Siryak Posted January 26, 2007 Author CID Share Posted January 26, 2007 Probably just a lot of traffic. The thing is though is Beam 40 has always been one of the very light loaded Beams. I have never seen a Peak Time slow down since October of 05. So I think it is probably more along the lines of Wildblue doing more tweaking than actual loading. Hopefully their tweaking will end with good performance and I can stay with what I got. But I am not going to hold my breath. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fikester Posted January 26, 2007 CID Share Posted January 26, 2007 Surely WB will get the firmware fixed soon? Hughes is tweaking with firmware as well. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Siryak Posted January 26, 2007 Author CID Share Posted January 26, 2007 Surely WB will get the firmware fixed soon? Hughes is tweaking with firmware as well. They don't talk like they are planning on it. What they are claiming is they prioritized http and put everything else on the bottom. Although for some odd reason my browsing got worse after the "upgrade"...Hmm...Also if they wanted to actually change what they had set up then could they not just revert back to the old firmware? Personally I think they are morons for messing with it in the first place. My service was as advertised 24/7 and ping times STAYED below 600 and rarely went into the low 600s. I mean if it aint broke don't fix it!!!! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
granpa Posted January 26, 2007 CID Share Posted January 26, 2007 Pinging 67.18.179.85 with 32 bytes of data: Reply from 67.18.179.85: bytes=32 time=825ms TTL=51 Reply from 67.18.179.85: bytes=32 time=725ms TTL=51 Reply from 67.18.179.85: bytes=32 time=753ms TTL=51 Reply from 67.18.179.85: bytes=32 time=702ms TTL=51 Ping statistics for 67.18.179.85: Packets: Sent = 4, Received = 4, Lost = 0 (0% loss), Approximate round trip times in milli-seconds: Minimum = 702ms, Maximum = 825ms, Average = 751ms Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fikester Posted February 2, 2007 CID Share Posted February 2, 2007 They don't talk like they are planning on it. What they are claiming is they prioritized http and put everything else on the bottom. Although for some odd reason my browsing got worse after the "upgrade"...Hmm...Also if they wanted to actually change what they had set up then could they not just revert back to the old firmware? Personally I think they are morons for messing with it in the first place. My service was as advertised 24/7 and ping times STAYED below 600 and rarely went into the low 600s. I mean if it aint broke don't fix it!!!! WB will have the new sat operational at 111 degrees by April '07, looks like improvements may be just ahead Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
816_1443013898 Posted February 3, 2007 CID Share Posted February 3, 2007 Microsoft Windows XP [Version 5.1.2600] © Copyright 1985-2001 Microsoft Corp. Pinging 67.18.179.85 with 32 bytes of data: Reply from 67.18.179.85: bytes=32 time=754ms TTL=51 Reply from 67.18.179.85: bytes=32 time=805ms TTL=51 Reply from 67.18.179.85: bytes=32 time=797ms TTL=51 Reply from 67.18.179.85: bytes=32 time=740ms TTL=51 Ping statistics for 67.18.179.85: Packets: Sent = 4, Received = 4, Lost = 0 (0% loss), Approximate round trip times in milli-seconds: Minimum = 740ms, Maximum = 805ms, Average = 774ms C:Documents and SettingsGex> Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
zeddlar Posted February 14, 2007 CID Share Posted February 14, 2007 Wildblue's new satt is up but they say it won't go online officially till june according to several dealers and even when it does you will have to specificly ask to be moved to one of the new beams and it will cost you a service call so it will take till closer to the end of the year for current users to see any real change. I just dumped wildblue and invested in a hughesnet small buissness system and package with the .98 dish and 2 watt transmitter. I also have the HN7000S modem so I will run and post some pings for those that were interested. Keep in mind it is overcast skies here and spitting snow and there is a light crust of snow on the dish. Microsoft Windows XP [Version 5.1.2600] © Copyright 1985-2001 Microsoft Corp. C:Documents and SettingsMe>ping www.yahoo.com Pinging www.yahoo.com [69.147.114.210] with 32 bytes of data: Reply from 69.147.114.210: bytes=32 time=773ms TTL=48 Reply from 69.147.114.210: bytes=32 time=712ms TTL=49 Reply from 69.147.114.210: bytes=32 time=722ms TTL=49 Reply from 69.147.114.210: bytes=32 time=672ms TTL=48 Ping statistics for 69.147.114.210: Packets: Sent = 4, Received = 4, Lost = 0 (0% loss), Approximate round trip times in milli-seconds: Minimum = 672ms, Maximum = 773ms, Average = 719ms C:Documents and SettingsMe>ping www.pcpitstop.com Pinging www.pcpitstop.com [64.29.201.21] with 32 bytes of data: Reply from 64.29.201.21: bytes=32 time=698ms TTL=243 Reply from 64.29.201.21: bytes=32 time=676ms TTL=243 Reply from 64.29.201.21: bytes=32 time=676ms TTL=243 Reply from 64.29.201.21: bytes=32 time=656ms TTL=243 Ping statistics for 64.29.201.21: Packets: Sent = 4, Received = 4, Lost = 0 (0% loss), Approximate round trip times in milli-seconds: Minimum = 656ms, Maximum = 698ms, Average = 676ms C:Documents and SettingsMe>ping www.testmy.net Pinging www.testmy.net [67.18.179.85] with 32 bytes of data: Reply from 67.18.179.85: bytes=32 time=660ms TTL=48 Reply from 67.18.179.85: bytes=32 time=719ms TTL=48 Reply from 67.18.179.85: bytes=32 time=699ms TTL=48 Reply from 67.18.179.85: bytes=32 time=678ms TTL=48 Ping statistics for 67.18.179.85: Packets: Sent = 4, Received = 4, Lost = 0 (0% loss), Approximate round trip times in milli-seconds: Minimum = 660ms, Maximum = 719ms, Average = 689ms C:Documents and SettingsMe> My download speed is suppose to be 1.5 but with the cloud cover and snow it has been running from 300 to 700 but upload stays constant at 280 to 290 and the pings have never been worse than these. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
coknuck Posted February 14, 2007 CID Share Posted February 14, 2007 zeddlar, Welcome to the forum! Hope you enjoy your stay here. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
zeddlar Posted February 14, 2007 CID Share Posted February 14, 2007 Ty, I have been using this speed test forever and figured I might could help someone along the way if I joined the forums so I decided to give it a shot. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tommie gorman Posted February 15, 2007 CID Share Posted February 15, 2007 Welcome to the forum zeddlar We can always use some more sat expertise. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Siryak Posted February 15, 2007 Author CID Share Posted February 15, 2007 Welcome to the forums zeddlar. Any and ALL information is always welcome. From what I can see it looks like Hughesnet's pings have improved quite a bit over the past year. Now if they could just straighten out those nasty peak time slowdowns. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
granpa Posted February 15, 2007 CID Share Posted February 15, 2007 Welcome to the forum zeddlar. If you look near the top of the page under community you will find "profile". you can go there and add a sig line like many of have at the bottom of their posts to identify your HN Sat and Equipment. That makes it easier than asking for it if you need any help from here. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
zeddlar Posted February 15, 2007 CID Share Posted February 15, 2007 There I added A sig and filled out a bit of other stuff, I will add more laters. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
zeddlar Posted March 27, 2007 CID Share Posted March 27, 2007 I just read somewhere, I think it was in the wildblue forums on here that someone was on the new wildblue sat and there pings are running the same as everyone elses. Correct me if I am wrong but that would mean that all the suspicion is true and that wildblue is throttling the ping times. How do they ever expect to hold customers like that. I am sure the original thought was that it would affect only gamers but when they first came out they advertized the ability to run VOIP which is affected by ping times as well as loading secure websites which almost anyone on wildblue can tell you is almost impossible on their system. Glad I have jumped ship, now if this contract will just run out so I can call and hand them a piece of my mind, lol. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
granpa Posted March 27, 2007 CID Share Posted March 27, 2007 I just read somewhere, I think it was in the wildblue forums on here that someone was on the new wildblue sat and there pings are running the same as everyone elses. Correct me if I am wrong but that would mean that all the suspicion is true and that wildblue is throttling the ping times. How do they ever expect to hold customers like that. I am sure the original thought was that it would affect only gamers but when they first came out they advertized the ability to run VOIP which is affected by ping times as well as loading secure websites which almost anyone on wildblue can tell you is almost impossible on their system. Glad I have jumped ship, now if this contract will just run out so I can call and hand them a piece of my mind, lol. No suspicion at all. I don't believe any are throttling as all believe. I remember reading somewhere and that (throttling) was an assumption that someone came up with and everyone jumped on it. There has to be control over the system and that is where FAP came in and has been there as long as i can remember. The other control is the limit on what your system is allowed to do (your monthly package) but to get these rates it probably had to be developed on an uncrowded frequency before being implemented. So just like a highway that at times is almost empty your speed will be good and when traffic picks up speeds drop. And if you want more speed you need to change to another highway that can handle it (a higher package). As far as ping times, there is the distance traveled and nothing can be done to change that except get off satellite. Throttling pings, I don't think so, that data pack of a ping is extremely small. I believe that these "back to normal pings" that you say WildBlue is getting are more than likely the same that they had when the customer base on a beam was low. I think there are many assumptions and thoughts that more should be given for the price of satellite internet. But that is probably due to maybe having had or using a land based broadband and then using satellite, there is no comparison, they are totally different. Myself having had a phone line at one time and then with nothing else but the satellite will not make that throttling assumption. I get near the package claim, (up to or more) but when traffic gets heavy it slows down like everyone else's. I have learned to work with it, calling tech support and talking to someone that probably has never even installed a system doesn't cut it for me. Besides they have no control on your PC and what lurks inside of it to slow your connection down, the system works. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Siryak Posted March 27, 2007 Author CID Share Posted March 27, 2007 It is true. The pings on the new satellite which doesn't have hardly anybody on it is averaging in the 1100-1200ms range. This is just ridiculous. This IS NOT normal satellite latency. In fact the Hughesnet system which is supposed to have worse latency actually cuts Wildblue's latency in half. So it CAN be done. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nos7667 Posted March 27, 2007 CID Share Posted March 27, 2007 EDIT: Whoops this is a hughesnet forum Nice pings for sat guys. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Siryak Posted March 27, 2007 Author CID Share Posted March 27, 2007 *sigh* Rub it in lol. Your edit was not fast enough for my poor satellite abused eyes. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nos7667 Posted March 27, 2007 CID Share Posted March 27, 2007 *sigh* Rub it in lol. I didnt realize this was a hughesnet forum guys, sorry about that Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Siryak Posted March 27, 2007 Author CID Share Posted March 27, 2007 I didnt realize this was a hughesnet forum guys, sorry about that Im sorry but to post ping times like that in a satellite forum is an unforgivable sin. lol jk Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
granpa Posted March 28, 2007 CID Share Posted March 28, 2007 I didnt realize this was a hughesnet forum guys, sorry about that Should we put a picture of a satellite dish on the top? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nos7667 Posted March 28, 2007 CID Share Posted March 28, 2007 Yeah, Have a big splash page when you enter a topic that shows a bird takin a dump on a sattelite dish Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
granpa Posted March 28, 2007 CID Share Posted March 28, 2007 Yeah, Have a big splash page when you enter a topic that shows a bird takin a dump on a sattelite dish I did solve that stain problem, but I had to find a used replacement dish that didn't have any BB holes in it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nos7667 Posted March 28, 2007 CID Share Posted March 28, 2007 I did solve that stain problem, but I had to find a used replacement dish that didn't have any BB holes in it. I wonder why it has BB holes in it........................ Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
upsurfer Posted March 29, 2007 CID Share Posted March 29, 2007 Better today than yesterday Microsoft Windows XP [Version 5.1.2600] © Copyright 1985-2001 Microsoft Corp. Pinging 67.18.179.85 with 32 bytes of data: Reply from 67.18.179.85: bytes=32 time=835ms TTL=50 Reply from 67.18.179.85: bytes=32 time=775ms TTL=50 Reply from 67.18.179.85: bytes=32 time=774ms TTL=50 Reply from 67.18.179.85: bytes=32 time=783ms TTL=50 Ping statistics for 67.18.179.85: Packets: Sent = 4, Received = 4, Lost = 0 (0% loss), Approximate round trip times in milli-seconds: Minimum = 774ms, Maximum = 835ms, Average = 791ms Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.