It's (503) 768-3063. It will be a long distance call, and probably connect to their office, not tech support, but may be able to negotiate your way from there. Dunno if you had that number before or not Carib
--
Windows XP Pro SP2|AMD Athlon 64 FX-57|2GB Dual Channel RAM|2x GeForce 7950 GT 512MB|250GB HDD |
|
caribconsult
Premium
join:2003-03-19
Mayaguez, PR
·HughesNet Satellit..
·Millenicom
·Sprint Mobile Broa..
| reply to dMarks
I think you hit the nail on the head, DM. Do you have a direct number for Oregon HQ? The numbers I used to have now are re-routed to their callcenter in Georgia, I think, and the only number I still have for HQ is (800) 898-7072 but that takes you to billing and you generally get the answering machine. Do you have a general HQ number that works?
--
Franklin CDU680/Assent MBR400 combo, Andrews T1900 Grid antenna, Millenicom, 4 XPPro stations, Mozilla everywhere. |
|
dMarks
Melting Faces For Fun
join:2007-02-09
Leslie, MI
·Millenicom
·HughesNet Satellit..
| reply to JAC
JAC, from what I understand, you will probably have to call up Millenicom's main office and get in touch with a senior tech for new MDN and MSID numbers. Just let them know that Verizon is not available to you where you live, so you need the CDU680 reactivated.
--
Windows XP Pro SP2|AMD Athlon 64 FX-57|2GB Dual Channel RAM|2x GeForce 7950 GT 512MB|250GB HDD |
|
