jdirty

I usually test at 6MB, simply because it's a more accurate display of the performance I get, because most of my downloads are small. But here is an average speed for a 130MB download (and another user on the network was downloading a Windows Update (~50MB): :::.. Download Stats ..::: Download Connection is:: 4365 Kbps about 4.4 Mbps (tested with 130 MB) Download Speed is:: 533 kB/s Tested From:: https://testmy.net/ (Dallas, TX USA) Test Time:: 2010-11-22 14:42:57 GMT -7 Bottom Line:: 76X faster than 56K 1MB Download in 1.92 sec Tested from a 130 MB file and took 249.826 seconds to complete Download Diagnosis:: Running at 394% of hosts average (Direcpc.com) D-Validation Link:: https://testmy.net/db/MJC9F8UK1 User Agent:: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 6.0; en-US; rv:1.9.2.12) Gecko/20101026 Firefox/3.6.12 [!]

Just had to post these results, beings it is related to the threads topic. :::.. Download Stats ..::: Download Connection is:: 8588 Kbps about 8.6 Mbps (tested with 6 MB) Download Speed is:: 1048 kB/s Tested From:: https://testmy.net/ (Dallas, TX USA) Test Time:: 2010-11-21 15:54:43 GMT -7 Bottom Line:: 150X faster than 56K 1MB Download in 0.98 sec Tested from a 6 MB file and took 5.868 seconds to complete Download Diagnosis:: Running at 775% of hosts average (Direcpc.com) D-Validation Link:: https://testmy.net/db/LP6ECXD0H User Agent:: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 6.0; en-US; rv:1.9.2.12) Gecko/20101026 Firefox/3.6.12 [!]

Try hitting this on satellite: :::.. Download Stats ..::: Download Connection is:: 8588 Kbps about 8.6 Mbps (tested with 6 MB) Download Speed is:: 1048 kB/s Tested From:: https://testmy.net/ (Dallas, TX USA) Test Time:: 2010-11-21 15:54:43 GMT -7 Bottom Line:: 150X faster than 56K 1MB Download in 0.98 sec Tested from a 6 MB file and took 5.868 seconds to complete Download Diagnosis:: Running at 775% of hosts average (Direcpc.com) D-Validation Link:: https://testmy.net/db/LP6ECXD0H User Agent:: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 6.0; en-US; rv:1.9.2.12) Gecko/20101026 Firefox/3.6.12 [!]

we raise chickens also, but not even 240, much less the extra 3 Zero's.

Free upgrade from what ? Were you on the old Ku system ? DW-Series terminal ? If so, the smaller dish and 1 watt transmitter for the HN series is sufficient. The bigger dish and 2w xmit is only going to help during rain events, and the HN system already does a good job of mitigating rain fade by automatically increasing power on the xmit side. If it's bad enough weather to knock one of them offline, it's probably severe enough to kill the connection even with a bigger dish and 2w xmit. The only real benefit of having a bigger dish and 2w xmit is for larger commercial packages where upload speed is important. Because even with elite premium (349/month), upload speeds are the same as regular elite, 300kbps. In other words, if you are not a fairly large corporation that must have a good upstream (can go up to 16Mbits on the xmit side), it is not worth it to have the bigger dish/radio. How do you use your system, on a daily average? Do you use a router with a traffic counter? You may be paying for elite and not be needing it. The highest ProPlus plan (which i was on for over a year) was solid as a rock for me. Speeds were always consistent, and while at times you may be able to tell that congestion might be slowing you down a little, those events were not often, and really didn't affect normal browsing activities. I'd say, as long as you do not find yourself hitting FAP frequently, try downgrading to ProPlus. The plan lists 1.6Mbit as downstream speed, and I'd say at least 95% of the time you are running that fast, or faster.. which alot of times it remains above 2Mbits especially during offpeak times. And if anyone hits FAP on the ProPlus, they have issue's other than what they speak about. I have 4 wired clients, that all stay active throughout the day, normal internet activities, watching youtube video's, facebook games.. everyday normal activities, and VERY RARELY hit FAP. It so rare, that I ALWAYS have a free token to use for reset.

Today ====================== 6 MB------- 7.57 Mbps || 924 kB/s jdirty 896143566650 Direcpc.com AJYGIZVW0

Well that is interesting... I was not aware that the beta software code was live yet. You are using the same terminal code that the beta group is on, 082065ab - which contains the building blocks for a new TP. But the GenVersion of your terminal is important, because the new TP has not been ported to Gen3 code yet, and is only live on Gen4 terminals. You can find out which genVersion your terminal is by checking the Advanced LUI (System Control Center) and looking at the ESN number at the top left hand. If it starts with "1101" it is a Gen3, other number indicates a Gen4.

HughesNet ElitePremium (5 Mbits down - 300kpbs up) HN9000 - Gen3 - Consumer dish/radio - 650MB Daily Allowance :::.. Download Stats ..::: Download Connection is:: 6880 Kbps about 6.9 Mbps (tested with 6 MB) Download Speed is:: 840 kB/s Tested From:: https://testmy.net/ (Dallas, TX USA) Test Time:: 2010-11-18 09:56:47 GMT -7 Bottom Line:: 120X faster than 56K 1MB Download in 1.22 sec Tested from a 6 MB file and took 7.325 seconds to complete Download Diagnosis:: Running at 623% of hosts average (Direcpc.com) D-Validation Link:: https://testmy.net/db/1J2FCTAS8 User Agent:: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 6.0; en-US; rv:1.9.2.12) Gecko/20101026 Firefox/3.6.12 [!] Date and Time - Size - Downstream - User - Comp ID - I S P - Test ID Thu Nov 18 2010 @ 9:56:49 am 6 MB------- 6.88 Mbps || 840 kB/s jdirty 896143566650 Direcpc.com 1J2FCTAS8 Mon Nov 15 2010 @ 1:19:07 pm 6 MB------- 4.76 Mbps || 581 kB/s jdirty 896143566650 Direcpc.com XGLCPN1Q4 Sat Nov 13 2010 @ 6:32:19 pm 6 MB------- 4.17 Mbps || 509 kB/s jdirty 896143566650 Direcpc.com SRPE87ONW Sat Nov 13 2010 @ 5:21:05 pm 6 MB------- 7.66 Mbps || 935 kB/s jdirty 896143566650 Direcpc.com 102ALNHVO Fri Nov 12 2010 @ 8:28:59 am 6 MB------- 4.8 Mbps || 586 kB/s jdirty 896143566650 Direcpc.com 4DUXBZVAL Fri Nov 12 2010 @ 12:17:56am 6 MB------- 4.78 Mbps || 584 kB/s jdirty 896143566650 Direcpc.com D9A8RB2NP

Could you please specify what your commissioning software version is, along with the operating version too.

There has been issue's with the Elite level service plan (Note: that Elite Plus & Elite Premium does not seem to be affected - maybe regular elite is oversold?), I am noticing quite a few reports of dramatic slowdowns on Elite, but as far as I know, only Gen4's were affected. Do you know what generation terminal you are using? I am using Gen3, and from what I have seen, Gen3's are unaffected. More reports from users stating their generation model terminal might be able to shed a little light on what's going on. I am on Elite Premium, and I do not notice any degradation of speeds during the PITs, but web responsiveness definitely seems to be slightly affected, however I do not notice drastic improvements with web browsing at 5-7 Mbits, once you hit around 3.5 - 4 Mbits on satellite, the web browsing aspect does not speed up anymore, it's really only beneficial for the download side of the equation. Elite Premium is sold as the highest consumer tier available, and starts at $349.00/month. But as you can see from my speed tests, if you cant get 5 Mbit because of geographical location, it may be worth it to some of the few who have that much to spend on it. Large (20MB) downloads average 4.8-5.0 Mbits, but if you are downloading smaller items, expect to see 5.0-8.0 Mbits. Still only 300kbps upstream (which is the same as advertised for Elite/Plus) But I dont personally care about uploads, my network rarely needs to use uploads except for maybe pictures to facebook and whatnot, and the uplink side does not affect FAP allowance. You can stream up all day without impacting your daily usage. Which is kind of good, if you do have to rely on uploading throughout your activities online. Most recent speed test results: :::.. Download Stats ..::: Download Connection is:: 7657 Kbps about 7.7 Mbps (tested with 6 MB) Download Speed is:: 935 kB/s Tested From:: https://testmy.net/ (Dallas, TX USA) Test Time:: 2010-11-13 17:21:03 GMT -7 Bottom Line:: 134X faster than 56K 1MB Download in 1.1 sec Tested from a 6 MB file and took 6.582 seconds to complete Download Diagnosis:: Running at 702% of hosts average (Direcpc.com) D-Validation Link:: https://testmy.net/db/102ALNHVO User Agent:: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 6.0; en-US; rv:1.9.2.12) Gecko/20101026 Firefox/3.6.12 [!] Download 7 Day Stats (Overall Average = 5874 Kbps :: 717 KB/sec) Upload 7 Day Stats (Overall Average = 258 Kbps :: 31 KB/sec) Download 30 Day Stats (Overall Average = 5420 Kbps :: 662 KB/sec) Upload 30 Day Stats (Overall Average = 213 Kbps :: 26 KB/sec) Direcpc.com download average = 1.1 Mbps or 134 KB/s 5217 records found

:::.. Download Stats ..::: Download Connection is:: 8277 Kbps about 8.3 Mbps (tested with 6 MB) Download Speed is:: 1010 kB/s Tested From:: https://testmy.net/ (Dallas, TX USA) Test Time:: 2010-11-10 08:49:41 GMT -7 Bottom Line:: 144X faster than 56K 1MB Download in 1.01 sec Tested from a 6 MB file and took 6.089 seconds to complete Download Diagnosis:: Running at 761% of hosts average (Direcpc.com) D-Validation Link:: https://testmy.net/db/SWLQ5VPEX User Agent:: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 6.0; en-US; rv:1.9.2.12) Gecko/20101026 Firefox/3.6.12 [!]

:::.. Download Stats ..::: Download Connection is:: 7211 Kbps about 7.2 Mbps (tested with 6 MB) Download Speed is:: 880 kB/s Tested From:: https://testmy.net/ (Dallas, TX USA) Test Time:: 2010-11-09 16:53:59 GMT -7 Bottom Line:: 126X faster than 56K 1MB Download in 1.16 sec Tested from a 6 MB file and took 6.989 seconds to complete Download Diagnosis:: Running at 664% of hosts average (Direcpc.com) D-Validation Link:: https://testmy.net/db/MDBFV7PQN User Agent:: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 6.0; en-US; rv:1.9.2.12) Gecko/20101026 Firefox/3.6.12 [!]

:::.. Download Stats ..::: Download Connection is:: 6461 Kbps about 6.5 Mbps (tested with 6 MB) Download Speed is:: 789 kB/s Tested From:: https://testmy.net/ (Dallas, TX USA) Test Time:: 2010-11-08 07:44:26 GMT -7 Bottom Line:: 113X faster than 56K 1MB Download in 1.3 sec Tested from a 6 MB file and took 7.8 seconds to complete Download Diagnosis:: Running at 594% of hosts average (Direcpc.com) D-Validation Link:: https://testmy.net/db/JE10ZXNWC User Agent:: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 6.0; en-US; rv:1.9.2.12) Gecko/20101026 Firefox/3.6.12 [!]

HughesNet Satellite HN9000 - Consumer dish/radio 79.99/month +10 for equipment lease | Own equipment after lease period :::.. Download Stats ..::: Download Connection is:: 4860 Kbps about 4.9 Mbps (tested with 12 MB) Download Speed is:: 593 kB/s Tested From:: https://testmy.net/ (Dallas, TX USA) Test Time:: 2010-11-07 11:27:31 GMT -7 Bottom Line:: 85X faster than 56K 1MB Download in 1.73 sec Tested from a 12 MB file and took 20.701 seconds to complete Download Diagnosis:: Running at 447% of hosts average (Direcpc.com) D-Validation Link:: https://testmy.net/db/5FRHA0JWV User Agent:: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 6.0; en-US; rv:1.9.2.12) Gecko/20101026 Firefox/3.6.12 [!] :::.. Upload Stats ..::: Upload Connection is:: 266 Kbps about 0.3 Mbps (tested with 1013 kB) Upload Speed is:: 32 kB/s Tested From:: https://testmy.net/ (Dallas, TX USA) Test Time:: 2010-11-07 11:04:56 GMT -7 Bottom Line:: 5X faster than 56K 1MB Upload in 32 sec Tested from a 1013 kB file and took 31.205 seconds to complete Upload Diagnosis:: Running at 225% of hosts average (Direcpc.com) U-Validation Link:: https://testmy.net/db/1G8953P6L User Agent:: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 6.0; en-US; rv:1.9.2.12) Gecko/20101026 Firefox/3.6.12 [!] I have hit 9.04 Mbits, and normally test at 4-6.5 mbits, consistently

It's a 2 year commitment. Contract's suck, we all know that. But not bad if Hughes is your only broadband provider. I do not have to worry about finishing out a contract if landbased broadband makes it to where I live, because it will never happen. So the commitment is not a problem, the 2 years I'm in a contract, is 2 years that I have some leverage (others may see it the other way), but I have used the contract's stipulations several times to gain advantages (such as an installation repair that went sour). People also must keep in mind that Hughes has a prime directive. PROTECT GUARANTEED BANDWIDTH AT ALL COST They provide connectivity for a lot more than some people know about. A major service they provide to gov. and business contracts is guaranteed bandwidth. Some people dont realize (with the correct hardware) the satellite link can do 30Mbits down and 16Mbits up. Guaranteed bandwidth is expensive, and must be protected at all costs. They also advertise the ability to link several spot beams in order to move up to 440Mbits, allowing major networks the ability to move a whole lot of data over the space link very quickly. This bandwidth is protected, and measures are built in to guarantee the availability of bandwidth to enterprise customers who pay for it. Keep in mind, the consumer side is the 'bottom feeders'... they just sell leftover bandwidth to the consumer (and dont guarantee it). People think 100 bucks a month is steep, those bus. and gov. contracts are of the highest importance to Hughes, as well should be. And to prove consistency, and show off another sweet test result: Your connection is: 9043 Kbps or 9 Mbps You downloaded at: 1104 kB/s or 1.1 MB/s You are running: 158 times faster than 56K and can download 1 megabyte in 0.93 second(s) Member Ident:Username:jdirty CompID:896143566650 Test Time:: 2010-11-07 09:20:27 GMT -7 Test Browser and OS info: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 6.0; en-US; rv:1.9.2.12) Gecko/20101026 Firefox/3.6.12 Test ID: YX1DH5T6B (if this is a screenshot go to testmy.net to see if this is fake) Diagnosis ^info^: Seriously? Are you kidding me?: You are running at 838% of your hosts average (Direcpc.com) Yes, I know it's only a 6MB file, but as stated in a previous post, most of my downloads are around that size, so that is an accurate display of performance.

You do not have to own anything. I pay a simple 10 bucks a month to lease the equipment. Not only is that a reasonable fee for the technology involved, but it also guarantees a warranty on everything you are leasing. If you own it, you gotta replace it if it breaks. anyways.. Here is another test, only 6MB size but most of my downloads are small, so this is relative to the actual performance I am used to. Sat Nov 06 2010 @ 12:09:28 pm Download = 6 MB Speed= 6.41 Mbps (783 kB/s) Comp ID: 896143566650 Host: direcpc.com Test ID: EXIC30AT8

Good question.. I'll get to that in just a moment. First, let me post another amazing download speed test that I just ran: :::.. Download Stats ..::: Download Connection is:: 6993 Kbps about 7 Mbps (tested with 6152 kB) Download Speed is:: 854 kB/s Tested From:: https://testmy.net/ (Dallas, TX USA) Test Time:: 2010-10-22 23:48:09 GMT Bottom Line:: 122X faster than 56K 1MB Download in 1.2 sec Tested from a 6152 kB file and took 7.207 seconds to complete Download Diagnosis:: Running at 716% of hosts average (Direcpc.com) D-Validation Link:: https://testmy.net/db/VHQXT3CW1 That is 7 Megs over a satellite link. Anyone able to pull the actual fastest speed recorded for Direcpc.com and compare? Note: HughesNet Elite Premium - HN9000 - Consumer dish/radio (Please also note that this is not my actual service plan. I am currently testing on this service level, and was able to get speed tests. My normal service plan is ProPlus) While I'm pretty sure they are not accepting new betas, the only process that I know of is the application process that was made available to HughesNet customers only after signing in to the Customer Care website. I know that applicants were screened based on information submitted on application, site usage patterns, and overall system reliability/performance. We do not receive any special treatment or discount (other than maybe the benefit of having some faster speeds while conducting tests). I say that I dont pay anything for those speeds because I simply pay my normal service plan fee, and I do not have to pay for Elite Premium while testing it, I still have to pay my normal service plan fee for ProPlus. We simply test and improve and we are focused on providing HughesNet with the most accurate data possible so that the dev team can provide the best improvements. While that may seem hard to believe, after reading all the horror stories. But people only bother with reporting the problems, and the downtimes, so that's all people see. I have been a HughesNet customer for 6 years. I signed up when the DW7000 was the new modem. The only issue's I've ever had with my system was FAP related, and completely my fault. A random outage here and there, but thats it. Speeds are always on par, and while it's not impressive performance in the broadband arena, considering the technology involved, the service is excellent. I'm in an area that will likely not see broadband solutions for a very very long time, if ever. I'm also in an area where there is a large collection of HughesNet customers, my road is only a quarter mile long with 8 houses, and 4 of us have HughesNet. And it's the same all over around here.. so that would translate into me being part of a crowded uplink cell, but I never have issue's other than rain fade problems at whatever NOCC I'm connected through at that time. (Las Vegas NOCC is a good one, hardly ever rains) People need to stop expecting land-based broadband performance from HughesNet. Yeah we got a 500ms avg ping response, yes the signal travels over 30,000 miles before it even reaches the NOCC, and while we can do it at under a second, it just is not fast enough for some. Maybe we should string cables from the terminals all the way to the bird, and see what kind of ping response time you get then. Yea, the FAP sucks, but as MANY MANY of us have already done, you need to deal with it, learn to adjust your usage patterns to comply with the policy, and just get used to it, or get dial up, whichever makes you happier. I have 4 PC's wired in to a dd-wrt router, all 4 machines are used throughout the day with no consideration of allowance usage, all 4 machines are actively used and we still dont come close to hitting FAP. From time to time, heavier usage might cause us to have to take it easy on particular activities until the reset.. but it's still an infinite amount better than 56k, and anyone who claims that dial up is better than HughesNet is just talking out of there rear end and they need to be horse-whipped. All of my equipment is backed up by VR-based APC UPS's, I've had an 87 day uptime on an HN9000. That is incredible, considering the hardware and sophistication of what that little box is actually doing, and shows that the terminal code is solid/stable. Turbo Page is tricky, but no matter what anyone says, it improves performance of web site loading over satellite transactions, by reducing back and forth communications. Not only is it a huge performance benefit, it's a FAP saver! Turn off Turbo Page and watch your usage. Turning it off increases data sent over the spacelink, wasting your FAP allowance. It's not planned that way to punish someone for not using Turbo Page, it just goes to show you exactly how much it is actually helping! Do not fall victim to the lazy installer that only wants to sell you a pole mount. I have had 3 actual install's, two of which would have been complete failures if I had not been supervising. I was not here for the last install (for an HN9000) it was so poorly done, a different install company (the orginal install company went out of business) had to fix problems such as impromper ground block placement, improper ground, improper cable splice and a coax connector that came apart. When I say impromper, I mean the system was not grounded at all, and the coax was not going through a ground block before entering the house. HughesNet payed for a whole reinstall, basically.. replacing all cables, and properly grounding everything. I can almost guarantee that a majority of the problems reported are completely unrelated to the actual HughesNet service. Slow speeds and unknown usage.. something else is going on.

I pay nothing for those speeds, I am a HughesNet BETA team member. Although you probably do not want to hear what it cost's, I will provide an answer. In order to reach the 4.5 - 5.2 Mbit range, you would need to have the Elite Premium package, which is the highest level service plan available to consumers. The plan starts at $199.00/Month, but if you absolutely need those kinds of speeds, then it may be worth it to you. You can get a frac T1 for the same price, but try getting a frac T1 in the middle of nowhere, cant do it. The FAP bucket is 625MB (please keep in mind that ALL service plans have a higher allowance than what HughesNet currently advertises. All service plans should have a 25% increase over the advertised amount (ProPlus = 525 but is only advertised at 425)) There are MANY things happening behind the scenes at HughesNet right now, expect service and performance increases, along with improvements to Turbo Page and the FAP algorithm.

Your connection is: 4752 Kbps or 4.8 Mbps You downloaded at: 580 kB/s You are running: 83 times faster than 56K and can download 1 megabyte in 1.77 second(s) Member Ident:Username:jdirty CompID:896143566650 Test Time:: 2010-10-16 19:50:02 GMT Test Browser and OS info: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 6.1; en-US) AppleWebKit/534.3 (KHTML, like Gecko) Chrome/6.0.472.63 Safari/534.3 Test ID: VM73KPW9Q (if this is a screenshot go to testmy.net to see if this is fake) Diagnosis: Seriously? Are you kidding me?: You are running at 486% of your hosts average (direcpc.com) This was tested from a 25600 kB (25MB) file and took 44.13 seconds to complete - HughesNet BETA team member This information reflects performance using an HN9000 modem on the Elite Premium service plan.