dslreports logo
site
spacer

spacer
 
   
spc
story category
HughesNet Still Promising A Future Where Satellite Doesn't Suck
Promises speeds of 5-20 Mbps whenever Jupiter is launched
by Karl Bode 02:35PM Tuesday Nov 09 2010
Not too long ago we talked about how Satellite was seen as the Rodney Dangerfield of broadband connectivity, given the technology's high price, very low caps, and slow speeds. Despite all this, most satellite broadband operators cater to a captive audience that usually lack other options -- which is why total satellite users recently surpassed about a million users. HughesNet prices range from $60 for just 1Mbps/128 kbps to $350 for 5 Mbps 300 kbps -- with daily caps ranging from 200 to 500 MB. Our user reviews clearly reflect user opinions on this value proposition.

Click for full size
Like ViaSat/WildBlue with their upcoming high capacity ViaSat-1 satellite, HughesNet has long promised their upcoming Jupiter satellite (pdf) will help improve things somewhat, HughesNet repeatedly proclaiming that the new bird will have more capacity than all current North American satellites combined. Despite the launch of both satellites being repeatedly hyped for years yet always a year or so away, CNET helps HughesNet drum up some enthusiasm by noting they'll someday offer speeds between 5-20 Mbps:
quote:
The new satellite means that Hughes and its wholesale customers, which will resell the service in Canada and the U.S., will now be able to address between 1.5 million and 2 million consumer broadband customers offering average download speeds of 5Mbps. High-end services could go up to as much as 20Mbps, according to Arunas Slekys, vice president of corporate marketing for Hughes.
Most satellite customers will have to see this kind of satellite broadband Utopia to believe it. Satellite providers have been making these kind of over-the-horizon promises for the better part of a decade, but limited capacity and their pesky inability to defeat basic physics have left them as little more than niche providers serving a captive rural residential market.

While the ViaSat 1 promotional video suggests consumers will see lower prices as a result of the launch, no competitive options for satellite users means prices will likely remain very high, and the added capacity from these new birds will be used to acquire additional customers, not to give users any significant relief on caps (aka "fair access policies" or FAPs, as satellite operators call them).

view:
topics flat nest 

treichhart

join:2006-12-12

about this setup

I would doubt what they are saying about the download speed and its still going to cost the customer the same amount either way. Satellite (internet) is a most outdated technology if you think about it.
dalekinder

join:2009-01-17
Virginia Beach, VA

Re: about this setup

I agree, It is very outdated. Furthermore, Satellite broadband will never be efficient enough for real time applications. Ie: Voip, Gaming or latency intense apps. I do see a good purpose for people who can not receive Dsl, fiber or cable, due to distance problems. Its great for viewing the web and watching youtube, But I never see providers hughsnet or wildblue ever providing a low latency fix. Last time I had wildblue before I moved to the city I was getting tracerts of 500ms+.
davidhoffman
Premium
join:2009-11-19
Warner Robins, GA
kudos:1

1 recommendation

For those who work and live in real remote areas( the middle of the oceans, large deserts, and mountain ranges) satellite communication is the only way I know of to transmit and receive relatively large amounts of data. Maybe there is something else (shortwave radio, ham radio, something radio) that can do the task, but I do not know of it.
bill672

join:2004-09-02
Cambridge, NY

Re: about this setup

said by davidhoffman:

For those who work and live in real remote areas( the middle of the oceans, large deserts, and mountain ranges) satellite communication is the only way I know of to transmit and receive relatively large amounts of data.
I live only 20 miles from a major city on the east coast, and still cannot have any wired or wireless internet service. I live 3 1/2 miles from a village that has dsl, cable, wireless, etc. but I'm outside the service area for those services. Many of my neighbors commute 45 minutes to the city to work, then come home to unserved homes. You don't have to live in a "remote" area to lack service.

Once the density of homes on a road drops below a certain level, the economics of dsl, cable don't work. (The strange thing is, they won't provide it at a higher price.)

For us, satellite is the nearest we come to real broadband. I get 1.5 Mb/250 kb for $80/month. Latency is high with 750ms ping times. But it sure beats dial-up.
--
Upstate NY HN9000 Apple Airport(802.11n)/ Mac OS X 10.6
davidhoffman
Premium
join:2009-11-19
Warner Robins, GA
kudos:1

Re: about this setup

Have you checked to see if you are in a Verizon Wireless Broadband Area? If you are, you might be able to get 10GB/month from Millenicom for $60/month. I have used this to get some coworkers internet access when they have no cable or dsl. Also there are no traditional WISPs in the areas they live.
PDXPLT

join:2003-12-04
Banks, OR

Re: about this setup

That's interesting; I went to their website, typed in my address, and apparently I'm withing their coverage range. I thought the only WISP plans I could get were limited to 5 GB; we seem to average about 7-8 per month.

--what is the download bitrate?

--I imagine the latencies are much better than on my Wildblue satellite connections; what are the ping times?
davidhoffman
Premium
join:2009-11-19
Warner Robins, GA
kudos:1

Re: about this setup

Typical result:

Simba7
I Void Warranties

join:2003-03-24
Billings, MT

Nothing new..

Satellite still sucks.

If you're one of the million unfortunate customers that are stuck with it, I really do feel your pain. I had to deal with DirecWay (now HughesNet) back in '02. After that experience, I'd rather have dialup than HughesNet.

If they increased speeds *AND* removed their caps, it'd be a different story.. But the problem is, even with a new bird in space, they won't get rid of their FAPcap. Which means with the faster speeds, you'll be nailing the FCap alot sooner.

I'd rather keep it at 4mbps without FCaps. Even 1mbps without FCaps would be awesome. The problem is having both FCaps and Latency is hurting Satellite Internet for moderate/power users. They want always fast connections, which the SatCo's aren't willing to provide.
--
Bresnan 18M/1M
MyWS[E5200@3.75GHz,4GB RAM,2x1TB HDDs,Win7]
WifeWS[A64@2GHz,2GB RAM,120GB HDD,Win7]
Router[2xP3@1GHz,512MB RAM,18GB HDD,SMC 8432BTA,2xDigital DE504,Compaq NC3131,Intel Pro/1000MT,IBM Gigabit Ethernet-SX,Allied Telesyn AT2560FX,Gentoo Linux]
biochemistry
Premium
join:2003-05-09
92361

Bye bye Hughesnet

As soon as Verizon LTE hits my area it will be a happy farewell to Hughesnet. Don't even attempt to browse the web during so-called peak hours in the evening. I'm paying 5 times the price of DSL for half the speed and 10 times the latency. I'm well prepared to suffer an early termination fee (which will be the full price no matter how many months I've been on unlike with DirecTV). I'll also be happy to say goodbye to their involuntary automatic deductions from my bank account. (Paying by mail is an extra $5 per month).

jchambers28

join:2007-05-12
Alma, AR

Re: Bye bye Hughesnet

I would pay the extra $5 a Moth to receive the bill When I got tired of them I would cancel and not pay the ETF. The economy is bad we don't need credit.

vpoko
Premium
join:2003-07-03
Boston, MA

Re: Bye bye Hughesnet

Credit report. Sometimes one needs to buy a car, or a house, and the extra interest you'd pay from having that on your report for 7 years could very easily outpace any ETF.
chgo_man99

join:2010-01-01
San Jose, CA

2 edits

Re: Bye bye Hughesnet

if you have a legitimate concern, live moving out, you could always try to cancel the contract without ETF with an attorney's help no matter what they stated in terms or conditions when you signed up. Block your bank account from satellite or close and open new one, and collection agencies can shove their ass if you're settled.

At least what they should do is deduct ETF for months you were their customer and not require to pay the whole amount at once.
chgo_man99

join:2010-01-01
San Jose, CA
Credit report. Sometimes one needs to buy a car, or a house, and the extra interest you'd pay from having that on your report for 7 years could very easily outpace any ETF.
Agree. And you need good credit report for rental, college (student loans), new contract agreements (wireless phone service, cable) and even to get a job!!

Nothing worse than not getting a job because you have a bad credit report!
hottboiinnc
ME

join:2003-10-15
Cleveland, OH
keep waiting on that LTE via VZ too. You may get it from Sprint faster. VZ hasn't even announced their usage or pricing yet.

vpoko
Premium
join:2003-07-03
Boston, MA

Re: Bye bye Hughesnet

There's no question that Verizon LTE will launch within 3 months. Man, everything that comes out of your mouth is nonsense, I've really enjoyed looking through your posting history.
chgo_man99

join:2010-01-01
San Jose, CA

Re: Bye bye Hughesnet

it will lunch by black friday or x-mas
hottboiinnc
ME

join:2003-10-15
Cleveland, OH
in every market? yah sure! They can launch 1 city and delcare a launch and you and everyone else on here would be happy.

The fact is every market will NEVER fully see LTE as VZ will never upgrade the smaller markets right away. Don't be suprised if you see any other cities getting the service within the first or 2nd quarters of next year. If it doens't take off. VZ won't expand it. Look at FiOS. No uptake. no get.

vpoko
Premium
join:2003-07-03
Boston, MA

Re: Bye bye Hughesnet

You didn't say "in every market" anywhere in the post I was replying you, but moving the goal posts is what you do. Yeah, everyone knows that satellite internet is used precisely by those people that have no better alternatives. LTE will soon be another alternative for a good number of people - far fewer people than the entire US population, but not negligible.

maartena
Elmo
Premium
join:2002-05-10
Orange, CA
kudos:2

The two biggest problems with satellite:

1) Latency. Nothing can be done about that, so if you are a gamer or require a connection with low latency for other reasons, satellite will always continue to suck, simply because you can't send data faster then the speed of light.

2) Data caps. 95% of Internet applications don't need low latency. Webbrowsing, Video streaming, downloading files etc can all be done with satellite.... were it not that they impose rediculously low caps on the connections.
--
"I reject your reality and substitute my own!"
bill672

join:2004-09-02
Cambridge, NY

Re: The two biggest problems with satellite:

said by maartena:

Webbrowsing, Video streaming, downloading files etc can all be done with satellite.... were it not that they impose rediculously low caps on the connections.
My Hughesnet plan gives me 520 MB/ day. I don't find that as bad as the 5 GB/month cap that most wireless plans have.

For one thing, 520MB/ day adds up to over 15GB/ month.

Also, there is an unlimited download period every night from 2-7am when I schedule system patch downloads, for example. (I don't know why the wireless companies don't offer something like that.)

Of course, this is inconvenient and annoying, but there is no other option where I live.
--
Upstate NY HN9000 Apple Airport(802.11n)/ Mac OS X 10.6
demir
Premium
join:2010-07-15
usa

satellite + latency = epic fail

Even if satellite does increase it's bandwidth, the latency is still going to suck - and there's not a damn thing they can do about that . . laws of physics limit how fast data can travel through our atmosphere

Compared to sending data through metal (or fiber optics) . . it's an ancient dinosaur

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

Re: satellite + latency = epic fail

said by demir:

Even if satellite does increase it's bandwidth, the latency is still going to suck - and there's not a damn thing they can do about that . . laws of physics limit how fast data can travel through our atmosphere

Compared to sending data through metal (or fiber optics) . . it's an ancient dinosaur
LEO & MEO. Look it up.
demir
Premium
join:2010-07-15
usa

4 edits

Re: satellite + latency = epic fail

LEO makes no difference to people sensitive to latency. Satellite and/or wireless connections are way, way more latent than a dedicated copper or optic connection.

LEO may have cut the penalty by a quarter, but adding 120+ms to your existing latency isn't something any avid gamer is going to do.

I challenge anyone that has a satellite connection to post up a traceroute to a game server

Additionally, let any clear wireless user do the same and we'll compare the latency and see who wins.

Barring any technical issues, hard wired copper and optic is going to win, every time.
patcat88

join:2002-04-05
Jamaica, NY
kudos:1

Re: satellite + latency = epic fail

What about blimpband?
chgo_man99

join:2010-01-01
San Jose, CA
well you cannot turn your arctic climate to tropical when you live in Greenland

SatBrat

@70.40.136.x

Fact Check

I think you made an error in the article. ViaSat-1 is being launched by ViaSat, parent of HughesNet competitor WildBlue. Hughes apparently has a different bird in planning.

zalternate

join:2007-02-22
freedom land

4 edits

Re: Fact Check

said by SatBrat :

I think you made an error in the article. ViaSat-1 is being launched by ViaSat, parent of HughesNet competitor WildBlue. Hughes apparently has a different bird in planning.
Hughesnet is scheduled for early 2012 launch.
The Hughesnet satellite(Jupiter) should be very similar to the ViaSat1(I suppose it could also be a ViaSat1, as Europe has one also).
»www.ssloral.com/html/pressreleas···616.html

»www.ssloral.com/html/satexp/viasat.html

WildBlue's ViaSat1 is scheduled for early 2011 launch.

Edit: Hughesnet Jupiter(also known as Spaceway4) approximate launch date.
»www.satbeams.com/satellites?id=2497

--
Consumer Rights is more than just a suggestion.

compuguybna

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

Re: Fact Check

Yep, different sats, different companies.

said by zalternate:

said by SatBrat :

I think you made an error in the article. ViaSat-1 is being launched by ViaSat, parent of HughesNet competitor WildBlue. Hughes apparently has a different bird in planning.
Hughesnet is scheduled for early 2012 launch.
The Hughesnet satellite(Jupiter) should be very similar to the ViaSat1(I suppose it could also be a ViaSat1, as Europe has one also).
»www.ssloral.com/html/pressreleas···616.html

»www.ssloral.com/html/satexp/viasat.html

WildBlue's ViaSat1 is scheduled for early 2011 launch.

Edit: Hughesnet Jupiter(also known as Spaceway4) approximate launch date.
»www.satbeams.com/satellites?id=2497


Karl Bode
News Guy
join:2000-03-02
kudos:39
Yep, thanks. Briefly mixed up my WildBlue/Viasat and HughesNet/Jupiter...
99376237

join:2007-09-25
Edgewood, TX

Fixed Wireless..

This whole satellite internet is really a waste of money.. If they were to just put up a couple of hundred 1200ft. towers and load them up with the same gear, they could push low latency signals out in 100 mile radius patterns around each tower. Latency is what kills satellite internet..

Else use fleets of high altitude blimps called stratollites. Perch them high enough where no winds exist and use GPS tracking with a solar battery powerpack that would power the wireless hardware and propulsion units. I've heard the blimps can state aloft for months at a time.. Change them out as deemed neccessary.
chgo_man99

join:2010-01-01
San Jose, CA

Re: Fixed Wireless..

pushing a lot of towers in low dense areas is risky (financially). And the fact that radio signal travels 100 miles does not mean you'll get the same speed at closer 10 miles. There is always a tradeoff between speed,latency and physical distance and number of subscribers. That applies everywhere with wireless.

And stratollites can at this moment cost more than satellites, be at beta testing and/or they are reserved for military use.

compuguybna

join:2009-06-17
Nashville, TN

1 edit

Re: Fixed Wireless..

Isn't Via-Sat 1 a Wild Blue project? Not a Hughesnet?

I thought the new Hughesnet satellite in 2010 was Jupiter or Juniper.

ViaSat bought Wildblue didn't it ? ? ?

compuguybna

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

VIASAT-1 isn't a HUGHESNET satellite!

But in the first half of 2012, that could change. Hughes Network Systems, one of the largest satellite broadband service providers in the world, will launch the Jupiter satellite ((((((((((NOT VIA-SAT1)))))))))), which will offer more than 100 gigabits per second of capacity.

Read more: »news.cnet.com/8301-30686_3-20022···4pP6X8Jb

dvd536
as Mr. Pink as they come
Premium
join:2001-04-27
Phoenix, AZ
kudos:4

One megabit or 9999999999999999

Doesn't matter as long as theres FAP!
chgo_man99

join:2010-01-01
San Jose, CA

Re: One megabit or 9999999999999999

at least those are daily right? 500 mb (on higer tiers) is not much of a problem unless you need to download 1 hour movie or big iso in one uninterrupted download.

Cellular has 5GB of cap, so if you use it everyday (i.e you're not lucky to have dsl/cable), thats only 170 mb of cap per day!

compuguybna

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

Re: One megabit or 9999999999999999

Depends on the company you go thru for 3G broaband.

Millenicom resells Verizon - 10gb cap
Millenicom resells Sprint - 50gb cap
Sprint resells thru Virgin Mobile - unlimited (I'm sure there's some invisible cap)

said by chgo_man99:

at least those are daily right? 500 mb (on higer tiers) is not much of a problem unless you need to download 1 hour movie or big iso in one uninterrupted download.

Cellular has 5GB of cap, so if you use it everyday (i.e you're not lucky to have dsl/cable), thats only 170 mb of cap per day!

RR Conductor
NWP RR Inc.,serving NW CA
Premium
join:2002-04-02
Redwood Valley, CA
kudos:1

Why no mention of WISP's?

I live in a very rural, mountainous and heavily forested county (Mendocino) here in Northwestern California, and many areas have no cable lines or dsl, but WISP's seem to be filling in at least some of that gap. They serve areas that nobody else does, like Covelo, Leggett and Potter Valley, and while more expensive and slower than wired broadband they blow away satellite. I am lucky here in Redwood Valley to have HSI from Comcast, we're on the Blast! Tier (16/2), and their service here has been great.
--
You've got to stand for something, or you'll fall for anything.

lordfly

join:2000-10-12
Homestead, FL
Reviews:
·SkyNet360

Re: Why no mention of WISP's?

I did just that. I dropped my crappy DSL about 2 months ago and switched to a local WISP. I went from 1.2/256 to 10/1.

AT&T = $32.95/mo
WISP = $40.00/mo
difference of $7.05/mo.

My pings went from 500ms+ to 10-50ms. And obviously my speeds are awesome. I just have a 30 foot pole with a 5.2GHz transceiver attached to my house. It works through all weather.

We have Comcrap in my area, but I refuse to work with them and their crap breaks all the time anyway.

RR Conductor
NWP RR Inc.,serving NW CA
Premium
join:2002-04-02
Redwood Valley, CA
kudos:1

4 edits

Re: Why no mention of WISP's?

»willitsonline.com/pricing_wireless.html
»www.instawave.com/
»www.ukiahwireless.com/coverage.htm

Those are the three that operate in our county. We can't get DSL in Redwood Valley (the CO isn't even equipped for it), WillitsOnline would be a 2nd choice if for some reason Comcast really went in the toilet. We've had Cable HSI since it first got here in 2001, they were Adelphia back then, and in the bankruptcy our Adelphia area went to Comcast. Comcast HSI has been awesome here, outages are very rare and the speeds and latency are great 24x7, their cable tv though isn't that great so we have Directv for that.

Edit-We live out in a lot of huge trees, mostly Oaks, Pine, and Fir, with some Ash, Elder, Cottonwood, Redwood and Manzanita mixed in, and have a lot of hills around us, so it's debatable if we could get good service from a WISP, if we could get any service at all.
--
You've got to stand for something, or you'll fall for anything.

Mr Anon

@comcast.net

More BS From HughesNet

I have no broadband. I live 10 minutes outside a large SouthEastern city with several hundred other residents in a rural bedroom community.

AT&T refuses to even provide basic DSL. Comcast owns the cable system, but it is analog and they refuse to upgrade to digital.

That said, I spend about 15 bucks a month for dialup. I am happier with that than I would be with Hughes crummy service.

Even with this new satellite, what will happen is that they will market the hell of the 'new capacity', but will charge the same and will not increase the caps on data transfer.

No way in hell am I going to pay outrageous monthly fees for crap service like that.

88615298
Premium
join:2004-07-28
West Tenness

FAP=FAIL

What good is 5 Mbps if you can only use 200 MB a DAY? So you can hit your cap in 6 minutes? What could you possibly need to do on the internet that requires a 5 Mbps connection but uses less than 200 MB in 24 hours?

I'm sorry huhesnet you don't need sae all that bandwidth for these millions of new customers you expect becuase they aren't coming. You might get some new ones and keep the ones you got if you increased speeds AND the caps. Minimum 1 GB day cap and increase FAP free window from 5 hours to 8 hours. THEN you might get all these new customers.
Sammer

join:2005-12-22
Canonsburg, PA

Re: FAP=FAIL

said by 88615298:

You might get some new ones and keep the ones you got if you increased speeds AND the caps. Minimum 1 GB day cap and increase FAP free window from 5 hours to 8 hours.
IMHO the direct satellite internet market in the US is already close to saturated. New satellites are needed to improve service and keep existing customers but there won't be many new customers.

88615298
Premium
join:2004-07-28
West Tenness

Re: FAP=FAIL

said by Sammer:

said by 88615298:

You might get some new ones and keep the ones you got if you increased speeds AND the caps. Minimum 1 GB day cap and increase FAP free window from 5 hours to 8 hours.
IMHO the direct satellite internet market in the US is already close to saturated. New satellites are needed to improve service and keep existing customers but there won't be many new customers.
and in 3 years when Verizon rolls out LTE many of those hughesnet subscribers wil leave in droves. Spending $1 billion to keep maybe 100,000 customers doesn't seem to be very smart.

blj028

@cox.net

ViaSat is WildBlue Not Hughesnet

I believe you have gotten Hughesnet mixed up with WildBlue for this article. ViaSat owns WildBlue and is scheduled to launch their new satellite mid next year which will significantly improve the throughput of the entire network. They are saying this is the largest Ka band satellite ever built. Hughesnet actually uses Ku band technology so this will not affect them at all unless they change their entire network to Ka band. I just wanted to point this out. I actually have an entire blog on this subject at mybluedish.com/blog.

george357
Premium
join:2009-09-18
Weaverville, NC
kudos:1

Maybe not the best but definitely better than dial-up!

I signed up with Hughesnet a little over 14 months ago, I have yet to regret that decision. While the service is expensive and latency heavy comparatively speaking it is so much better than the dial-up that is the only other option here. I started out on the mid-range plan which is 1.6mbps/250kbs for $90 bucks a month, I have since moved to the next tier 2mbps/300kbs at $120 a month. My latency averages around 900ms and heavy storms block the signal. The upside to all this is that even on my worst Hughesnet days my speed is 20-30 times better than the 3kbs I was getting with dial-up. If a better option becomes available I will grab it, but to tell you the truth I am glad I had the satellite option.
--
If at first you don't succeed go fishing!
zeddlar

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

Re: Maybe not the best but definitely better than dial-up!

If you do your homework and do a little research you will find there are also plans to increase the FAP caps as well as speeds. I agree it sucks as I have been a customer of hughes for the better part of 8 or 9 years I think but if you play mmorpg games or just simple puzzle games like flash games and not twitch games like FPS games then it is totally usable and like it was mentioned before you can download approx. 50 to 70 GB a month and never hit your cap on the high tiered plans so that isn't so bad and much better than alot of land based services.

The latency and speeds are a killer at times because of over crowding but that will be relieved alot with the new satt. So all in all the biggest gripe for me as a customer would be the price and I don't see that improving considering the cost of even offering this service.
--
HughesNet elite plan/.74 dish w/1watt trans. / 9000 modem / 3 computers on a linksy's wired network
Rockin4D

join:2007-10-11
Beggs, OK

Hughesnet is UTTER GARBAGE

I've had the service from 2003 to 2008, it was tolerable on high end plans up until about early 2008. For years Hughes has promised improved service faster speeds, and better service. The reality is that its a company established to merely rob customers of their hard earned monies for nothing you could even remotely call a pleasent internet experience. Hughesnet actively prevents people from being able to upload anything significant, Actively prevent users from connecting to latency tolerant games like World of Warcraft, and has steadily lowered the allowed data amounts from 170 megabytes to 1.2 gigabytes every 4 hours (rolling) to a range of 200 meg to 500 megabytes PER DAY. I thought it was insanely cruel. Real time experience for me (and i've used the neighbors Hughesnet system recently) is that youtube videos take 30 minutes to even load, you cannot upload anything over 10 megs, and game packets are delayed to 30 seconds per ping. WHEN SATELLITE SERVICE BECOMES UNLIMITED AND WORKS LIKE IT DID IN 2007 WHEN I HAD A COMMERCIAL ACCOUNT I"LL CONSIDER IT. BUT UNTIL THEN ITS WORTHLESS.

septcasey

join:2006-09-07
United State

Re: Hughesnet is UTTER GARBAGE

We don't want faster speeds we want unlimited internet or atleast more than the tiny handful you give your customers paying an arm and leg for this stuff.
Max Mouse

join:2010-02-28

1 edit

What a bunch of idiots all we want is unlimited internet.

This coming in mid 2012? By that time I'll be out of Hughesnet. For Good. I don't plan on waiting for something that still might suck... and still lower than 1gb limited internet and things that are unfixable like Latency and Weather and frequent disconnecting problems.. I don't know why Hughesnet is so bad... I mean cell phones have better internet then Hughesnet.

I hope they get put out of business before they even have the chance to launch the satellite or forced to switch to a Cable/DSL internet Company and I really don't trust them with that...
alhanson

join:2006-01-29
Barneveld, WI

Some links

This white paper is 12 years old but it explains Satellite Architecture. Most Satellites being built today are a combination of these three types of Architecture plus using a combination L band, Ka and Ku frequencies for transmigration of users from older satellites.

»www.as.northropgrumman.com/produ···Arch.pdf

This white paper is 11 years old and explains what (OISL) Optical Intersatellite Link Terminals are.
»www.as.northropgrumman.com/produ···nal1.pdf

Here are drawing of the two new satellite Hughes Jupiter and ViaSat 1 both built by Space Systems Loral. Look the same don’t they!

»www.ssloral.com/html/satexp/hugh···ter.html

»www.ssloral.com/html/satexp/viasat.html

Here is a link that explains what Space Way is. Space Way is not a piece of Hardware it is a platform with many Protocols forming a network in space and the ground. One has a Space Way Router with Optical Intersatellite Link Terminal connected to Jupiter 1, Jupiter 2 and so on like the spokes of a wagon wheel – which connect to LTE cell towers on the ground. The voice is reduced to an App on the 4G phone traveling over the data link. The space Way Routers can be stacked much like a networked closet with spokes extending out from each one.

»www.highspeedsat.com/hn9000.php

Here is more about Hughes, Space Way Architecture and expansion.

»www.hughes.com/Documents/Feature···0310.pdf

Here is a real time example of Space Way Architecture – Satellites and Cell Towers in Nepal.

»www.hellonepalgsm.com/about/gallery.php

The Question is will ViaSat 1 be a bigger Wildblue with the same disappointing performance and experience. Then after they get people to sign a contract install the same DAMA scheduler. They are promising what they were first promising back in 2001 when they were getting stake holders to invest money in them. If this is true is true it means Bankruptcy for ViaSat and Hughes with buy out there Satellite for pennies on the dollar.

Their never was a Space Way “one” or “two” – the satellite "Space Way 3" is three satellites in one