ghostmaster

Can't you backup all of your game saves and stuff to a USB drive? Or is that only pics, mp3s and such? I just got one and im still learning....

If WB indeed increased lag times in an effort to stop people from using "Big Ping", then I wouldn't expect them to do anything about it. Maybe when the WB1 sat is up and running, it will open up the bandwidth for them to reduce their excessive traffic shaping....

As a matter of fact, the link you provided backs up what I just said... <blockquote> "Can I Tweak My Self-Hosted System? (#8500) The short answer is, not much. Explanation: <b>The way your computer connects to the Internet when using a DW6000 or DW4020 is significantly different than it would with a non-self-hosted system like a DW4000. Instead of a direct connection to Internet servers, your computer connects through the appliance. The appliance itself maintains the connection to the external server and buffers both incoming and outgoing data. This precludes the use of the standard TCP

The difference here is that the DW6000 and above HAVE their own OS, and simply act as an active gateway router. The DW4000 is just like a passive modem, so any tweaks to the OS pass on through the modem. OS tweaks don't work on the DW6000 and above, because once the information passes through D6k+, it is transmitted with whatever TCP settings are used on the DW6K+. When I say could be putting them on the same gateways, I don't mean they are necessarily clogging the drain. If all of the modems on a specific gateway are DW4000 or below, they could limit the bandwidth on the actual gateway, since they can't control the modem. They don't have to do that with the DW6K+ because they can control the bandwidth on the modem.

Probably because they are crowding all off them on the same gateways...

Hughes doesnt have control over the DW4000's like they do with the 6000 and above. Tweaks work with the 4000 series.

Does this card require a power supply connection, and is your power supply strong enough to handle the extra load?

Wild Blue is one Hughes newest competitors. And at this point, the only advantage is US based support. Wild Blue also has worse pings since they started traffic shaping ICMP traffic, or whatever they did. Some users are seeing 3000ms+ on some pings....

Dude, if you switch from ANY terrestrial broadband to ANY sat system, you are And for Peter's problem, the only thing I can suggest you do is call Hughes support. A transponder change may be in order. I don't think you have a FAP issue, it looks more like something else....

No. But it is suppose to be a step up from what we have now. Users should see a more consistent performance, and should see less rain fade with the Ka band system. And until they start using LEO (low earth orbit) sats, pings will never be sub 500.

We used to have a computer lab with 120 Compaq P400 models. We had 2 other labs with 40 and 28 of them respectively. They were complete pieces of crap, and almost every one of them had at least 1 part with a "refurbished" label on them. They were big, heavy, ran very hot, and were dust traps. I don't know how compaq is now, so I won't say anything about their current status.

Bird, what version of the firmware do you have? :::.. Download Stats ..::: Download Connection is:: 2937 Kbps about 2.9 Mbps (tested with 2992 kB) Download Speed is:: 359 kB/s Tested From:: https://testmy.net/ (Server 2) Test Time:: 2006/12/23 - 10:28am Bottom Line:: 51X faster than 56K 1MB Download in 2.85 sec Tested from a 2992 kB file and took 8.344 seconds to complete Download Diagnosis:: Awesome! 20% + : 181.59 % faster than the average for host (direcpc.com) D-Validation Link:: https://testmy.net/stats/id-KXQWM917P User Agent:: Mozilla/4.0 (compatible; MSIE 7.0; Windows NT 5.1; .NET CLR 1.1.4322; .NET CLR 2.0.50727; InfoPath.1) [!]

Holy Sh!t.. :::.. Download Stats ..::: Download Connection is:: 3338 Kbps about 3.3 Mbps (tested with 2992 kB) Download Speed is:: 407 kB/s Tested From:: https://testmy.net/ (Server 1) Test Time:: 2006/12/22 - 9:15pm Bottom Line:: 58X faster than 56K 1MB Download in 2.52 sec Tested from a 2992 kB file and took 7.343 seconds to complete Download Diagnosis:: Awesome! 20% + : 220.96 % faster than the average for host (direcpc.com) D-Validation Link:: https://testmy.net/stats/id-S5ZA6WQOU User Agent:: Mozilla/4.0 (compatible; MSIE 7.0; Windows NT 5.1; .NET CLR 1.1.4322; .NET CLR 2.0.50727; InfoPath.1) [!] :::.. Download Stats ..::: Download Connection is:: 2021 Kbps about 2 Mbps (tested with 2992 kB) Download Speed is:: 247 kB/s Tested From:: https://testmy.net/ (Server 1) Test Time:: 2006/12/22 - 9:16pm Bottom Line:: 35X faster than 56K 1MB Download in 4.15 sec Tested from a 2992 kB file and took 12.125 seconds to complete Download Diagnosis:: Awesome! 20% + : 94.33 % faster than the average for host (direcpc.com) D-Validation Link:: https://testmy.net/stats/id-8ZTBORM3H User Agent:: Mozilla/4.0 (compatible; MSIE 7.0; Windows NT 5.1; .NET CLR 1.1.4322; .NET CLR 2.0.50727; InfoPath.1) [!] :::.. Download Stats ..::: Download Connection is:: 1592 Kbps about 1.6 Mbps (tested with 2992 kB) Download Speed is:: 194 kB/s Tested From:: https://testmy.net/ (Server 1) Test Time:: 2006/12/22 - 9:17pm Bottom Line:: 28X faster than 56K 1MB Download in 5.28 sec Tested from a 2992 kB file and took 15.391 seconds to complete Download Diagnosis:: Awesome! 20% + : 53.08 % faster than the average for host (direcpc.com) D-Validation Link:: https://testmy.net/stats/id-UXD8SCA32 User Agent:: Mozilla/4.0 (compatible; MSIE 7.0; Windows NT 5.1; .NET CLR 1.1.4322; .NET CLR 2.0.50727; InfoPath.1) [!] :::.. Download Stats ..::: Download Connection is:: 1678 Kbps about 1.7 Mbps (tested with 2992 kB) Download Speed is:: 205 kB/s Tested From:: https://testmy.net/ (Server 1) Test Time:: 2006/12/22 - 9:17pm Bottom Line:: 29X faster than 56K 1MB Download in 5 sec Tested from a 2992 kB file and took 14.609 seconds to complete Download Diagnosis:: Awesome! 20% + : 61.35 % faster than the average for host (direcpc.com) D-Validation Link:: https://testmy.net/stats/id-RHN6SLK2D User Agent:: Mozilla/4.0 (compatible; MSIE 7.0; Windows NT 5.1; .NET CLR 1.1.4322; .NET CLR 2.0.50727; InfoPath.1) [!]

Since we're showing off... :::.. Download Stats ..::: Download Connection is:: 2811 Kbps about 2.8 Mbps (tested with 2992 kB) Download Speed is:: 343 kB/s Tested From:: https://testmy.net/ (Server 1) Test Time:: 2006/12/22 - 8:53pm Bottom Line:: 49X faster than 56K 1MB Download in 2.99 sec Tested from a 2992 kB file and took 8.719 seconds to complete Download Diagnosis:: Awesome! 20% + : 170.29 % faster than the average for host (direcpc.com) D-Validation Link:: https://testmy.net/stats/id-REY6O7B8A User Agent:: Mozilla/4.0 (compatible; MSIE 7.0; Windows NT 5.1; .NET CLR 1.1.4322; .NET CLR 2.0.50727; InfoPath.1) [!] Now that's what I call a burst....

Like I said about the Wildblue ping problems in this thread: http://www.testmy.net/forum/index.php?topic=15300.msg193133;topicseen#new On Nov. 17, Wildblue released a firmware update that causes huge latency spikes in your connection. They are also most likely using traffic shaping to put ICMP traffic at the low end of the priority list. Some have speculated that Wildblue did this on purpose. Explanation: A few months ago, Wildblue introduced a traffic shaping method which reduces your bandwidth when your connection is idle, or you aren't doing anything bandwidth intensive. In other words, when your usage picks up, your speeds pick up. Well, this didn't sit to well with many users because it created connection issues, so they created a program called "big ping" which I guess keeps your usage up enough to keep your bandwidth at full throttle. There has been speculation that this "firmware update" on Nov 17th increased ping times to bypass this "big ping" method of avoiding the throttling. Please remember this is just speculation. How is this related to the topic? Because everyone that got this firmware update has had terrible pings.

On Nov. 17, Wildblue released a firmware update that causes huge latency spikes in your connection. They are also most likely using traffic shaping to put ICMP traffic at the low end of the priority list. Some have speculated that Wildblue did this on purpose. Explanation: A few months ago, Wildblue introduced a traffic shaping method which reduces your bandwidth when your connection is idle, or you aren't doing anything bandwidth intensive. In other words, when your usage picks up, your speeds pick up. Well, this didn't sit to well with many users because it created connection issues, so they created a program called "big ping" which I guess keeps your usage up enough to keep your bandwidth at full throttle. There has been speculation that this "firmware update" on Nov 17th increased ping times to bypass this "big ping" method of avoiding the throttling. Please remember this is just speculation. How is this related to the topic? Because everyone that got this firmware update has had terrible pings.

Welcome! DON'T use the smart test for a sat connection. It is never accurate. Use the 2992KB test for downloads, and at least the 579KB test for uploads.

Nope, DirecTV owned half of Hughes, then SkyTerra bought the rest of Hughes from DirecTV. Then Hughes went public.

And to further note here, DirecTV and "Direcway/Hughesnet" are no longer associated. As a matter of fact, DirecTV has partnered with Wildblue to provide satellite internet......................

the ending was funny as hell....but the 5 minutes of annoyance in the begining wasn't worth my bandwidth...

congrats, I passed mine with an 894, so you did much better than me lol. But we passed and that's all that counts. Congrats....

The modem is capable of those speeds definately. Hell, the DW6000 was capable of that. Hughes can't afford to give it to us. The only thing Hughes gives us, is a long, cylindrical object, shoved into a small round openening on our backside, with no form of lubrication. They're not even nice enough to spit on it first..... I agree with Bird Fan though. No amount of tweaking will help your DW6000 and above. Simply because the thing is self hosted. The only thing tweaking does is "tweak" the communication between the modem and the computer, which does nothing. Tweaking does help the DW4000 units, because it functions much like a normal DSL or cable modem. If we all got along all the time, the forum would be boring as hell, so lets just keep argueing!

What TV you get depends upon what you are using it for. For a living room, not necessarily for gaming, I would go with Plasma. It has better viewing angles, and is cheaper than LCD when you go with larger sizes. It is also better for watching movies, esp action movies, as there is no ghosting. For gaming/bedroom, I would go LCD.

None of us ever really know what are speed is, because it is CONSTANTLY changing with Hughes. You can test 20 times in a row, and you might get a 200k difference between some of them. Not to mention, the fact that there are so many variables with Hughes. All the different Sats, Xpondrs, gateways, and 2 different NOCs. The only thing testing does, is give an accurate speed rating for users on the same gateway. One persons experience with Hughes will most certainly be different than everyone elses. So what the F*ck am I talking about? The point is, if you want an accurate speed test with Hughes, just download part of a big file from MS or something because unless you are on the same gateway as someone else, argueing about speed bursts or true speeds is pointless.

:::.. Download Stats ..::: Download Connection is:: 1325 Kbps about 1.3 Mbps (tested with 2992 kB) Download Speed is:: 162 kB/s Tested From:: https://testmy.net/ (Server 1) Test Time:: 2006/12/17 - 11:14am Bottom Line:: 23X faster than 56K 1MB Download in 6.32 sec Tested from a 2992 kB file and took 18.5 seconds to complete Download Diagnosis:: Awesome! 20% + : 29.14 % faster than the average for host (direcpc.com) D-Validation Link:: https://testmy.net/stats/id-DJY7WGAHP User Agent:: Mozilla/4.0 (compatible; MSIE 7.0; Windows NT 5.1; .NET CLR 1.1.4322; .NET CLR 2.0.50727; InfoPath.1) [!] :::.. Download Stats ..::: Download Connection is:: 1227 Kbps about 1.2 Mbps (tested with 2992 kB) Download Speed is:: 150 kB/s Tested From:: https://testmy.net/ (Server 1) Test Time:: 2006/12/17 - 11:15am Bottom Line:: 21X faster than 56K 1MB Download in 6.83 sec Tested from a 2992 kB file and took 19.969 seconds to complete Download Diagnosis:: Looks Great : 19.59 % faster than the average for host (direcpc.com) D-Validation Link:: https://testmy.net/stats/id-LF3G0P9MK User Agent:: Mozilla/4.0 (compatible; MSIE 7.0; Windows NT 5.1; .NET CLR 1.1.4322; .NET CLR 2.0.50727; InfoPath.1) [!] :::.. Download Stats ..::: Download Connection is:: 1199 Kbps about 1.2 Mbps (tested with 2992 kB) Download Speed is:: 146 kB/s Tested From:: https://testmy.net/ (Server 1) Test Time:: 2006/12/17 - 11:16am Bottom Line:: 21X faster than 56K 1MB Download in 7.01 sec Tested from a 2992 kB file and took 20.437 seconds to complete Download Diagnosis:: Looks Great : 16.86 % faster than the average for host (direcpc.com) D-Validation Link:: https://testmy.net/stats/id-E6J54G0IK User Agent:: Mozilla/4.0 (compatible; MSIE 7.0; Windows NT 5.1; .NET CLR 1.1.4322; .NET CLR 2.0.50727; InfoPath.1) [!]