dslreports logo
site
 
    All Forums Hot Topics Gallery
spc

spacer




how-to block ads


Search Topic:
uniqs
267
share rss forum feed

rradina

join:2000-08-08
Chesterfield, MO

1 recommendation

How are they going to "fix it"?

Unless there's some kind of firmware bug in the satellite or CPE that's causing management problems, there are only a limited number of reasons as to why things suck:

1) Insufficient bandwidth capacity where the traffic enters/exits the hard-line Internet
2) Insufficient satellite capacity
3) ????

If it's #1 that's almost beyond belief. Who would spend millions (billions) floating a new satellite and launch it with insufficient hard-line capacity?

If it's #2, how can that be "fixed"? I suppose it's possible if they started the service with a limited number of transponders and they can add more but WTF? That's almost as bad as #1.

Anyone have a #3?

Regardless, if it's really #2, the only way to fix that is to stop new subscriptions and wait for enough customers to leave through attrition.



FFH
Premium
join:2002-03-03
Tavistock NJ
kudos:5

said by rradina:

Unless there's some kind of firmware bug in the satellite or CPE that's causing management problems, there are only a limited number of reasons as to why things suck:

1) Insufficient bandwidth capacity where the traffic enters/exits the hard-line Internet
2) Insufficient satellite capacity
3) ????

Anyone have a #3?

How about a mis-aimed sat dish at residence or one with line of sight thru trees, etc.
--
A democracy cannot exist as a permanent form of government. It can only exist until the voters discover that they can vote themselves money from the public treasury.

TexasRebel

join:2011-05-29
Edgewood, TX
reply to rradina

I seriously doubt it's #2. The satellite is the same platform that makes up ViaSat-1. Exede12 has had at least an 8 month jump on Hughesnet and there have been many users on Exede that are getting 18+Mbps down and 4Mbps up when doing speedtests.

Hughesnet tell you to use their speedtest servers and I've done that over the 3 months I've had the service and not once have I ever seen 15Mbps that is advertised for the PowerMax plan.

If it's not #1 then Hughesnet is secretly selling off most of the 130Gbps of bandwidth that the satellite has and is using it for nefarious purposes.

I'm really believing that Hughesnet rushed out HNG4 because they were really losing market share with Exede. Exede apparently spend a buttload of money with building new gateways and server farms and it paid off.

Hughesnet just decided to use the infrastructure they already had in place with their legacy satellites and now it's showing how damn stupid they were for doing it. If they are claiming that the HNG4 service will improve over the next year, then it's probably because they will start migrating HNG4 traffic to newly build gateways and server farms that can handle the bandwidth.



Heh213

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

said by TexasRebel:

If it's not #1 then Hughesnet is secretly selling off most of the 130Gbps of bandwidth that the satellite has and is using it for nefarious purposes.

What kind of nefarious purposes?

Just sounds like HughesNet as normal to me, I have low expectations.

rradina

join:2000-08-08
Chesterfield, MO
reply to FFH

This would cause it to suck only during peak periods?

Besides, this only explains one customer. The article implies that everyone is slow during peak periods. Would this cause everyone to be slow?



FFH
Premium
join:2002-03-03
Tavistock NJ
kudos:5

said by rradina:

The article implies that everyone is slow during peak periods. Would this cause everyone to be slow?

Yes, implied. But nothing but a few selected complaints in a forum. Not proof of everyone being slow.
--
A democracy cannot exist as a permanent form of government. It can only exist until the voters discover that they can vote themselves money from the public treasury.

rradina

join:2000-08-08
Chesterfield, MO

The complaints in our HughesNet forum are flowing heavily, with dozens of users telling me they've filed complaints with the Better Business Bureau over the botched product launch. Customers with slow or no service say they then get to deal with long hold times and numerous technician visits with no problem resolution.
Are we reading the same article?

Besides, why would alignment only suck during peak periods?

TexasRebel

join:2011-05-29
Edgewood, TX
reply to Heh213

nefarious purposes as in possibly selling it off to FEMA where it can be used at those so-called non-existing FEMA camps that they have spread out all over the US.

before calling me a tinfoil hat wearer, go do some research on FEMA camps.. Jesse Ventura covered them in one of his Conspiracy Theory episodes..

Seeing that Hughesnet is partly owned by the government, I wouldn't put it past them.


big_e

join:2011-03-05

Everyone knows that FEMA camps are only used to secretly detain Elvis, John Lennon, Tupac Shakur and Michael Jackson. Their internet bandwidth needs can't be that great.


tanzam75

join:2012-07-19
reply to TexasRebel

said by TexasRebel:

If it's not #1 then Hughesnet is secretly selling off most of the 130Gbps of bandwidth that the satellite has and is using it for nefarious purposes.

I'm really believing that Hughesnet rushed out HNG4 because they were really losing market share with Exede. Exede apparently spend a buttload of money with building new gateways and server farms and it paid off.

Well, 130 Gbps is the aggregate capacity of the entire satellite. You'd be competing with other users on beam 44 for the 2.2 Gbps of capacity in your beam -- which covers the Dallas metropolitan area.

As for the other hypothesis, HughestNet claims "All-new gateway architecture ... New distributed Network Management System ... New Web acceleration severs." Maybe the roll-out isn't complete yet.

Slide 11 of the investor presentation from October 8, 2012: »files.shareholder.com/downloads/···inal.pdf