View Full Version : 100M Will the VMNG300 Be able to handle 120 Mb ?
ethan103
27-02-2012, 14:15
Will the modem be able to handle the speed upgrade when it comes ?
Or will we just have to wait and see ?
Since mine works perfectly with the 100 Mb I don't want to "upgrade" to the Superhub >.>
Andrewcrawford23
27-02-2012, 14:20
the vmng300 could in thoery do up to 220mb but will most likely have problems over 150-180mb
however virign are rolling out 8 downstrem channel boning and vmng300 only supports 4 so shub is inevitable not sure once the extra downstreams are rolled out if it will knock the vmng300 off or not
Virgin have said that it won't, but I know that they won't force people to upgrade their modems if they don't want to - however anyone on a VMNG300 will be offered a SuperHub as far I know
So it'll be up to you what you do
Andrewcrawford23
27-02-2012, 14:22
Virgin have said that it won't, but I know that they won't force people to upgrade their modems if they don't want to - however anyone on a VMNG300 will be offered a SuperHub as far I know
So it'll be up to you what you do
virgin will eventally in teh fact if the cusotmer complaisn they cant get full speed or cant get onlien that they will say it because the vmng300 is fault or cant handl;e the speed and say the only way is the shub
Well yes, but it'll still be the customers choice as to whether to swap it out or not. If they are happy not getting the full speed they are paying for then it's their choice
ethan103
27-02-2012, 15:04
the vmng300 could in thoery do up to 220mb but will most likely have problems over 150-180mb
however virign are rolling out 8 downstrem channel boning and vmng300 only supports 4 so shub is inevitable not sure once the extra downstreams are rolled out if it will knock the vmng300 off or not
Thanks, I guess I'll wait an see what happens.
In order to get the new speeds customers will need to change to the Superhub.
Andrewcrawford23
27-02-2012, 15:55
In order to get the new speeds customers will need to change to the Superhub.
wrong the vmng300 can do 150mb easily and can probally do 200mb, the only reason the shub is needed is for 8 donstream channels
wrong the vmng300 can do 150mb easily and can probally do 200mb, the only reason the shub is needed is for 8 donstream channels
I am not wrong. I stated that VM want people to take the Superhub for the new speed upgrades if they don't already have one. Its nothing to do with what the old vmng can or can't do.
General Maximus
27-02-2012, 16:16
In order to get the new speeds customers will need to change to the Superhub.
no they dont. VM arent going to upgrade every single connection one by one and say "we'll only upgrade you if you have a shub". They have probably got away with forcing the shub on 99% of 10mbit customers anyway so when they rollout up the new speed they just wang a new config file down to everyone's modem.
I don't see not being able to use 8 channels as a problem. It will let the shub users loads balance which will reduce the traffic going through the 4 I am using which will hopefully make it more likely that I will achieve top speed.
That being said, I am not a speed freak and am very happy with the speed I am getting atm. They could upgrade me to 150mbit and I would still be happy with what I am getting now. There gets a point where fast is fast and anything faster is only making a few secs difference to download times. Every Friday morning I start 5 downloads going and by the time I have finished clicking on the link for the 5th files, the first 2 files have already finished. Increasing my speed will just mean that the third file is downloaded as well which makes no difference to me whatsoever.
I love uploading at 1mb/sec as well and tbh that is so fast I still havent got quite used to that either so I can't say I would appreciate anything faster atm.
But while we are talking about max speed, does anyone know what the max up is for the vmng300? I would think it would be something like 40mbits?
qasdfdsaq
27-02-2012, 16:21
It supports 4 upstream channels, so at maximum of 38mbit/s per channel, theoretically 152mbps.
Actual speed in practice... no idea.
And I'd agree beyond a point there's no noticeable difference in "interactive" services, e.g. browsing - as indicated by over 2/3rds of VM customers being on 10mb or less; and recent OFCOM findings that BT 40mb loads web pages faster than VM 50mb. But that doesn't mean some people don't want their large file downloads to finish in 5 minutes instead of 6.
What is more than likely is that when the new speeds are enabled, unless you have the superhub you will stay on the old speed. i.e 50Mb where as those with superhubs will get the 100Mb straight away.
General Maximus
27-02-2012, 16:46
maybe, but as you admins always like to point out to us, read the title for the thread. We are talking about upgrading from 100 to 120.
Either way, I think they are going to be so busy bumming around with all the hundreds of thousands (if not over 1 million) 10 and 20mbit users and making sure they get shubs for 30mbits that they arent going to be too worried about peeps on 50mbit with a vmng. The PR blab might say if won't run at 100 or 120 but they know it will and can afford to leave it alone for now.
qasdfdsaq
27-02-2012, 16:56
10mb users won't be getting superhubs and won't be getting 30mb.
The double speed upgrade is to double 10mb users to 20mb.
Also the total number of 10mb and 20mb users is closer to 3 million. There's >2.9 million on "10mb or less" (but probably most on 10mb) and ~500k on 20mb.
maybe, but as you admins always like to point out to us, read the title for the thread. We are talking about upgrading from 100 to 120.
Either way, I think they are going to be so busy bumming around with all the hundreds of thousands (if not over 1 million) 10 and 20mbit users and making sure they get shubs for 30mbits that they arent going to be too worried about peeps on 50mbit with a vmng. The PR blab might say if won't run at 100 or 120 but they know it will and can afford to leave it alone for now.
I was only using that as an example. It will probably be the same for 100 to 120 for customers without Superhubs.
General Maximus
27-02-2012, 19:29
10mb users won't be getting superhubs and won't be getting 30mb.
The double speed upgrade is to double 10mb users to 20mb.
Also the total number of 10mb and 20mb users is closer to 3 million. There's >2.9 million on "10mb or less" (but probably most on 10mb) and ~500k on 20mb.
Ouch, I wouldnt like to be the person responsible for these upgrades. Having all these peeps on different packages must be causing them tonnes of grief. If it were me I have upgrade everyone below 30mbit to 30mbit, 30s to 60 and 50's to 120 with the 100s.
This way everyone is on docsis 3 with a shub (which I am sure they would be over the moon with) and you have got a new clear 3 tier system of:
Small: 30mbit
Medium: 60mbit
Large: 120mbit
XL: 200mbit for the future
XXL: 400mbit for the future
Leaving it as it is now and going on to XXXL and XXXXL is stupid because you just lose track of what is what. The tier structure naming should relfect todays technology. 50mbit isn't XL, it is quickly becoming the norm, especially with Infinity becoming widely available. 10mbit or less should be called XS now because it really is.
Andrewcrawford23
27-02-2012, 19:45
Small is for rententions which will be 5mb after the upgrades, but they could say we are doblign yoru speed if 20mb was goign to 30 they had to go to 40 or 60 and they went 60 to bring the tiers into line, i think it will be medium 20mb, large 60mb, xl 120mb, and then xxl for 200mb or 200 for 200mb
If you keep your VMNG300 on a 120Mb connection it will be like trying to run a NTL100 or a Motorola 3100 on a 20Mb connection, it will try but it will never get there.:erm:
Remember the VMNG300 only has 4 downstream channels whereas the Superhub has 8 downstream channels and they will require you to use 8 channels to achieve the higher speeds.
i think it will be medium 20mb, large 60mb, xl 120mb, and then xxl for 200mb or 200 for 200mbNo it won't
We already know that XL is 60 and XXL is 120Mbit
Andrewcrawford23
27-02-2012, 19:47
If you keep your VMNG300 on a 120Mb connection it will be like trying to run a NTL100 or a Motorola 3100 on a 20Mb connection, it will try but it will never get there.:erm:
Remember the VMNG300 only has 4 downstream channels whereas the Superhub has 8 downstream channels and they will require you to use 8 channels to achieve the higher speeds.
and each channel is capable fo 55mb, so vmg can do 200mb, peter/mas we know you liek the shub but the vmng can still do the new top speeds and possible 200mb but ocne over 200mb comes everyone ho wants or is getitng it will need a shub perosnall yi douwngrade unless i am seeing better reports of the shub or they decided to bring out a true modme in the future
Pantsu-san
27-02-2012, 19:47
It will probably be the same for 100 to 120 for customers without Superhubs.
I have a contact at the CEO's office that disagrees - already asked the question.
Andrewcrawford23
27-02-2012, 19:50
No it won't
We already know that XL is 60 and XXL is 120Mbit
im talking in the future i think they ill harmonis the 60mb into one group ie medium and birng tht other down to be remain as above
---------- Post added at 19:50 ---------- Previous post was at 19:48 ----------
I have a contact at the CEO's office that disagrees - already asked the question.
eventally if you want over 200mb which virign will offer ina few years ie i think the bottom tiers in 2-3 years time will be about 100mb then it will be sometihng liek 250mb and 400mb and possible gbit, but for anything over 200mb peopel will need shub to achive the full speed but they oculd remain on the vmng300 but need to be aware they will neber get the speed paided for but yoru correct 120mb vmng300 can and virign will most likely allow
I have a contact at the CEO's office that disagrees - already asked the question.
Well if you believe what they tell you then I have this fantastic pyramid scheme that just needs some investment.
I would not trust the CEO's office to find their own backside with their own 2 hands and a torch.
Pantsu-san
27-02-2012, 19:53
Well if you believe what they tell you then I have this fantastic pyramid scheme that just needs some investment.
I would not trust the CEO's office to find their own backside with their own 2 hands and a torch.
Well, Peter, the people outside of the CEO's office told me that the VMNG300 wasn't technically capable of running 100Mb. Which is a rather odd as it's running pretty fine downloading at 14MB/s.
I think I know which people I'm gonna stick with ;)
Andrewcrawford23
27-02-2012, 19:55
Well, Peter, the people outside of the CEO's office told me that the VMNG300 wasn't technically capable of running 100Mb. Which is a rather odd as it's running pretty fine downloading at 14MB/s.
I think I know which people I'm gonna stick with ;)
i very much doubt it is downloading at 114MB/s ;)
as then you would have about 950Mb connection :p
Pantsu-san
27-02-2012, 19:56
Typo much?
Well, Peter, the people outside of the CEO's office told me that the VMNG300 wasn't technically capable of running 100Mb. Which is a rather odd as it's running pretty fine downloading at 14MB/s.
I think I know which people I'm gonna stick with ;)
You do know that once the VMNG300 fails the is no replacement apart from the Superhub and once 8 downstreams come online your modem will struggle to say the least just like a NTL100 on 20Mb.
Andrewcrawford23
27-02-2012, 19:59
You do know that once the VMNG300 fails the is no replacement apart from the Superhub and once 8 downstreams come online your modem will struggle to say the least just like a NTL100 on 20Mb.
if anything once mroe downstreams come sonline and other user having shub it hsould get better because each channel the vmng is on will have half hte amount of data goign through it
Pantsu-san
27-02-2012, 20:01
You do know that once the VMNG300 fails the is no replacement apart from the Superhub and once 8 downstreams come online your modem will struggle to say the least just like a NTL100 on 20Mb.
Yes. But that wasn't the point you were making. You were claiming the CEO's office talk out of their rear end. In my experience it's the people who come to the property or answer the phone when you ring 151, they're the idiots.
Andrewcrawford23
27-02-2012, 20:03
Yes. But that wasn't the point you were making. You were claiming the CEO's office talk out of their rear end. In my experience it's the people who come to the property or answer the phone when you ring 151, they're the idiots.
acutally no... think about it this way, virign will tell the agents and staf who come to oyu that they must tell you it doesnt work but if they where to be honest and say yeah it will work there jobs could be on teh line, but ceo office you would be in contact with someoen high up who coudl say that and allow it as there job wouldnt be on the line
Pantsu-san
27-02-2012, 20:06
Sorry, Andrew, but how can you tell me 'no' when it's been my experience over and over again? This is not an opinion. This is fact. Deny it all you want but in my experience this is how it's been for about 5 years.
Anyway, I don't want to derail the thread. Apologies for doing it up to this point.
Andrewcrawford23
27-02-2012, 20:11
Sorry, Andrew, but how can you tell me 'no' when it's been my experience over and over again? This is not an opinion. This is fact. Deny it all you want but in my experience this is how it's been for about 5 years.
Anyway, I don't want to derail the thread. Apologies for doing it up to this point.
ok take it this way, i employee you to sell and fix my gadget, i make a new one but a fx can make the old one better but i want you sell the new one so tell you not to say or you be in breach of cvontract and possib;e sacked so woulkd you risk your job to tyell customers???
Pantsu-san
27-02-2012, 20:15
ok take it this way, i employee you to sell and fix my gadget, i make a new one but a fx can make the old one better but i want you sell the new one so tell you not to say or you be in breach of cvontract and possib;e sacked so woulkd you risk your job to tyell customers???
It's not that I didn't understand you, I just don't agree with you.
Look at from the other side of the coin : Why would I listen to the same people that have lied to me in the past about anything they have to say in the future? Of course, I'm going to think they're fools. I'd rather listen to the people that told me the truth as they can be trusted.
We're never going to agree. Let's leave it there. I have curry to eat ;)
Yes. But that wasn't the point you were making. You were claiming the CEO's office talk out of their rear end. In my experience it's the people who come to the property or answer the phone when you ring 151, they're the idiots.
No the CEO's office do quite often talk out of their rear end and give erroneous advice and promise the moon even when it is not possible, not the thing people in their position should be doing.
Usually any sound advice comes from a proper source and often from the call centres as I have answered a couple calls in the past from them, but really they should be going to 2nd line.
No longer my concern anyway as I am working elsewhere.
The thread was derailed when the Superhub fanboys came in and made guesses about what will happen but stated them as fact.
The VMNG300 is capable of 100meg right now on 4 channels. Each channel is capable of much more than 25meg on DOCSIS3 and VM have made no noise at all about forcing upgrades. I'll be sticking with it purely for the lower latency it provides. If when I go to 120meg the connection turns to poop I'll switch to the hub and say I've switched, no shame in that.
And by the time VM roll out 250meg they wont be using the current Superhub for it.
The thread was derailed when the Superhub fanboys came in and made guesses about what will happen but stated them as fact.
The VMNG300 is capable of 100meg right now on 4 channels. Each channel is capable of much more than 25meg on DOCSIS3 and VM have made no noise at all about forcing upgrades. I'll be sticking with it purely for the lower latency it provides. If when I go to 120meg the connection turns to poop I'll switch to the hub and say I've switched, no shame in that.
And by the time VM roll out 250meg they wont be using the current Superhub for it.
Nor will they be using any steam powered VMNG300 modems as they will be well out of puff, remember 8 channels in the Superhub which are there for a reason.
Pantsu-san
27-02-2012, 20:19
The thread was derailed when the Superhub fanboys came in and made guesses about what will happen but stated them as fact.
The VMNG300 is capable of 100meg right now on 4 channels. Each channel is capable of much more than 25meg on DOCSIS3 and VM have made no noise at all about forcing upgrades. I'll be sticking with it purely for the lower latency it provides. If when I go to 120meg the connection turns to poop I'll switch to the hub and say I've switched, no shame in that.
And by the time VM roll out 250meg they wont be using the current Superhub for it.
Quite.
+1
Nor will they be using any steam powered VMNG300 modems as they will be well out of puff, remember 8 channels in the Superhub which are there for a reason.
DOCSIS Modem side the superhub is fine. But with tests of 16 channel modems happening even that part of it is out of date.
Its just everything else they slapped in there that is the problem. I'd love to see one given an unlocked profile, on a nice uncongested part of the network, just to see how quickly it craps out at the faster speeds.
DOCSIS Modem side the superhub is fine. But with tests of 16 channel modems happening even that part of it is out of date.
Its just everything else they slapped in there that is the problem. I'd love to see one given an unlocked profile, on a nice uncongested part of the network, just to see how quickly it craps out at the faster speeds.
Do you really think that Virgin Media actually want the VMNG300 on anything higher than 100Mb, they will try to ensure it will not work as they will not write new firmware for it as with all old modems they will just let them die.
Remember they have not been supplied for over a year and the stock ran out finally 6 months ago.
So they will just replace your outmoded modem with the next incarnation of the Superhub.
Andrewcrawford23
27-02-2012, 20:43
DOCSIS Modem side the superhub is fine. But with tests of 16 channel modems happening even that part of it is out of date.
Its just everything else they slapped in there that is the problem. I'd love to see one given an unlocked profile, on a nice uncongested part of the network, just to see how quickly it craps out at the faster speeds.
they have tested a 32 channel modem :p and standalone modem at that :D but we wont see tha tfora while possible they will have a new ultimate hub for when that would have come out ie over gbit
they have tested a 32 channel modem :p and standalone modem at that :D but we wont see tha tfora while possible they will have a new ultimate hub for when that would have come out ie over gbit
They tested many off the shelf modems that all would have been better than both the VMNG300 and the Superhub but went for the cheap options and failed.
Andrewcrawford23
27-02-2012, 20:53
They tested many off the shelf modems that all would have been better than both the VMNG300 and the Superhub but went for the cheap options and failed.
rofl i thought the 1.5gig trail was asucces lol not really been keeping tabs nto really itnerested i am hopign for bt infitiy in my area and fibre on demand to be rolled out and i am going to true fibre hopefully 100mb+
qasdfdsaq
27-02-2012, 20:58
Let's not speculate on what VM are planning to do to deploy next-gen connectivity over their cable network shall we? Frankly, all of the options right now are so drastic and equally unlikely that not even VM themselves would have any concrete knowledge of where the technology is going to lead.
And by that I mean really "next-gen" not some incremental pseudo-upgrades to existing deceptively-marketed fibre-to-the-backside-of-nowhere "services".
---------- Post added at 20:58 ---------- Previous post was at 20:57 ----------
They tested many off the shelf modems that all would have been better than both the VMNG300 and the Superhub but went for the cheap options and failed.
Remember the DIR-615? Surprisingly good device that, on reflection, was actually rock-bottom-so-dirt-cheap-a-whore-would-call-it-filthy-cheap to begin with and futher revisions made to make it even cheaper but yet performed admirably for what has become a £5 router. It's not the money that counts, it's what you do with it. Broadcom, in my opinion, are overpriced and poor value but represent decent performance in the mid-high end of the spectrum. In which the Superhub is not.
Andrewcrawford23
27-02-2012, 20:59
Let's not speculate on what VM are planning to do to deploy next-gen connectivity over their cable network shall we? Frankly, all of the options right now are so drastic and equally unlikely that not even VM themselves would have any concrete knowledge of where the technology is going to lead.
And by that I mean really "next-gen" not some incremental pseudo-upgrades to existing deceptively-marketed fibre-to-the-backside-of-nowhere "services".
are you talking about the replacement to docsis? if you know wh t i mean which isuspect you do as you doknow this type of stuff, if nto ill try tracka link down to it to explain wha ti meaning
General Maximus
27-02-2012, 21:08
No the CEO's office do quite often talk out of their rear end and give erroneous advice and promise the moon even when it is not possible, not the thing people in their position should be doing.
Usually any sound advice comes from a proper source and often from the call centres as I have answered a couple calls in the past from them, but really they should be going to 2nd line.
That's a laugh considering the drama I had to go through before xmas and everyone i spoke to in call centres, before and after installation, lied out of their asses, and it was only the CEO's office that actually spoke any sense. I spent nearly 3 hours on the phone to 4 different people on the 100mbit support team and they could work out why I was getting crap speed test results with the shub. They kept putting me on hold and speaking to 2nd line and their awesome advice that it was my pc which was at fault. Strangely though, as soon as I got my vmng300 back the speed tests went back to being 100%.#
I am greatful that the CEO's office exists to over rule everyone else because every else just wants to be a drone and do what they are told. No matter how calm you are and explain thingd clearly and concisely they just don't care and only want to do what they are told. The answer you get from everyone is "I understand what you are saying and I want to help you but I am not allowed. Only bla bla is allowed to do it".
Remember the DIR-615? Surprisingly good device that, on reflection, was actually rock-bottom-so-dirt-cheap-a-whore-would-call-it-filthy-cheap to begin with and futher revisions made to make it even cheaper but yet performed admirably for what has become a £5 router. It's not the money that counts, it's what you do with it. Broadcom, in my opinion, are overpriced and poor value but represent decent performance in the mid-high end of the spectrum. In which the Superhub is not.
You do realise that I am speaking about both the VMNG300 and the Superhub being cheap alternatives when they could have got kit from both Cisco and Motorola as they were tested but it seems cost was the winner.
General Maximus
27-02-2012, 21:35
that would be so sweet. That is the sort of thing that they could market as a sign of quality and respect. Screw price wars, come to our network because we offer the fastest speeds in the UK and only use the best hardware for it. Join us and we'll give you a Cisco modem and router.
I would sign up in a heart beat. I don't know how they can't afford to do something like that anyway with all the faff they have with installation charges and activation charges. They should just bung it all together and say we are going to charge you £80 for a Cisco router and we'll send someone round to install it and get it activated on the network so you are up and running.
They use Motorola and Cisco CMTS so why not supply the device that matches your CMTS at least you would know that is was truly compatible and not just a cheap alternative.
General Maximus
27-02-2012, 22:46
I agree, I am not a huge fan of motorola so I pray I am a Cisco user but I am all for uniformity and compatability
I haven't read this thread so apologies if I repeat what someone else has posted ..
The speed profiles are defined in the provisioning platform and a speed is associated to a modem type.
If VM choose NOT to give the 300 a 120Mb profile, it wont see the upgrade.
It would be very easy for us to single out the 300 customers and not upgrade them, should that be the business requirement.
I'm not suggesting that will happen, just clearing how things work.
I haven't read this thread so apologies if I repeat what someone else has posted ..
The speed profiles are defined in the provisioning platform and a speed is associated to a modem type.
If VM choose NOT to give the 300 a 120Mb profile, it wont see the upgrade.
It would be very easy for us to single out the 300 customers and not upgrade them, should that be the business requirement.
I'm not suggesting that will happen, just clearing how things work.
I have posted on a similar line to you but you know a damn sight more than me about provisioning the devices on the network so maybe people will take heed, or not if they have a VMNG300.
General Maximus
29-02-2012, 08:18
I'm not suggesting that will happen, just clearing how things work.
that's good to know, from previous experience I just thought they sent a new config file down to the modem regardless of which modem it was. How long have they been able to do that for because you would think that they wouldn't provision you for something which your modem can't handle. As an example, they were more than happy to upgrade me to 20mbit when it first came out donkeys years ago but my terayon tj210 still wouldn't shift above 10mbit and I had to ring them up to get an ambit 256. Why would you allow a 10mbit modem to be provisioned for 20mbit? It was that long ago that I can't even remember if it was pre-VM.
Chrysalis
29-02-2012, 15:24
Well if you believe what they tell you then I have this fantastic pyramid scheme that just needs some investment.
I would not trust the CEO's office to find their own backside with their own 2 hands and a torch.
Admit it :) you and the CEO office are great buddies.
Admit it :) you and the CEO office are great buddies.
Only if they were on the end of a cattleprod.:D
that's good to know, from previous experience I just thought they sent a new config file down to the modem regardless of which modem it was. How long have they been able to do that for because you would think that they wouldn't provision you for something which your modem can't handle. As an example, they were more than happy to upgrade me to 20mbit when it first came out donkeys years ago but my terayon tj210 still wouldn't shift above 10mbit and I had to ring them up to get an ambit 256. Why would you allow a 10mbit modem to be provisioned for 20mbit? It was that long ago that I can't even remember if it was pre-VM.
No idea to be honest, I think it was around 2003 the current platform came in.. But it was before I started.
All devices are literally listed once per service code, networks could force provision it but that would bypass Billing. I see quite a few attempts to provision tiers of service to modems not defined in the config.
Like when an agent does an upgrade and just tries to apply the new service to the current
Modem.
General Maximus
29-02-2012, 20:49
Like when an agent does an upgrade and just tries to apply the new service to the current Modem.
like upgrading peeps to 100mbit with the vmng 300 :) The fact that they have been able to do it means that your system is setup for it then despite VM saying it is shub only. A bit backwards if you ask me.
like upgrading peeps to 100mbit with the vmng 300 :) The fact that they have been able to do it means that your system is setup for it then despite VM saying it is shub only. A bit backwards if you ask me.
They are business and it makes business sense to get everyone using the one device because sooner or later your VMNG300 will fall over, especially as they decided not to go with the Cisco and Motorola modems in the first place and that can only be down to cost.
like upgrading peeps to 100mbit with the vmng 300 :) The fact that they have been able to do it means that your system is setup for it then despite VM saying it is shub only. A bit backwards if you ask me.
As above, the VMNG is end of line for Virginmedia, everyone knows it works, (apart from some agents apparently) but they want to remove it and replace it with the Superhub.
Which in modem only mode is just as good, if not better.
Chrysalis
29-02-2012, 21:29
As above, the VMNG is end of line for Virginmedia, everyone knows it works, (apart from some agents apparently) but they want to remove it and replace it with the Superhub.
Which in modem only mode is just as good, if not better.
Sorry I still disagree with the last line.
For whatever reason the superhub increase jitter even in modem mode. I had for the last few weeks with the superhub very jittery behaviour regardless of time of the day, with my vmng300 back on the jitter has much improved although does still get bad at peak when congestion is very high but is fine off peak. Right now at 9.30pm my ssh is noticebly smoother to use than at 4am when I used the superhub.
I got no idea why this happens if its down to different configs on buffer sizes or the superhub firmware. But I have seen this behaviour repeatedly on my VM connection and the 2 devices. I suspect it is config related and that VM reduce the buffers on superhubs in low utilised areas hence not everyone noticing the problem.
General Maximus
29-02-2012, 22:27
yeah, ignitionet mentioned this before. He did go into the finer points of it and technical details but i can't remember what the reason was for it. The shub definitely isnt better than the vmng300 in modem mode otherwise it would deliver better speed test results.
Neither of you have answered my question though. If VM want everyone on the shub and the vmng300 is end of line, why write a 100mbit config file for it so it can be provisioned over the phone?
Neither of you have answered my question though. If VM want everyone on the shub and the vmng300 is end of line, why write a 100mbit config file for it so it can be provisioned over the phone?Originally it's because 100Mbit was being tested before the SuperHub was available, so had to be tested on the VMNG300 modem with the appropriate number of downstreams.
Now, it's because 50Mbit customers with VMNG300 won't be forced to change over when they get upgraded to 100/120Mbit
craigj2k12
29-02-2012, 22:38
Originally it's because 100Mbit was being tested before the SuperHub was available, so had to be tested on the VMNG300 modem with the appropriate number of downstreams.
what do you mean by this??
qasdfdsaq
29-02-2012, 22:45
Funny, if that were the case why was 200mb tested with dedicated, picked for purpose modems and not the Superhub?
what do you mean by this??I mean that the VMNG300 can only do 4 downstreams, so that is what was tested.
The commercial plan was always to make it available with the SuperHub, which is why it was and why 100Mbit now has more than 4 downstreams
---------- Post added at 22:46 ---------- Previous post was at 22:45 ----------
Funny, if that were the case why was 200mb tested with dedicated, picked for purpose modems and not the Superhub?Maybe because it was trialled before the SuperHub was around?
SuperHub was H2 2010, 200Mbit trial was 2009 http://www.theregister.co.uk/2009/05/06/virgin_media_200/
qasdfdsaq
29-02-2012, 22:51
Good point, my bad.
Funny, if that were the case why was 200mb tested with dedicated, picked for purpose modems and not the Superhub?
They were testing branded kit at that time such as Cisco and Motorola modems but as above they went for the cheaper alternative.
The better .. not cheaper :)
The better .. not cheaper :)
If the VMNG300 or the Superhub were dearer than either of those brands especially the variants with inbuilt wifi with external antennas then the person/s responsible for buying them wants sacking because they must have received a backhander to buy them.;)
General Maximus
01-03-2012, 10:14
that really is a shame. You would have thought the people responsible for these type of things would be very intelligent, analytical and methodical. I would have thought there would be a massive different in every way between any Cisco product tested and the shub, making the Cisco one the ideal choice, but they still decided to go for crap over something decent. Just says what they think about their customers. If it was me I couldn't do it in good conscience and would argue the point with the power that be.
ethan103
01-03-2012, 10:37
I for one will try and get 120 Mb on my VMNG300,
Not saying I will succeed but I will spend all day on the phone if I hve to if that's how I can at least get someone to try and send a 120 Mb config down to the modem :-p
General Maximus
01-03-2012, 10:44
you shouldn't have to try. There is no way they are going to check the current 100mbit users to see which modem they have got. Remember, we are provisioned for 110mbit already so if they turn around and say "oh by the way, you need a shub for that extra 10mbit" they'll just be making themselves look like fools. I proved a point quite nicely that I didn't need one going from 50 to 100, so I defo don't need one going from 110 to 120 (or maybe 130 if they want to keep up nice and cozy with fluff).
Either way, I have already got notes on my account from the CEOs office saying I can keep my vmng 300 so lets hope that carrys some weight.
so if they turn around and say "oh by the way, you need a shub for that extra 10mbit" they'll just be making themselves look like fools.
And all the way back in post 3 I said:
Virgin have said that it won't, but I know that they won't force people to upgrade their modems if they don't want to - however anyone on a VMNG300 will be offered a SuperHub as far I know
So it'll be up to you what you do
So stay or a VMNG300 or don't - the choice is yours
General Maximus
01-03-2012, 12:08
sweet, i hope they collate some stats for the sake of it. I would love to know the % of customers who choose to keep the vmng 300. Says a lot about brand confidence.
sweet, i hope they collate some stats for the sake of it. I would love to know the % of customers who choose to keep the vmng 300. Says a lot about brand confidence.
However there is every possibility that if customers choose to stick with the VMNG they won't get the speed increase. They may have to take it to get the increase.
General Maximus
01-03-2012, 12:25
i argued that point 3 posts above and Ben said we will be offered a shub. Not "take it or you won't be upgraded". I love being sarcastic though and I am defo going to be sending some emails when I get upgraded.
"hey guess what. The VMNG300 which you rigourously tested on your network and said wouldn't do above 92mbit is now doing 33% more than that and achieving 120mbit. How does that work?"
craigj2k12
01-03-2012, 14:25
"hey guess what. The VMNG300 which you rigourously tested on your network and said wouldn't do above 92mbit is now doing 33% more than that and achieving 120mbit. How does that work?"
must have been about as rigorously tested as the POS superhub was
Andrewcrawford23
01-03-2012, 14:58
must have been about as rigorously tested as the POS superhub was
what you mean 5 days and was alrteady pencilled in for install for when the 5days was upgrade without feedback on it
craigj2k12
01-03-2012, 16:19
well id say 5 mins, thats including unboxing, I doubt it was even plugged in
qasdfdsaq
01-03-2012, 17:39
"hey guess what. The VMNG300 which you rigourously tested on your network and said wouldn't do above 92mbit is now doing 33% more than that and achieving 120mbit. How does that work?"
"You sir clearly have a hacked/cloned modem."
General Maximus
01-03-2012, 17:50
ah yes, it can only do 92mbit so I must have violated the T&Cs, taken it apart changed it.
ethan103
02-03-2012, 22:05
Is everyone gone to "110 Mb" for "100 Mb" customers ?
---------- Post added at 22:05 ---------- Previous post was at 21:55 ----------
Also read the VM FAQ on 120 Mb,
Apparently I have a magical VMNG300 that can do 98 Mb/sec and do 12.8 MB/sec download :D
But ofc that's not possible as they an only do 92 Mb >.<
General Maximus
02-03-2012, 22:11
Is everyone gone to "110 Mb" for "100 Mb" customers
all 100mbit customers should be provisioned for 110mbit. This allows for overheads and the extra stuff you dont see going on ensuring that you can achieve as close to 100mbit as poss. When we get upgraded to 120mbit I would expect to see up provisioned for 130mbit or 132.
what you mean 5 days and was alrteady pencilled in for install for when the 5days was upgrade without feedback on it
That makes no sense, but the Superhub was tested for months before it was released.
craigj2k12
04-03-2012, 22:51
That makes no sense, but the Superhub was tested for months before it was released.
all those wasted months probably isnt good for business
all those wasted months probably isnt good for business
I can assure you they were not wasted months. A lot of bugs and issues would have been found and corrected before release and as I have previously mentioned I have had a Superhub since then and it has not had a single issue with wireless or anything else for that matter and I run a lot of devices at the same time, both wired and wireless.
Ok so some people have problems but they probably arent all down to the Superhub. There are many environmental factors that could be causing problems.
ethan103
04-03-2012, 23:06
I can assure you they were not wasted months. A lot of bugs and issues would have been found and corrected before release and as I have previously mentioned I have had a Superhub since then and it has not had a single issue with wireless or anything else for that matter and I run a lot of devices at the same time, both wired and wireless.
Ok so some people have problems but they probably arent all down to the Superhub. There are many environmental factors that could be causing problems.
Can't really Trust VM that much when they clearly the VMNG300 can only do 92 Mb but my Signature and my download speed and times say otherwise :/
There are many environmental factors that could be causing problems.
Which the superhub should be capable of dealing with. Other routers in the exact same location deal with the same issues fine, but because the superhub isnt then it can't.
craigj2k12
04-03-2012, 23:16
I can assure you they were not wasted months. A lot of bugs and issues would have been found and corrected before release and as I have previously mentioned I have had a Superhub since then and it has not had a single issue with wireless or anything else for that matter and I run a lot of devices at the same time, both wired and wireless.
Ok so some people have problems but they probably arent all down to the Superhub. There are many environmental factors that could be causing problems.
are you for real?
Can't really Trust VM that much when they clearly the VMNG300 can only do 92 Mb but my Signature and my download speed and times say otherwise :/
What something can do and what a service provider says it can do and what they support are all different things ;) also they are trying to get people on to the Superhub so would say that it can't do the full 100Mb.
---------- Post added at 23:26 ---------- Previous post was at 23:25 ----------
are you for real?
Erm... *pinches self*
Yip I'm real. :rolleyes:
craigj2k12
05-03-2012, 00:10
What something can do and what a service provider says it can do and what they support are all different things ;) also they are trying to get people on to the Superhub so would say that it can't do the full 100Mb.
---------- Post added at 23:26 ---------- Previous post was at 23:25 ----------
Erm... *pinches self*
Yip I'm real. :rolleyes:
I always had suspicions you were real, however the question i was asking was if you were "for real" with your post in regards to the superhub....... just becuase your superhub works doesnt mean the whole product line does
General Maximus
05-03-2012, 00:25
deja vu
Fair enough Stephen I'll admit that some shubs work and people are happy with them and some don't and they are the ones we here about. You have got to admit though the despite your assertions that it was tested for "months", the simple basic problems which have been cropping up like the ip flood detection and firewall (forgetting the wireless and everything else) and easy things which should have been picked up prior to release if they did any sort of proper testing on it. With something like this you test it on a variety of devices with different loads and god knows whatever else and it should have been picked up on straight away. The fact that they missed it makes me think that they connected one pc to the shub, checked to make sure they could get to google and signed it off.
deja vu
Fair enough Stephen I'll admit that some shubs work and people are happy with them and some don't and they are the ones we here about. You have got to admit though the despite your assertions that it was tested for "months", the simple basic problems which have been cropping up like the ip flood detection and firewall (forgetting the wireless and everything else) and easy things which should have been picked up prior to release if they did any sort of proper testing on it. With something like this you test it on a variety of devices with different loads and god knows whatever else and it should have been picked up on straight away. The fact that they missed it makes me think that they connected one pc to the shub, checked to make sure they could get to google and signed it off.Not quiet. Afaik the ip flood detection was picked up early on and resolved
Andrewcrawford23
05-03-2012, 07:26
Not quiet. Afaik the ip flood detection was picked up early on and resolved
stephen it was tested for 5 days and it was already planned fo rnationwide kit even before the trial ended , there was no way in hell it was trailed for months, even in the labs it only really got a a month trail, virign knew it could save them laods since they gota great deal with netgear for it and it work ok, but it sub standard try make out it good all you want but it not, it certianly never got tested long enough if it was modem mpode would have been standard before ite went live
stephen it was tested for 5 days and it was already planned fo rnationwide kit even before the trial ended , there was no way in hell it was trailed for months, even in the labs it only really got a a month trail, virign knew it could save them laods since they gota great deal with netgear for it and it work ok, but it sub standard try make out it good all you want but it not, it certianly never got tested long enough if it was modem mpode would have been standard before ite went live
It's a shame you work/worked for VM, people might think you know what you're talking about.
Andrewcrawford23
05-03-2012, 07:36
It's a shame you work/worked for VM, people might think you know what you're talking about.
ive always said what is true, i dnt really care is someone ikes or dislieks it, it onyl gota few days trail i think 5-7 and was already was goign to be part of the install tech kit to install
ive always said what is true, i dnt really care is someone ikes or dislieks it, it onyl gota few days trail i think 5-7 and was already was goign to be part of the install tech kit to install
It didn't, clearly testing wasn't as complete as it should of been and I'm not going to defend it .. but it was tested for a lot longer than 5 - 7 day.
ive always said what is true, i dnt really care is someone ikes or dislieks it, it onyl gota few days trail i think 5-7 and was already was goign to be part of the install tech kit to install
You know this for sure? Were you part of the trials or know someone on them?
I know for a fact it was a lot longer than 5-7 days.
qasdfdsaq
05-03-2012, 10:54
Not quiet. Afaik the ip flood detection was picked up early on and resolved
It took several months after release to be resolved, all in all a year and a half after the product was already finalized by Netgear and submitted to VM for modifications.
As BenMcr rightly pointed out, the base model received WiFi certification in May 2010, but wasn't released by VM until late 2011. That'd suggest they had over a year to "do their thing" whatever it was, one thing they did was to de-wifi certify it and blast interference across the whole wireless spectrum - something they've since reneged on, thankfully.
Now I can't defend VM's competence at these things but I know if I had a shiny thing sitting on my desk for a year and a half I'd do more than 5 days of testing on it; and that's without being paid to do it. On the other hand it takes me less than half an hour between making a change to the firmware's source code to having it recompiled and flashed onto the device, so the average firmware revision cycle is more like two hours than two weeks when you have different companies dealing with different stages, let alone different people.
As I mentioned in an earlier post the trials period was a lot longer than 5 days.
ethan103
05-03-2012, 12:58
What something can do and what a service provider says it can do and what they support are all different things ;) also they are trying to get people on to the Superhub so would say that it can't do the full 100Mb.[COLOR="Silver"]
So bassically, they are lying to customers by saying it cannot do 100 Mb and only can do 92 Mb, even though it can do 100 Mb just to get them over to the superhub?
:erm: :td: :confused: :rolleyes: :o:
qasdfdsaq
05-03-2012, 13:00
Pretty much, tells you a lot when they'd rather lie to customers to cover up their decisions than just to tell them the truth.
ethan103
05-03-2012, 13:32
Pretty much, tells you a lot when they'd rather lie to customers to cover up their decisions than just to tell them the truth.
Seems so, how can any company be proud of that ?
Basically scaring people into switching over to the Superhub by saying you won't get the full service....
Oh well, I'll hang on to my VMNG300 which works perfectly fine for as long as I can !
^_^
Seems so, how can any company be proud of that ?
Basically scaring people into switching over to the Superhub by saying you won't get the full service....
Oh well, I'll hang on to my VMNG300 which works perfectly fine for as long as I can !
^_^
Scaring ? VM are well within their rights to force you to use any device they wish. They don't need to scare you ..
qasdfdsaq
05-03-2012, 18:05
They don't need to lie either. You're right, they could move everyone over without giving them a reason at all, but making up stuff that's clearly untrue? I don't see the justification.
General Maximus
05-03-2012, 19:57
Scaring ? VM are well within their rights to force you to use any device they wish. They don't need to scare you ..
true, but I think they have pretty much exhausted all their luck and customer loyalty with the shub fiasco. If they did something else to **** everyone off I dont think people would have a problem jumping ship now that there is some proper competition. I have always been with VM/NTL for speed but now BT have caught up if VM ever do anything stupid again like telling me I have got to use a router that doesnt work instead of my Linksys router I have no probs whatsoever saying ciao. Money talks and ******** walks.
I don't understand this argument. To my knowledge the VMNG300 is a cable modem - no router functionality. The Superhub can now be used in exactly the same way once configured into modem-mode.
There have been some reports that the Superhub is more power hungry than previous VM provided devices; after that I can't see why somebody who is currently using a VMNG300 would be unhappy with a Superhub. The main complaint about the Superhub has been about the routing and wireless performance/functionality - isn't this all a bit moot if you have been using a VMNG300? Simply plug whatever wireless router you have been using with VMNG300 into a new Superhub and off you go.
Am I missing something?
Best regards
David
ps. Despite being intially skeptical of the reliability of the VM service in general I've been using the an R30 Superhub in modem-mode since the service was installed in early January with no problems.
https://www.cableforum.co.uk/images/local/2012/03/58.png (http://www.thinkbroadband.com/ping/share/5bb42c2245860389d0f2f4bd547b6aaf.html)
I don't understand this argument. To my knowledge the VMNG300 is a cable modem - no router functionality. The Superhub can now be used in exactly the same way once configured into modem-mode.
The vmng300 is currently only capable of 4 bonded downstream channels where the superhub is capable of 8.. No idea without reading the rest of this thread if that is a hardware or firmware restriction but that is the main difference with capability especially as many areas are going to more than 4 bonded channels
I don't understand this argument. To my knowledge the VMNG300 is a cable modem - no router functionality. The Superhub can now be used in exactly the same way once configured into modem-mode.
The Superhub in modem mode introduces a higher minimum ping than a VMNG300 and I think more jitter (though they could be confused as being one in the same).
As for 8 downstreams, the jury is still out on that mattering. The superhub users will use all 8 while the VMNG300 users will still be load balanced, just on 4. It should just mean that the superhub will handle being in a heavily congested area better, but perversely it could also mean the VMNG300 causes more congestion as it wont spread its load across 8 channels. All theory though, roll on 120meg funtimes! :dunce:
The vmng300 is currently only capable of 4 bonded downstream channels where the superhub is capable of 8.. No idea without reading the rest of this thread if that is a hardware or firmware restriction but that is the main difference with capability especially as many areas are going to more than 4 bonded channels
I understand that being the original topic, but I'm not sure why the ability of the VMNG300 to support 120 Mb/s on a 4 channel downstream connection is really relevant as it would seem anybody moving to that tier of service would be issued a Superhub.
I understood the opposition to the Superhub prior to the R30 firmware release. This prevented me from having a VM Internet connection before modem-mode was made available. Ironically if modem-mode was available on the Superhub's Business-hub sibling I would be probably on a much higher cost VM Business connection as I assumed (wrongly) that I would be needing the better quality and more accessible customer support.
Best regards
David
General Maximus
05-03-2012, 22:45
Am I missing something?
Yup, I don't know what the technical ins and outs are with regards to how the things are designed but a shub in modem mode isnt the same as modem. As an example (and this is "my" issue with it):
I live in a very good area for congestion and have never had an issue with speed. When I ran speed tests when I was on 50mbit I always pretty much got 50mbit. When I thought there was something wrong with my connection and I ran a speed test to confirm, the speedtest would reflect the issue and only give me something like 10mbits.
Now this is the joke. I was forced to have a shub when I upgraded to 100mbit. On the morning of the upgrade I ran a speedtest with the vmng 300 and got 50mbit. I was then upgraded to 100mbit and given a shub and all of a sudden my speedtest went down to 27-36mbit consistently. It is a long story but spoke to VM who ran tonnes of tests and said that I was the only 100mbit customer in my area (i was one of the first to upgrade) and the utilisation on the cmts was practically 0 so it must be the shub which was at fault. They sent me another and I had exactly the same problem.
I made a complaint and got my vmng300 back. Just before activating it i ran another speedtest with the shub and got the same result. 15 mins later the vmng300 was connected and activated and I ran a speedtest and straight away first time it was just over 90mbit on a Friday evening.
I know the shub has 8 channels and in the future I'll need 8 channels but I am hoping that by the time it gets to that point they'll have moved on to something else. Either that or I'll be moving to BT Infinity. At the moment my VMNG300 is performing flawlessly like it always has done and I am confident it will do up to 150mbit ish. I am well chuffed with the speed I get atm and with all these upgrades and speed doubling going on atm it is going to be at least another 2 years before they decide to rollout 200mbit, make a rollout schedule and it gets round to my area. As I said, at that point I am hoping they will have moved on to a decent 16 channel modem or BT will be kicking ass and I'll move over to them.
Soooooooo, in summary, the shub doesnt out perform the vmng 300 as a modem, and even in modem mode, some people are still having problems with random restarts and stuff like that. I obviously want the best equipment for something I use and enjoy a lot and if I thought the shub was the best, then I would use it, but it ain't :rant:
Soooooooo, in summary, the shub doesnt out perform the vmng 300 as a modem, and even in modem mode, some people are still having problems with random restarts and stuff like that. I obviously want the best equipment for something I use and enjoy a lot and if I thought the shub was the best, then I would use it, but it ain't
When you have a company unwilling to invest in the correct modems because they are either not company branded or have ugly none aesthetically pleasing external antenna, you will always be be in no win situation.
Someone high up the ladder decided after rigorous testing not to go with either Cisco or Motorola and plumbed for the VMNG300 a non standard modem just because it could have the company logo on it and probably the same people decided to go with the Superhub with its internal antennas fitted to the back of the case because it spoilt the pretty lines of the casing, now who would think to install them there.
These people have a lot to answer for and the next generation may still have internal antenna as it again may spoil the pleasing lines of the device.
Those of you that have the VMNG300 should concede the fact that your device is now classed as the unwanted runt of the litter and the is no way that anyone will ever write any firmware to possibly improve the device as they want rid of it as soon as possible.
When you have a company unwilling to invest in the correct modems because they are either not company branded or have ugly none aesthetically pleasing external antenna, you will always be be in no win situation.
Someone high up the ladder decided after rigorous testing not to go with either Cisco or Motorola and plumbed for the VMNG300 a non standard modem just because it could have the company logo on it and probably the same people decided to go with the Superhub with its internal antennas fitted to the back of the case because it spoilt the pretty lines of the casing, now who would think to install them there.
These people have a lot to answer for and the next generation may still have internal antenna as it again may spoil the pleasing lines of the device.
Those of you that have the VMNG300 should concede the fact that your device is now classed as the unwanted runt of the litter and the is no way that anyone will ever write any firmware to possibly improve the device as they want rid of it as soon as possible.
That's not quite true. Each device brought in as a contender is run against a mass of test scripts and the project balances out the results. There is no evil genius behind any of VMs devices... Sure mistakes have been made but neither the 300 or 480 where brought in for any other reason than they were the best of the bunch. Do you honestly think the bad press is worth cutting corners?
I know this to be fact as I played my part in both devices and although I do not manage hardware I had to review the testing and as Stephen and Ben have said there was a lot of it.
Andrewcrawford23
06-03-2012, 08:54
That's not quite true. Each device brought in as a contender is run against a mass of test scripts and the project balances out the results. There is no evil genius behind any of VMs devices... Sure mistakes have been made but neither the 300 or 480 where brought in for any other reason than they were the best of the bunch. Do you honestly think the bad press is worth cutting corners?
I know this to be fact as I played my part in both devices and although I do not manage hardware I had to review the testing and as Stephen and Ben have said there was a lot of it.
cisco branded momdems and motorola modems will perform better with there coutnerpart cmts, virign took the decision based on numerious reasons, script based tests liek you sai, price and other tihngs liek custommising nd otehr probally a few other things but the shub is not the best bit of kit it is better when it was uncustomise by virign is the original netgear one, vmng3000 is the same, as with tivo.
as with tivo.Most of those issues that customers don't like about TiVo are TiVo issues, not ones introduced as part of the VM one
Andrewcrawford23
06-03-2012, 10:12
Most of those issues that customers don't like about TiVo are TiVo issues, not ones introduced as part of the VM one
well i cant comment to much on tivo itself as i dnt use it, but ther eone feature that virign have blocked i knwo why but still comes down to customise teh tvo box as my arguement i saying , ie downloading content recorded form teh tivo box to another device you can do it freely on teh american one not on teh virign ones alsoa lot of the apps that you coudlg et from tivo site wont work from what i ahve heard again i cant comment i dnt use it
well i cant comment to much on tivo itself as i dnt use it, but ther eone feature that virign have blocked i knwo why but still comes down to customise teh tvo box as my arguement i saying , ie downloading content recorded form teh tivo box to another device you can do it freely on teh american one not on teh virign ones alsoa lot of the apps that you coudlg et from tivo site wont work from what i ahve heard again i cant comment i dnt use it
TiVo is still new .. give it chance.
Andrewcrawford23
06-03-2012, 10:15
TiVo is still new .. give it chance.
i want to bang my head :( my point is virign dnt jsut use test or money are reaosn teh fact tivo allowed them to cusotmise it is a big plus for htem virign liek to brand and restrict or changes things to there own means
tivo is probally the one tihng virign have got right and once it is improve will be really good yes but virign should jsut use off the shelf stuff and stop wanting to brand it
Tivo is not the subject of this thread, so please stay on topic
General Maximus
06-03-2012, 10:29
plumbed for the VMNG300 a non standard modem just because it could have the company logo on it
I was just about to say you were wrong and my vmng300 doesnt have a logo on it but I have just checked and noticed it for the first time. Shows how pointless that is :)
decided to go with the Superhub with its internal antennas fitted to the back of the case because it spoilt the pretty lines of the casing
they didnt have to go with the shub just because it looked pretty with internal attenae. The Linksys E series are excellent routers, look very pretty and have internal antannae and have a love big Cisco logo on the top; hardware you can be proud of.
Chrysalis
06-03-2012, 12:08
When you have a company unwilling to invest in the correct modems because they are either not company branded or have ugly none aesthetically pleasing external antenna, you will always be be in no win situation.
Someone high up the ladder decided after rigorous testing not to go with either Cisco or Motorola and plumbed for the VMNG300 a non standard modem just because it could have the company logo on it and probably the same people decided to go with the Superhub with its internal antennas fitted to the back of the case because it spoilt the pretty lines of the casing, now who would think to install them there.
These people have a lot to answer for and the next generation may still have internal antenna as it again may spoil the pleasing lines of the device.
Those of you that have the VMNG300 should concede the fact that your device is now classed as the unwanted runt of the litter and the is no way that anyone will ever write any firmware to possibly improve the device as they want rid of it as soon as possible.
Dont worry I am welll aware there will be no firmware updates and eventually the device will be disabled completely although the superhub will also eventually have the same fate but probably at a later date.
The superhub design to me is a big failure, not just the lack of external antenna's but also the orientation the cables plug in, usually on modems, routers etc. the cables plug in on a thin side of the device not in the big flat part. The blue flashing led also is extremely bright and lights up my entire bedroom without me covering it up, and doing that I am probably restricting airflow to the device. Also that plastic base on the superhub meaning its forced to be stood up as it would get in the way in another position. I would guess VM went on trying to make it look nice rather than practical.
Now the vmng300 may be non standard but I would say the superhub falls under the same category except the vmng300 is the more stable of the 2, it can tolerate congestion better as jitter is noticebly lower and it connects a lot faster as well, if I reboot the superhub it can take over 30 seconds to connect, sometimes over a minute.
---------- Post added at 12:08 ---------- Previous post was at 12:03 ----------
That's not quite true. Each device brought in as a contender is run against a mass of test scripts and the project balances out the results. There is no evil genius behind any of VMs devices... Sure mistakes have been made but neither the 300 or 480 where brought in for any other reason than they were the best of the bunch. Do you honestly think the bad press is worth cutting corners?
I know this to be fact as I played my part in both devices and although I do not manage hardware I had to review the testing and as Stephen and Ben have said there was a lot of it.
Same vendor devices will nearly always work the best with each other both ends of the connection, also its been well publicised on a blog (forgot the guys name but he is a senior VM CS manager) that testers prior to the superhub launch had their reports ignored so the launch could be pushed through.
Now remember when you mentioned how good you were at your job, and now you have stated you were part of the superhubs testing, now remember how bad the superhub was at launch. Do you have a reason how all that slipped through the net?
General Maximus
06-03-2012, 12:18
testers prior to the superhub launch had their reports ignored so the launch could be pushed through.
Now remember when you mentioned how good you were at your job, and now you have stated you were part of the superhubs testing, now remember how bad the superhub was at launch. Do you have a reason how all that slipped through the net?
excellent point and I think it shows quite nicely that VM obviously ignored what testers were telling them and only listened to what they wanted to. Great attitude; go for whatever is cheapest and screw whether it works or not
Andrewcrawford23
06-03-2012, 12:28
excellent point and I think it shows quite nicely that VM obviously ignored what testers were telling them and only listened to what they wanted to. Great attitude; go for whatever is cheapest and screw whether it works or not
to be honest i think it will teach thema lesson as the amoutn they will have paid in replacing shub all the time will mean it has been more costly to take the cheaper option which is the case for morst things
qasdfdsaq
06-03-2012, 13:07
Those of you that have the VMNG300 should concede the fact that your device is now classed as the unwanted runt of the litter and the is no way that anyone will ever write any firmware to possibly improve the device as they want rid of it as soon as possible.
Your face is the unwanted runt of the litter!
(That's for insulting my VMNG300)
---------- Post added at 13:03 ---------- Previous post was at 12:56 ----------
That's not quite true. Each device brought in as a contender is run against a mass of test scripts and the project balances out the results. There is no evil genius behind any of VMs devices... Sure mistakes have been made but neither the 300 or 480 where brought in for any other reason than they were the best of the bunch. Do you honestly think the bad press is worth cutting corners?
I know this to be fact as I played my part in both devices and although I do not manage hardware I had to review the testing and as Stephen and Ben have said there was a lot of it.
In an ideal world they'd pick the device with the best technical capability and be done with it. Unfortunately there's a lot of corporate politics and bureaucracy at play too. Especially for example the choice of an integrated modem/router rather than a separate 8 channel modem and gigabit router - clearly can't have been because of the technical superiority of the integrated solution :rolleyes: Compare also the sudden disappearance of the VMDG485 that nobody knows much about - do you know anything about the testing of that? I find it unlikely there were any showstopping technical faults. Huawei already have lots of experience building products with Broadcom SoCs, both modems and routers, and already got better certification for the one part of the Superhub that gets most complaints - the wireless. On the other hand, Huawei also power most of their biggest competitor's fibre kit... That said they did have a recent overheating issue that was fixed pretty quick.
---------- Post added at 13:07 ---------- Previous post was at 13:03 ----------
The superhub design to me is a big failure, not just the lack of external antenna's but also the orientation the cables plug in, usually on modems, routers etc. the cables plug in on a thin side of the device not in the big flat part. The blue flashing led also is extremely bright and lights up my entire bedroom without me covering it up, and doing that I am probably restricting airflow to the device. Also that plastic base on the superhub meaning its forced to be stood up as it would get in the way in another position. I would guess VM went on trying to make it look nice rather than practical.
Actually the BT HomeHub 3 (while less than half the size) does have the same orientation of connectors (but suffers from it a lot less as it doesn't oft end up with 5 inches of rigid coax and FPAs screwed onto the back of it). The lights on the the HH3 on the other hand are, IMO a perfect balance of style and usability. Barely noticeable when you don't look at them but they look awesome when you do. I haven't unboxed my Superhub(s) yet but the HH3 being one of the best looking CPEs I've seen, it's going to be hard to beat.
Andrewcrawford23
06-03-2012, 13:13
Your face is the unwanted runt of the litter!
(That's for insulting my VMNG300)
---------- Post added at 13:03 ---------- Previous post was at 12:56 ----------
In an ideal world they'd pick the device with the best technical capability and be done with it. Unfortunately there's a lot of corporate politics and bureaucracy at play too. Especially for example the choice of an integrated modem/router rather than a separate 8 channel modem and gigabit router - clearly can't have been because of the technical superiority of the integrated solution :rolleyes: Compare also the sudden disappearance of the VMDG485 that nobody knows much about - do you know anything about the testing of that? I find it unlikely there were any showstopping technical faults. Huawei already have lots of experience building products with Broadcom SoCs, both modems and routers, and already got better certification for the one part of the Superhub that gets most complaints - the wireless. On the other hand, Huawei also power most of their biggest competitor's fibre kit... That said they did have a recent overheating issue that was fixed pretty quick.
---------- Post added at 13:07 ---------- Previous post was at 13:03 ----------
Actually the BT HomeHub 3 (while less than half the size) does have the same orientation of connectors (but suffers from it a lot less as it doesn't oft end up with 5 inches of rigid coax and FPAs screwed onto the back of it). The lights on the the HH3 on the other hand are, IMO a perfect balance of style and usability. Barely noticeable when you don't look at them but they look awesome when you do. I haven't unboxed my Superhub(s) yet but the HH3 being one of the best looking CPEs I've seen, it's going to be hard to beat.
i doubt the shub will beat it style wise lol
just out of curiosty is the oen you see on that ad for bt infity with the students?
qasdfdsaq
06-03-2012, 13:20
Dunno about the ad, it's this one : http://www.shop.bt.com/learn-more/bt-branded-products-and-services/new-bt-home-hub-3-9902.html
To be fair it looks better in the flesh, rather than the over-glossed marketing pics.
Andrewcrawford23
06-03-2012, 13:22
Dunno about the ad, it's this one : http://www.shop.bt.com/learn-more/bt-branded-products-and-services/new-bt-home-hub-3-9902.html
To be fair it looks better in the flesh, rather than the over-glossed marketing pics.
appears to be the same one personally i dnt care what it looks liek i care abotu performance hopefulyl ina year or so time i can see for ymself if your thinkbroadband graph is anything to go on ill be drooling
qasdfdsaq
06-03-2012, 13:27
Well, the performance (or performance impact) of both routers is fairly minimal to the thinkbroadband graph - after all mine's not even connected as I have the BT VDSL modem responding to pings, not the router. It's the quality of the internet connection itself causing that difference, not the routers.
As I've said before, the performance of the router on BT is up to you, and you're free to use your own and completely remove the BT one. VM only allows you to turn off some (not all) of the routing functions and wireless, but not remove the device entirely - although they get close with "modem mode".
As for the comparative performance of the two "hubs" in "hub" mode, I can assure you, Battle of the Hubs will be revealed shortly :)
Chrysalis
06-03-2012, 14:25
Actually the BT HomeHub 3 (while less than half the size) does have the same orientation of connectors (but suffers from it a lot less as it doesn't oft end up with 5 inches of rigid coax and FPAs screwed onto the back of it). The lights on the the HH3 on the other hand are, IMO a perfect balance of style and usability. Barely noticeable when you don't look at them but they look awesome when you do. I haven't unboxed my Superhub(s) yet but the HH3 being one of the best looking CPEs I've seen, it's going to be hard to beat.
Then thats also a bad design and it would seem VM copied the same concepts.
Every router I have brought on the market doesnt use this type of design.
Also the vmng300 (and any other modem from VM) has to also suffer with the rigid coax cable and any attenuators but because they have a better design they are much better. The thin space I have slotted my vmng300 into wouldnt be possible on the superhub without putting a hacksaw to the base and drilling a hole in my unit to cater for the angle the cables go in.
qasdfdsaq
06-03-2012, 18:28
Then thats also a bad design and it would seem VM copied the same concepts.
I wouldn't say so. It's based on the same design as any ordinary "book-shaped" router, with the cables coming out the back, only it's been squished longitudinally so it takes up less space on the desk, and stretched vertically so the wireless antennas get better clearance. Or think of it another way, a ordinary book shaped router tilted forwards about 80 degress, but with the ports re-angled to they still face horizontally rather than sticking out the top. Right, you cant fit it into tight spaces (but BT aren't forcing you to use it, the modem with you (almost) have to use is half the size of the VMNG300 and book-shaped too) but most people will sit it on a desk. It's actually properly designed, rather than the Netgear solution of taking a flat router and flipping it 90 degrees and that's it (and then flipping the connectors another 90 degrees as is the case in the SH).
I must also remind you that there are plenty of other, worse designs out there, such as this:
https://www.cableforum.co.uk/images/local/2012/03/110.jpg
---------- Post added at 18:28 ---------- Previous post was at 17:50 ----------
I wonder, if VM specifically designed the SH to be more immune to these (http://www.ispreview.co.uk/index.php/2012/03/uk-isp-concern-spreads-as-more-cats-found-sitting-on-broadband-routers/) kind of problems which the old VMNG300 was quite susceptible to because of it's shape...
That's not quite true. Each device brought in as a contender is run against a mass of test scripts and the project balances out the results. There is no evil genius behind any of VMs devices... Sure mistakes have been made but neither the 300 or 480 where brought in for any other reason than they were the best of the bunch. Do you honestly think the bad press is worth cutting corners?
I know this to be fact as I played my part in both devices and although I do not manage hardware I had to review the testing and as Stephen and Ben have said there was a lot of it.
They tested Cisco and Motorola modems and they should have gone down that route and supplied the matching device for your CMTS, if that had happened I rather doubt we would be arguing over supplied Virgin Media kit.
If they announced that they would supply the above kit for a one off fee on the lines of the £30 30Mb upgrade fee many customers would stump up the cost as they would know they were buying decent kit and not something disguised or crammed into a small space for aesthetic reasons.
Chrysalis
06-03-2012, 18:52
I wouldn't say so. It's based on the same design as any ordinary "book-shaped" router, with the cables coming out the back, only it's been squished longitudinally so it takes up less space on the desk, and stretched vertically so the wireless antennas get better clearance. Or think of it another way, a ordinary book shaped router tilted forwards about 80 degress, but with the ports re-angled to they still face horizontally rather than sticking out the top. Right, you cant fit it into tight spaces (but BT aren't forcing you to use it, the modem with you (almost) have to use is half the size of the VMNG300 and book-shaped too) but most people will sit it on a desk. It's actually properly designed, rather than the Netgear solution of taking a flat router and flipping it 90 degrees and that's it (and then flipping the connectors another 90 degrees as is the case in the SH).
I must also remind you that there are plenty of other, worse designs out there, such as this:
https://www.cableforum.co.uk/images/local/2012/03/110.jpg
---------- Post added at 18:28 ---------- Previous post was at 17:50 ----------
I wonder, if VM specifically designed the SH to be more immune to these (http://www.ispreview.co.uk/index.php/2012/03/uk-isp-concern-spreads-as-more-cats-found-sitting-on-broadband-routers/) kind of problems which the old VMNG300 was quite susceptible to because of it's shape...
As I said before, every single retail router I own is not a router of this style. Prior to getting a superhub I have never used a router of this style. There is clearly a reason why routers are not commonly designed like this.
Your post seems to indicate tho you have used this sort of design before.
What popular routers use this stand up design with the cables going out the large flat part?
That asus design whilst not great is actually better than the superhub. Has better angles for the cables.
By the way I own over 10 routers from 5 different brands.
Also most people probably have their router tucked away somewhere near where their signal is fed into their property rather than on a desk. With virgin media I expect in most cases its near where the TV is and with BT near the phone socket.
---------- Post added at 18:52 ---------- Previous post was at 18:44 ----------
They tested Cisco and Motorola modems and they should have gone down that route and supplied the matching device for your CMTS, if that had happened I rather doubt we would be arguing over supplied Virgin Media kit.
If they announced that they would supply the above kit for a one off fee on the lines of the £30 30Mb upgrade fee many customers would stump up the cost as they would know they were buying decent kit and not something disguised or crammed into a small space for aesthetic reasons.
Also as well vendors tend to have unique capabilties on network kit which will normally only work with kit at the other end from the same vendor. I have seen this on adsl with eg. broadcom dslam having features that only wotk with broadcom routers, and on ukonline where SRA would only work with conexant based routers. So this further backs up what you are saying with matching vendor kit. I expect on cisco ubr kit there is features that only work in conjunction with cisco cable modems.
If the VMNG300 or the Superhub are in any way more expensive to buy than a Cisco or Motorola device it can only be so because the people who bought them were wined and dined and received other incentives to go down that route.
I can not see how the VMNG300 could be classed as a more expensive and more capable device than any Cisco or Motorola off the shelf device, the same can be said about the Superhub.
Any person who knows how the systems work would never buy an unbranded device or one that was seemingly purchased because it looked pretty without any antenna's.
You want your platform to have an exemplary reputation so in the real world you would purchase and supply the best device possible unless you wanted to find yourself in the position of having to replace one device because it did not have 8 downstreams with another device with badly placed small internal antenna's you that you think looks pretty because the is nothing to spoil its lines.
qasdfdsaq
06-03-2012, 19:06
As I said before, every single retail router I own is not a router of this style. Prior to getting a superhub I have never used a router of this style. There is clearly a reason why routers are not commonly designed like this.
Your post seems to indicate tho you have used this sort of design before.
No, I haven't, I'm saying the HH3 is not much different from the normal "style" speak of, simply squished a bit.
What popular routers use this stand up design with the cables going out the large flat part?I haven't seen any. Netgear however produce a kit if stand up routers with cables going out the back though, including the original model the SH was based on. VM got the plugs flipped sideways for god knows what reason. The BT HH3 is not "this style" as it is not large or flat in any dimension.
That asus design whilst not great is actually better than the superhub. Has better angles for the cables.But on the other hand it's not symmetric from any angle, nor can you hide the cables without hiding the LEDs or seeing its ugly underside. Up to you which you prefer tbh.
Also most people probably have their router tucked away somewhere near where their signal is fed into their property rather than on a desk. With virgin media I expect in most cases its near where the TV is and with BT near the phone socket.
I disagree. Most of the ones I see are either on a desk or other, large, flat, desk shaped object, e.g. a shelf, floor, TV stand, etc. The HH3, while having similar "aspect ratio" to the Superhub, can easily fit in on a table without taking up much space while the Superhub (I presume, I don't have one yet) cannot.
Your face is the unwanted runt of the litter!
(That's for insulting my VMNG300)
I think somehow you got my meaning mixed up, the company class it as the runt of the litter hence they want it put down as quietly as possible.https://www.cableforum.co.uk/images/local/2012/04/8.gif
---------- Post added at 19:12 ---------- Previous post was at 19:09 ----------
Compare also the sudden disappearance of the VMDG485 that nobody knows much about
You can probably add a number or 2 to that name by now.;)
qasdfdsaq
06-03-2012, 19:30
I think somehow you got my meaning mixed up, the company class it as the runt of the litter hence they want it put down as quietly as possible.https://www.cableforum.co.uk/images/local/2012/04/8.gif
Could say the same about what the company did to your face! (Or rather, your old call centre) Mwahaha. See how witty I am? :D
Could say the same about what the company did to your face! (Or rather, your old call centre) Mwahaha. See how witty I am? :D
Its gone or soon will be so who really cares now.
All you VMNG300 users on her know that Virgin Media want rid of your device as soon as possible and have no intention of offering any real support for it.https://www.cableforum.co.uk/images/local/2012/11/13.gifhttps://www.cableforum.co.uk/images/local/2012/03/32.gif
You are going to Infinity so why posting strange remarks over a modem which will soon become your paperweight.https://www.cableforum.co.uk/images/local/2012/10/4.gif
Its entirely possible that big brand (IE Cisco/Motorolla) kit was more expensive for the same spec cheapo brand (Ubee/Netgear) kit. At the end of the day, you get what you pay for. And the DOCSIS3 and wifi standards are, well, pretty standard. Its hard to mess those up.
The tests were also probably based more around things even the cheapest kit can do in a lab, which meant the final choice was based on cost per unit. They certainly wont have been testing how well they handled being in a built up area packed with other routers, baby monitors, microwaves and various other spectrum polluters. Thats what the user trials are for, but by then its far too expensive to fix a hardware design flaw that isn't going to affect every device. So you get a substandard product that ticks all the boxes and away you go.
Only idiots do it twice.
General Maximus
06-03-2012, 19:54
Its gone or soon will be so who really cares now.
All you VMNG300 users on her know that Virgin Media want rid of your device as soon as possible and have no intention of offering any real support for it.https://www.cableforum.co.uk/images/local/2012/11/13.gifhttps://www.cableforum.co.uk/images/local/2012/03/32.gif
You are going to Infinity so why posting strange remarks over a modem which will soon become your paperweight.https://www.cableforum.co.uk/images/local/2012/10/4.gif
that is the nice thing though. If VM upset me again over the vmng300 I'll tell them what I think of the whole shub disaster (not that they'll care) and off I'll go to BT who have got an awesome network atm and dont force customers to use sub-standard equipment.
qasdfdsaq
06-03-2012, 20:35
Its gone or soon will be so who really cares now.
All you VMNG300 users on her know that Virgin Media want rid of your device as soon as possible and have no intention of offering any real support for it.https://www.cableforum.co.uk/images/local/2012/11/13.gifhttp://www.addemoticons.com/emoticon/animated/AddEmoticons04284.gif
You are going to Infinity so why posting strange remarks over a modem which will soon become your paperweight.https://www.cableforum.co.uk/images/local/2012/10/4.gif
You insult my modem, I insult your face, that's just how it goes ;)
And yes, I'm already on Infinity and my modem will stop working soon, but not before I get to compare it to a bunch of decommissioned Superhubs. In any case old gear does not become a paperweight in my world, it becomes a learning and development platform
---------- Post added at 20:35 ---------- Previous post was at 20:27 ----------
Its entirely possible that big brand (IE Cisco/Motorolla) kit was more expensive for the same spec cheapo brand (Ubee/Netgear) kit. At the end of the day, you get what you pay for. And the DOCSIS3 and wifi standards are, well, pretty standard. Its hard to mess those up.
That's the thing. Standards are there for a reason, so that any manufacturer's kit would work with any other manufacturers'. Looking at Cisco - a lot of wireless networks are powered by Cisco kit. Cisco don't even make wireless cards anymore. They don't need to. Same goes for Aruba networks - they don't make wireless client kit either. Their wireless kit works fine with any other manufacturer's wireless clients.
Do Cisco make Ethernet cards for PCs/servers? No? World's still turning with Cisco switches and routers though...
Motorola builds a lot of mobile network infrastructure, but you don't see many people choosing Motorola phones if their operator uses their transmitters. Siemens and Ericsson power the rest of the transmitters but don't even make phones anymore either.
There's absolutely no need for vendor exclusivity if you're following standards properly.
Can I join in on the insults.. I'll see your modem & his face and I'll raise with an infraction... ;)
Back to being civil please
Can I join in on the insults.. I'll see your modem & his face and I'll raise with an infraction... ;)
Back to being civil please
If it's not in bold do we ignore it ? :D
---------- Post added at 20:49 ---------- Previous post was at 20:46 ----------
BT who have got an awesome network
http://community.bt.com/t5/BT-Infinity/bd-p/BTInfinity
:angel:
The tags were my next raise.....
qasdfdsaq
06-03-2012, 20:58
Dammit how did you make those tags stay not bold.
Just quote it and you'll see the secret tags ;)
Or you can not cheat and fudge it: ] [/b]
qasdfdsaq
06-03-2012, 21:01
Clever! Just spent nearly ten minutes trying to figure that out so I could post a witty retort like:
oos?
LOL, as I normally say...you never stop learning..
Now back on topic you naughty boys..
ethan103
06-03-2012, 21:18
It's a definate fact that the VMNG300 is better than the Superhub in Performance, Ping and Jitter.
Speedtests and pingtests prove that as do user experiences.
I guess I'll hve my answer when 120 Mb rolls out.
No doubt it'll handle the extra 20Mb anyway ....
Can I join in on the insults.. I'll see your modem & his face and I'll raise with an infraction... ;)
Back to being civil please
Hey I was being civil, it is Virgin Media not being civil about his modem so it they who should be insulted but each to their own.;)
it is Virgin Media not being civil about his modemNot his modem ;)
Not his modem ;)
I doubt they will ask for his VMNG300 back somehow.;)
qasdfdsaq
06-03-2012, 22:10
They already told me to dispose of it myself (I thought the recycling regulations required them to be responsible for disposing of it, or is it just that strict with public bodies...)
They already told me to dispose of it myself (I thought the recycling regulations required them to be responsible for disposing of it, or is it just that strict with public bodies...)Virgin Media are part of the take back scheme (http://dts.valpak.co.uk/dts/page1533.aspx), so contribute to the fund for local recycling centres and is fully compliant with the WEEE directive
qasdfdsaq
06-03-2012, 22:16
Ah. Would be nice if they gave that information on the phone during the disconnection request rather than literally just telling me to "go dispose of it".
rather than literally just telling me to "go dispose of it".Well yes they should have been a bit clearer
Although saying that, even if VM hadn't said anything but you then followed the rules your local council have for electrical kit, it still is compliant with appropriate WEEE regulations
Chrysalis
06-03-2012, 22:20
No, I haven't, I'm saying the HH3 is not much different from the normal "style" speak of, simply squished a bit.
I haven't seen any. Netgear however produce a kit if stand up routers with cables going out the back though, including the original model the SH was based on. VM got the plugs flipped sideways for god knows what reason. The BT HH3 is not "this style" as it is not large or flat in any dimension.
if you havent seen any then how can you consider it normal style?
The asus is better because the cables come in from the side of the narrow side like they supposed to rather than the large flat area.
Routers that are designed small and flat like the dir615 where the cables go in also at the narrow part of the router can be stood up using plastic stands and the cables are still easy to manage.
I thought part of the reason for the design of the SuperHub is it forces the antenna to face out into the room
qasdfdsaq
06-03-2012, 22:42
if you havent seen any then how can you consider it normal style?
You were the one talking about normal style, not me. I assumed by normal style you meant something like this (http://cdn.zath.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/2009/12/netgear-dgn2000-adsl-wireless-router.jpg)
The asus is better because the cables come in from the side of the narrow side like they supposed to rather than the large flat area.That's your opinion. I'd rather have something that's not lopsided where I can't see the cables and can see the indicators.
Routers that are designed small and flat like the dir615 where the cables go in also at the narrow part of the router can be stood up using plastic stands and the cables are still easy to manage.Yes but that's cheap and lame, literally flipping a normal router sideways. The HH3 on the other hand is specifically designed to reap the benefits of standing a normal router up sideways but with fewer drawbacks and also benefit from that being its "normal" orientation rather than being on a flimsy tacked-on stand.
General Maximus
07-03-2012, 01:17
I thought part of the reason for the design of the SuperHub is it forces the antenna to face out into the room
at least two people have said that they are positioned in such a way that the signal is directed out of the back of the hub and not the front
qasdfdsaq
07-03-2012, 08:52
Don't worry, I'll be getting that measured in a lab shortly.
crazyronnie
07-03-2012, 10:16
i thought wi-fi antennas were supposed to be omni directional. Otherwise depending on where you put the router you'd get signal in one room and not the other.
Andrewcrawford23
07-03-2012, 10:18
i thought wi-fi antennas were supposed to be omni directional. Otherwise depending on where you put the router you'd get signal in one room and not the other.
they should be, but they could be crappy ones or faulty ones so dnt do thing the right way
Don't worry, I'll be getting that measured in a lab shortly.
Phew
General Maximus
07-03-2012, 10:49
well at least somebody is actually testing to see if it works :rofl:
well at least somebody is actually testing to see if it works :rofl:
And his results posted on here over and over will help no end :cool:
qasdfdsaq
07-03-2012, 10:53
VM probably did the same tests but on the other hand they're not in a habit of releasing the data publicly. If they'd bothered I wouldn't have to bother.
VM probably did the same tests but on the other hand they're not in a habit of releasing the data publicly. If they'd bothered I wouldn't have to bother.
genuine question, why are you bothering?
General Maximus
07-03-2012, 11:00
because he is probably like me and is a man of principle and like to a prove a point. At least then he can say he has made an effort and does his part even if it does fall on deaf ears.
If he had an ground breaking info to share with us then you are the one in a position to do something about it for the greater good of us customers and VM.
because he is probably like me and is a man of principle and like to a prove a point. At least then he can say he has made an effort and does his part even if it does fall on deaf ears.
If he had an ground breaking info to share with us then you are the one in a position to do something about it for the greater good of us customers and VM.
You think anyone cares what I think? Company or forum wise lol
Andrewcrawford23
07-03-2012, 11:03
You think anyone cares what I think? Company or forum wise lol
no :p esicpally isnce yoru pro vm :p seriously tohugh i do take what you say but i dnt always agee with you esicpally on shub
qasdfdsaq
07-03-2012, 11:04
genuine question, why are you bothering?
Firstly as a long-time member of this forum I see a lot of people arguing one way or another about the Superhub without any empirical facts, including myself, getting information from second-hand sources elsewhere. I like to know what I'm talking about and getting information first hand. So next time someone says the wireless range is crap I've got some actual numbers and can say "well no, it's fine except it's horizontally polarized and most other routers are vertically polarized, and your laptop/phone/tablet has vertically polarized antennas". If that's the case of course.
Secondly, I'm a wireless enthusiast, I design wireless networks and algorithms for reliable wireless communications in my spare time. I'm curious what makes a device like this supposedly so bad for some people and not for others. And to learn what I should and shouldn't do in my own routers.
no :p esicpally isnce yoru pro vm :p seriously tohugh i do take what you say but i dnt always agee with you esicpally on shub
We agree and the SH you just add facts that aren't facts now and then. :D
Firstly as a long-time member of this forum I see a lot of people arguing one way or another about the Superhub without any empirical facts, including myself, getting information from second-hand sources elsewhere. I like to know what I'm talking about and getting information first hand.
Secondly, I'm a wireless enthusiast, I design wireless networks and algorithms for reliable wireless communications in my spare time. I'm curious what makes a device like this supposedly so bad for some people and not for others. And to learn what I should and shouldn't do in my own routers.
Fair enough.
Andrewcrawford23
07-03-2012, 11:07
Firstly as a long-time member of this forum I see a lot of people arguing one way or another about the Superhub without any empirical facts, including myself, getting information from second-hand sources elsewhere. I like to know what I'm talking about and getting information first hand.
Secondly, I'm a wireless enthusiast, I design wireless networks and algorithms for reliable wireless communications in my spare time. I'm curious what makes a device like this supposedly so bad for some people and not for others. And to learn what I should and shouldn't do in my own routers.
just out of curiosyt what bench mark test will you run, just wnat ot know how fair it will be and excately what your testing, i am hopign even tohugh you dislike the shub that since you said your enthusiast that you will be non biased it, i am really interested in your results
qasdfdsaq
07-03-2012, 11:14
UDP and TCP throughput tests, compared to a certain other Hub and various wireless routers with optimized firmware. Tests will be done at different ranges and 5 different client devices. I'm not so much trying to find fault with the Superhub as to see why certain people are complaining - in my limited capacity of not being able to survey each and everyone's homes. But a general comparison of speed, range, signal strength, signal quality, distortion, and sideband leakage will be done.
To be fair I don't expect to find the wireless exceptionally bad on the Superhub, I expect to see big problems only in interference prevention and mitigation. I'll be specifically testing those to see if the SH handled it properly and behaves according to wireless standards (which it probably does not, hence making the problem worse for itself). I know that dealing with interference and particularly, hard to detect sideband interference is a total pain. Most leading wireless drivers don't do it properly.
Oh, and I'll also take the wireless card out and test it in isolation in another device (or 3). Though I don't know what Linux driver support is like for that wireless chip yet so it might be a few weeks or months before we have a useable driver.
Andrewcrawford23
07-03-2012, 11:41
UDP and TCP throughput tests, compared to a certain other Hub and various wireless routers with optimized firmware. Tests will be done at different ranges and 5 different client devices. I'm not so much trying to find fault with the Superhub as to see why certain people are complaining - in my limited capacity of not being able to survey each and everyone's homes. But a general comparison of speed, range, signal strength, signal quality, distortion, and sideband leakage will be done.
To be fair I don't expect to find the wireless exceptionally bad on the Superhub, I expect to see big problems only in interference prevention and mitigation. I'll be specifically testing those to see if the SH handled it properly and behaves according to wireless standards (which it probably does not, hence making the problem worse for itself). I know that dealing with interference and particularly, hard to detect sideband interference is a total pain. Most leading wireless drivers don't do it properly.
Oh, and I'll also take the wireless card out and test it in isolation in another device (or 3). Though I don't know what Linux driver support is like for that wireless chip yet so it might be a few weeks or months before we have a useable driver.
im looking for to the results, i would be generalyl intereested in throughput as well, what it handle withotu falling over
Chrysalis
07-03-2012, 13:17
You were the one talking about normal style, not me. I assumed by normal style you meant something like this (http://cdn.zath.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/2009/12/netgear-dgn2000-adsl-wireless-router.jpg)
That's your opinion. I'd rather have something that's not lopsided where I can't see the cables and can see the indicators.
Yes but that's cheap and lame, literally flipping a normal router sideways. The HH3 on the other hand is specifically designed to reap the benefits of standing a normal router up sideways but with fewer drawbacks and also benefit from that being its "normal" orientation rather than being on a flimsy tacked-on stand.
I consider normal whats on the market.
You have confirmed to me that the market doesnt follow VM and BT's placement of the cables based on what you know off anyway.
Also the majority of routers do not stand up although some do its not the favoured design. The most common design is the router flat with the cables going out the back of it whilst like that. Like the dir615 and all of VMs modems prior to the superhub as well as STB's. Nothing cheap either about using a detachable stand and its certianly better than a permanent stand which doesnt give the end user choice. :)
I suspect BT chose that design to match phones that stand up on a base, and VM chose it to copy BT.
craigj2k12
07-03-2012, 13:34
Well the best router ive had for wireless reception is without doubt the Belkin N1 Vision. It has literally the best wireless reception ive ever seen and its a very nice looking unit despite it being upright and having antennae
https://www.cableforum.co.uk/images/local/2012/03/105.jpg
qasdfdsaq
07-03-2012, 13:39
While I'm not trying to defend the SH's design, the BT HomeHub3 is properly designed to "stand up" and I'd ask you don't berate it until you've tried one. It's actually surprisingly good. As I've said before, there's numerous advantages, and possibly only one disadvantage - you can't turn it sideways to cram it into a narrow space, but I seriously don't see that as a problem for most people I deal with. However fair number of recent Netgear routers have their antennas concentrated in half the device, and *need* to be turned vertically to get decent wireless signal out of them.
Whether BT chose to copy VM or vice versa I wouldn't a clue. Like I said though, the HH3 is specifically designed to be properly operated "standing up" and does it well - down to the placement of connectors (recessed) and location of the antennas on the circuit board (top left and top right corners), to take advantage of the (almost) vertical orientation. It works a lot better compared to "flat" routers laid flat. I've always found flat routers on a sideways stand flimsy and unstable so maybe there's a bit of personal bias there.
But based on home-call experience, of the last 10 people I recall dealing with, 7 of them had their router laid flat, where the HH3 would be a better design, and the 3 that had them vertically didn't do so because of space constraints or trying to shove them into tall narrow spaces. They had them on a table anyway, where the HH3 would be a better design.
When I get home tonight I'll be able to take some pictures of the HH3, SH, and VMNG300 side by side to give you a better idea of how the HH3 compares form-factor wise.
---------- Post added at 13:39 ---------- Previous post was at 13:37 ----------
Well the best router ive had for wireless reception is without doubt the Belkin N1 Vision. It has literally the best wireless reception ive ever seen and its a very nice looking unit despite it being upright and having antennae
Yes, the primary benefit of the upright design is for better wireless reception, so I'm not surprised there. Secondarily it saves desk space and has a smaller footprint.
craigj2k12
07-03-2012, 13:46
well I could get a reliable wireless signal from my house to the end of the street, so more than good signal I would say
well I could get a reliable wireless signal from my house to the end of the street, so more than good signal I would say
Depends how big your street is .. you could live here
https://www.cableforum.co.uk/images/local/2012/03/99.jpg
craigj2k12
08-03-2012, 14:38
Depends how big your street is .. you could live here
https://www.cableforum.co.uk/images/local/2012/03/99.jpg
I got a signal at the local primary school which is over 300 metres away
And if I were you I wouldnt put a picture of yourself online, protect your privacy!
Depends how big your street is .. you could live here
https://www.cableforum.co.uk/images/local/2012/03/99.jpg
Nah that house isn't serviceable, no t at the edge of the property and virgin dont dig up tarmac
qasdfdsaq
08-03-2012, 15:11
I got a signal at the local primary school which is over 300 metres away
And if I were you I wouldnt put a picture of yourself online, protect your privacy!
Meh I got a signal 1200m away from my DIR-615.
craigj2k12
08-03-2012, 15:28
yeah i meant without any modification
Andrewcrawford23
08-03-2012, 15:44
the furthest i have got from ym dlink n router i think it 615r need to double check if anyone really that interested is about 200m but that isa poor signal to receive teh best signal i need to be within 30-40m, so getting 1500m would be brilliant well if i was doign hotspots :D
Meh I got a signal 1200m away from my DIR-615.
You been eating pringles again??? ;)
http://www.qsl.net/kb9mwr/projects/wireless/2pt4GHz_Pringles_Can_Antenna.pdf
qasdfdsaq
08-03-2012, 16:23
yeah i meant without any modification
That *was* without any modification.
---------- Post added at 16:23 ---------- Previous post was at 16:22 ----------
You been eating pringles again??? ;)
http://www.qsl.net/kb9mwr/projects/wireless/2pt4GHz_Pringles_Can_Antenna.pdf
As above. Just sat the router on my window ledge, nothing more.
I've done pringles can antennas, reflectors, satellite dishes and the like but there's not much point - most routers output near enough the maximum legal limit that any additional gain and you'd be breaking the law. The exception being on 5Ghz where we have special licenses for high power equipment but it's not really relevant to the home user as most end user devices won't be able to connect.
I got a signal at the local primary school which is over 300 metres away
And if I were you I wouldnt put a picture of yourself online, protect your privacy!
Why where you outside the local primary school :erm:
craigj2k12
10-03-2012, 11:08
Why where you outside the local primary school :erm:
I was inside :) muhaha
ethan103
05-04-2012, 02:30
Any news on a potential date for upgrade ?
Any news on a potential date for upgrade ?
With regards to what.
General Maximus
05-04-2012, 08:38
i think he means 100 to 120
ethan103
05-04-2012, 14:01
i think he means 100 to 120
Exactly.
General Maximus
05-04-2012, 14:28
Afaik we are going to be last. They are going to go round by area and bang all 50s up to 100 and when they have finished that (next summer i think) then they'll move us all up to 120. I am hoping by that time though they will have started the 200mbit rollout.
Afaik we are going to be last. They are going to go round by area and bang all 50s up to 100 and when they have finished that (next summer i think) then they'll move us all up to 120. I am hoping by that time though they will have started the 200mbit rollout.
I thought they where beginning the 120 rollout this summer?
Out of curiosity, assuming i got one that worked perfectly would it be worthwhile me asking for a superhub to be sent out or just stick with the VMNG? I only just went from 50 to 100 the other day and the lass on the phone just did it there and then on the phone, she never said she was sending a hub out.
My VMNG seems fine so far as in speed tests give it 105/4.8 but i've yet to see that from any downloads. I think 8.1 was the fastest i've seen so far and that was from a torrent no less, kinda miss megaupload as they were always a good way to see where i was capping out.
General Maximus
05-04-2012, 14:55
On the vm website it said i would get it inline with the area upgrades which is april-june for me but i am sure masque or ben have said it isnt happening till the end
General Maximus
05-04-2012, 17:41
Out of curiosity, assuming i got one that worked perfectly would it be worthwhile me asking for a superhub to be sent out or just stick with the VMNG? I only just went from 50 to 100 the other day and the lass on the phone just did it there and then on the phone, she never said she was sending a hub out.
My VMNG seems fine so far as in speed tests give it 105/4.8 but i've yet to see that from any downloads. I think 8.1 was the fastest i've seen so far and that was from a torrent no less, kinda miss megaupload as they were always a good way to see where i was capping out.
Stick with your VMNG300 if you have still got it dude. You'll struggle to get your full speed from http downloads either way. The only time I max mine out is torrents or newsgroups. It is nice to know though that is it is working 100% rather than sitting when there is a problem and wondering whether it is the shub that has let you down or a network fault.
Thanks Max, any suggestions on how i can test whether i'm geting the full down speed other than speed tests? At this point i'm regretting not going 60 instead of 100.
General Maximus
05-04-2012, 19:41
nope. You need to think about what sort of stuff you download and where you get it from. I download probably about 250gb a month from newsgroups and torrents so the faster I can get it done the better. Otherwise if you look at mp3s and stuff like that I think the most I have ever got is 1mb/sec and I don't think I have ever got more than 4mb/sec off Steam for games. You need to think of 100mbit as a multiuser connection where you can download a couple of files at 1mb/sec and your children (example) can youtube and do their own thing. It is all about having enough throughput to cater for everyone rather than it being a bottleneck and 4 people trying to hammer a 2mbit connection which is what happened in the old days.
http://trailers.apple.com/
Download or stream a 720p or 1080p trailer. Apple (and really any big american tech company) tend to have ridiculous amounts of bandwidth on tap via CDN's.
And if you have Firefox, install downthemall. It can do multi threaded downloads of most files (or grab every link on a website) which will stress your connection.
borrissey
05-04-2012, 20:24
Afaik we are going to be last. They are going to go round by area and bang all 50s up to 100 and when they have finished that (next summer i think) then they'll move us all up to 120. I am hoping by that time though they will have started the 200mbit rollout.
My area is July for the double speed roll out. They've already started upgrading the cabs in NP19 and my area is NP20 so mine should be soon. So the Cab that is feeding my box that's damaged is just being secured for now. I'm happy with that. :)
General Maximus
05-04-2012, 20:47
http://trailers.apple.com/
Download or stream a 720p or 1080p trailer. Apple (and really any big american tech company) tend to have ridiculous amounts of bandwidth on tap via CDN's.
And if you have Firefox, install downthemall. It can do multi threaded downloads of most files (or grab every link on a website) which will stress your connection.
I admit apple are normally really good for speed but I tried watching a 720p trailer for hunger games yesterday evening and it took more than 10 mins to download a 2 min trailer so it is best not to use Apple as your only guide for speed.
---------- Post added at 20:47 ---------- Previous post was at 20:46 ----------
My area is July for the double speed roll out. They've already started upgrading the cabs in NP19 and my area is NP20 so mine should be soon. So the Cab that is feeding my box that's damaged is just being secured for now. I'm happy with that. :)
how do you know why cabs are being upgraded? I am curious to know when they start doing them in my area.
vBulletin® v3.8.11, Copyright ©2000-2024, vBulletin Solutions Inc.