fikester

what kind of pings do you get?

Yes the good ol delay for us less fortunate Pinging testmy.net [67.18.179.85] with 32 bytes of data: Reply from 67.18.179.85: bytes=32 time=861ms TTL=52 Reply from 67.18.179.85: bytes=32 time=903ms TTL=52 Reply from 67.18.179.85: bytes=32 time=803ms TTL=52 Reply from 67.18.179.85: bytes=32 time=849ms TTL=52 Reply from 67.18.179.85: bytes=32 time=771ms TTL=52 Ping statistics for 67.18.179.85: Packets: Sent = 5, Received = 5, Lost = 0 (0% loss), Approximate round trip times in milli-seconds: Minimum = 771ms, Maximum = 903ms, Average = 837ms

Did you file a claim withBBB ? There is no way I would be paying full price for less than half of what they advertised! At least get credit with billing until Hughes gets it right.

Filing a claim is easy and they will get back to you BBB I am assuming you have the 7000s ? Just because it works would not suit me. Its bad enough to pay the price when its working correctly!

October 27th, 06:42AM - 977/195 Kbps :::.. Upload Stats ..::: Upload Connection is:: 205 Kbps about 0.2 Mbps (tested with 1013 kB) Upload Speed is:: 25 kB/s Tested From:: https://testmy.net/ (Server 1) Test Time:: 2006/10/27 - 3:45am Bottom Line:: 4X faster than 56K 1MB Upload in 40.96 sec Tested from a 1013 kB file and took 40.53024 seconds to complete Upload Diagnosis:: Awesome! 20% + : 95.24 % faster than the average for host (direcpc.com) U-Validation Link:: https://testmy.net/stats/id-AG92Z5DQ0 User Agent:: Mozilla/4.0 (compatible; MSIE 7.0; Windows NT 5.1; .NET CLR 1.0.3705; .NET CLR 1.1.4322; Media Center PC 4.0; .NET CLR 2.0.50727) :::.. Download Stats ..::: Download Connection is:: 1076 Kbps about 1.1 Mbps (tested with 2992 kB) Download Speed is:: 131 kB/s Tested From:: https://testmy.net/ (Server 1) Test Time:: 2006/10/27 - 3:48am Bottom Line:: 19X faster than 56K 1MB Download in 7.82 sec Tested from a 2992 kB file and took 22.781 seconds to complete Download Diagnosis:: Looks Great : 2.18 % faster than the average for host (direcpc.com) D-Validation Link:: https://testmy.net/stats/id-TNMO4GX8H User Agent:: Mozilla/4.0 (compatible; MSIE 7.0; Windows NT 5.1; .NET CLR 1.0.3705; .NET CLR 1.1.4322; Media Center PC 4.0; .NET CLR 2.0.50727) [!]

I was guessing the one hop system would improve pings?

actually no KY....however when the connection goes down for days at a time or don't work correctly, the owner blames it on your PC. The owner of this company (SC-TV) does own hundreds of acres of real estate and lives in a 6000 sq ft mansion.

how would you like some pings like this for $69.99 for 1Mb/200k Pinging yahoo.com [216.109.112.135] with 32 bytes of data: Reply from 216.109.112.135: bytes=32 time=931ms TTL=51 Reply from 216.109.112.135: bytes=32 time=957ms TTL=52 Reply from 216.109.112.135: bytes=32 time=874ms TTL=51 Reply from 216.109.112.135: bytes=32 time=1204ms TTL=52 Reply from 216.109.112.135: bytes=32 time=1024ms TTL=53 Reply from 216.109.112.135: bytes=32 time=1127ms TTL=52 Reply from 216.109.112.135: bytes=32 time=1225ms TTL=52 Reply from 216.109.112.135: bytes=32 time=1023ms TTL=51 Reply from 216.109.112.135: bytes=32 time=1046ms TTL=52 Reply from 216.109.112.135: bytes=32 time=1308ms TTL=53 Reply from 216.109.112.135: bytes=32 time=1228ms TTL=51 Reply from 216.109.112.135: bytes=32 time=1023ms TTL=52 Reply from 216.109.112.135: bytes=32 time=1022ms TTL=53 Reply from 216.109.112.135: bytes=32 time=1024ms TTL=52 Reply from 216.109.112.135: bytes=32 time=922ms TTL=53 Reply from 216.109.112.135: bytes=32 time=1763ms TTL=52 Reply from 216.109.112.135: bytes=32 time=921ms TTL=51 Reply from 216.109.112.135: bytes=32 time=1047ms TTL=52 Reply from 216.109.112.135: bytes=32 time=1125ms TTL=52 Reply from 216.109.112.135: bytes=32 time=1535ms TTL=53 Reply from 216.109.112.135: bytes=32 time=1842ms TTL=52 Reply from 216.109.112.135: bytes=32 time=1946ms TTL=51 Reply from 216.109.112.135: bytes=32 time=2046ms TTL=52 Reply from 216.109.112.135: bytes=32 time=1637ms TTL=51 Reply from 216.109.112.135: bytes=32 time=1859ms TTL=52 Reply from 216.109.112.135: bytes=32 time=1723ms TTL=53 Reply from 216.109.112.135: bytes=32 time=1740ms TTL=52 Reply from 216.109.112.135: bytes=32 time=1330ms TTL=53 Reply from 216.109.112.135: bytes=32 time=1023ms TTL=52 Reply from 216.109.112.135: bytes=32 time=1022ms TTL=51 Reply from 216.109.112.135: bytes=32 time=1023ms TTL=53 Request timed out. Reply from 216.109.112.135: bytes=32 time=1685ms TTL=51 Reply from 216.109.112.135: bytes=32 time=1945ms TTL=52 Reply from 216.109.112.135: bytes=32 time=1638ms TTL=51 Reply from 216.109.112.135: bytes=32 time=1739ms TTL=52 Reply from 216.109.112.135: bytes=32 time=1946ms TTL=53 Ping statistics for 216.109.112.135: Packets: Sent = 37, Received = 36, Lost = 1 (2% loss), Approximate round trip times in milli-seconds: Minimum = 874ms, Maximum = 2046ms, Average = 1346ms or better yet how about the my local cable provider at: Speeds of service available are: *64K w/1-email $25.00/month 128K w/2-emails $45.00/month 256K w/3-emails $65.00/month 512K w/4-emails $95.00/month Faster speeds available and will be priced according to usage, etc. *Not much faster than dial-up

Providing the Ka band system ends up working....sounds at least like it would be a noticeable upgrade? The other day at my friends house used a DSL connection 1Mb/200k with pings between 50-90ms web browsing alone is not even close to my 1Mb/200k connection with pings between 675-1900ms. So to me 12Mb down sounds great but also would hope the pings are going to improved as well. Who knows Spaceway could easily be delayed another year as it has in the past already.

I had a similar problem a week or so ago.....downloading more than two larger files at once. However just minutes ago did a replay of this very incident seem to work fine running 3 downloads at once while browsing on a third laptop. nothing was changed with my system.....could have been a glitch at the NOC

here is a local shop near me.... http://www.ohiopyleprints.com/index.php?option=com_frontpage&Itemid=1 http://www.yourimageisourpassion.com/

would it matter where the supplier is located?

Testmy t-shirts, sweat shirts, shorts etc...?

Here is the link to the Ka band info...at least there is some hope for us who are likely to never see dsl or any other form of high speed internet. From what I understand this was already supposed to be up and running last year, but DirecTv are using those sats.

I can't complain ....

No issues here with IE7 works same as the beta for me....however the cleartype option does not impress me on any of the three screens I work.

during a heavy rain today: :::.. Download Stats ..::: Download Connection is:: 1243 Kbps about 1.2 Mbps (tested with 2992 kB) Download Speed is:: 152 kB/s Tested From:: https://testmy.net/ (Server 1) Test Time:: 2006/10/17 - 3:42am Bottom Line:: 22X faster than 56K 1MB Download in 6.74 sec Tested from a 2992 kB file and took 19.719 seconds to complete Download Diagnosis:: Looks Great : 18.38 % faster than the average for host (direcpc.com) D-Validation Link:: https://testmy.net/stats/id-R84CB5YZ7 User Agent:: Mozilla/4.0 (compatible; MSIE 7.0; Windows NT 5.1; .NET CLR 1.0.3705; .NET CLR 1.1.4322; Media Center PC 4.0; .NET CLR 2.0.50727) [!] :::.. Upload Stats ..::: Upload Connection is:: 201 Kbps about 0.2 Mbps (tested with 1496 kB) Upload Speed is:: 25 kB/s Tested From:: https://testmy.net/ (Server 1) Test Time:: 2006/10/17 - 3:36am Bottom Line:: 4X faster than 56K 1MB Upload in 40.96 sec Tested from a 1496 kB file and took 60.96 seconds to complete Upload Diagnosis:: Awesome! 20% + : 93.27 % faster than the average for host (direcpc.com) U-Validation Link:: https://testmy.net/stats/id-YWUZ2AOM3 User Agent:: Mozilla/4.0 (compatible; MSIE 7.0; Windows NT 5.1; .NET CLR 1.0.3705; .NET CLR 1.1.4322; Media Center PC 4.0; .NET CLR 2.0.50727)

even if the new S model was getting the up to of 1500/200....for the extra contract (15months) & higher monthly fee. The only gain I see from the older 7000 would be 300kbps on the download which would not be noticeable to most, FAP bucket slightly bigger. This cat will wait on the Ka band upgrade. The older 7000 is already capable of higher speeds which are offered on the small business plans....like 2000/500.

If the installer did not do his job correctly and you are not seeing speeds of "up to" advertised speeds during off peak hours file a claim with the BBB. This will get you to a higher level support to get things done.

If upper level support does not fix the problem for you ....file a claim with BBB which you can do on-line. Also call billing for credit....don't be shy with these people at all. They will first try to blame it on weather conditions, router, ad-ware so make note of clear sky problems etc.

I had the same issues with time of day speed performance after upgrading to the DW7000...was fixed after a transponder and a rate code change. All was done by "deep support" if I remember correctly. This level of support was reached after a BBB claim, FCC report filed and a phone call to Vice president of Hughes. This took several hours of my time, but was well worth it in the end. Its too bad Hughes is well known for releases of products that are not just not ready for release to the public. I also feel sure the greed factor plays a role as well in the upgrade chaos.

Sometime in 2007 Hughes will have the Ka band offer for sale.....as I understand 8x faster! Now that would be a real upgrade. After raising quite a storm I now do get advertised speeds consistently.

Thanks for the regedit.....simple enough! Cleartype is gone

not familar with registry changes etc... looks like this is the fix I need as the change did work on the internet options in IE7 to disable cleartype but still using cleartype in OE....just can not like it on my laptop even after tweaking with the powertoy download.

Does anyone know how to disable "cleartype" in Outlook Express?