Originally Posted by markie1966 (Post 35257925)

it was tested for months??

not try gaming for a few minutes when on a break from looking at websites?? just on the off chance that some people on vm actually use it for gaming??

i mean all the adverts in mags and papers telling the gaming community that theres "fewer lags so ur gaming experience is better on vm"....didnt they even TRY gaming as a test??

ffs stop defending a product that DOESNT provide the end user what vm claim it provides

im not talking about the speeds here...for me they are fantastic

but try gaming using a pc, xbox, ps3 and see how many disconnects you get...or how badly u lag....which RUINS gameplay

just fix the damn thing so it does what vm claim it does

btw are u really saying that this new modem mode will eliminate lag for gamers?? can i have that in writing????

Originally Posted by Stephen (Post 35257860)

For the majority of customers it's done exactly that. BT homehubs aren't exactly perfect themselves. I mean they are now on the third model of it.

Originally Posted by KenK (Post 35257890)

It should have been there on day 1, not still waiting 6 months later.

Originally Posted by qasdfdsaq (Post 35258034)

Course, VM went onto the second version of their 'Hub' after what, 3, maybe 4 months? And the Business service (Edit: and according to Masque the consumer service too) is rumoured to be using a new, third version, after what, less than a year?
BT's taken at least 4 years to go through 3 versions, which were released only to accomodate new hardware technologies that the old ones couldn't support.

I'm don't even dare touch on what VM's reasons are...

---------- Post added at 11:43 ---------- Previous post was at 11:40 ----------


Closer to 7 months now.

Originally Posted by Stephen (Post 35257860)

Total nonsense.

The superhub was brought out to make things simpler for customers to set up their broadband and create a network in the home, rather than farting around with a separate modem and router.

For the majority of customers it's done exactly that. BT homehubs aren't exactly perfect themselves. I mean they are now on the third model of it.

Originally Posted by Masque (Post 35257894)

The vast majority of Superhub users have no issues and the are well over 300,000 in circulation and this is growing by the day.

Originally Posted by kwikbreaks (Post 35257988)

I'd guess that the majority use wireless. I'd also guess that the majority are pretty clueless but have found a reboot gets it going again for a while and think that is normal and acceptable behaviour. Certainly rebooting is less aggro than calling offshore support who will almost certainly get you to reboot then claim a fix when it works .

I've just had mine replaced. The first one had WiFi issues (mostly an inability to connect fixed by rebooting). As I don't use wireless much this only usually shows up when I get visitors who try to connect and I have to reboot the hub so they can. I'll see how the new one goes but range wise it is dire just like the one it replaced.

My recommendation is if you have a Superhub and it doesn't work properly complain on the VM community board and try for a replacement. If they have to replace all the duff ones (multiple times if necessary) perhaps they'll put more effort into getting it right. That said if this one fails I'll probably try the CEO office for a modem.

Originally Posted by Stephen (Post 35257860)

Total nonsense.

The superhub was brought out to make things simpler for customers to set up their broadband and create a network in the home, rather than farting around with a separate modem and router.

For the majority of customers it's done exactly that. BT homehubs aren't exactly perfect themselves. I mean they are now on the third model of it.

Originally Posted by Stephen (Post 35257893)

It was not rushed out at all. I know for a fact it was tested for months before the launch.

Originally Posted by Stephen (Post 35257893)

During that testing everything went perfectly. That's why it launched.

Originally Posted by Stephen (Post 35257893)

Howev once it was with a wider audience there were a few bugs that were missed in testing. Not every eventuality can possibly be covered in testing.

Originally Posted by Stephen (Post 35257893)

Reason for the multiple updates was that once a bug got found VM attempted to resolve it ASAP rather than Waiting to fix a few at the same time.

Originally Posted by internetuser (Post 35258068)

Only Business customers? :td:

Originally Posted by zekeisaszekedoes (Post 35258121)

Not thoroughly enough it would seem, therefore it was rushed out.



Probably because it wasn't tested across all of the network, and put under any serious pressure. I mean, it'd have to be a case of that, seeing as it fails at a lot of very basic routing tasks which have been commonplace for DECADES.



Excuse me... a FEW bugs? There are loads. I found some within an hour of plugging it in. Also, missing mainstay features like proper Dynamic DNS and port forwarding being inconsistent. As I've said before, the routing side (part of the reason it was introduced) is severely underwhelming.



And apparently a lot of those rushed out firmware updates either don't fix the bugs for everyone or introduce new ones or make other existing ones worse. I think there's less than 100 people in the secret community forum beta pool, and going from what they've posted most of those aren't particularly technically adept (some of the cluelessness about having the alpha modem mode patch rolled out makes me wonder why they were chosen at all).

I don't see why you're doing so much damage control. Attempting to blanket these clear, measurable problems and hoping they'll go away is exactly the reason people get exasperated, here on CF and everywhere else.

Now if Masque would like to chime in about how his works perfectly connected to his Edimax, that everyone will eventually have the superhub like it or lump it, that VMNG300s are rare as hens teeth etc then this thread will be complete. :D

Originally Posted by ccarmock (Post 35258130)

Wonder if this does mean the 2nd option for residential customers is Cisco then.

Originally Posted by Stephen (Post 35258202)

They don't need to be technically adept, as most of VMs customers probably aren't. The technically minded are more than likely a minority in this case.

Originally Posted by ccarmock (Post 35258130)

Wonder if this does mean the 2nd option for residential customers is Cisco then.

Originally Posted by TJS (Post 35257990)

Gaming works fine for me :) Get an average of 5 - 20 ms latency on Half life 2 death match + team fortress 2 (only 2 games i've played so far but i had people commenting how low my latency was when the score board was shown at the end of each game; as i was getting arround 5- 20 and they were all abou 40 - 120 ms

Originally Posted by Masque (Post 35257894)

The vast majority of Superhub users have no issues and the are well over 300,000 in circulation and this is growing by the day.

Originally Posted by markie1966 (Post 35257859)

yep iv tried a few times

posted on the forums....engineers have visited....shown them screenshots of winmtr and tbb showing packetsloss and been fobbed off with the usual high utilisation...or another excuse

got to the point where i couldnt be arsed playing games cos its useless

Originally Posted by zekeisaszekedoes (Post 35258121)

Now if Masque would like to chime in about how his works perfectly connected to his Edimax, that everyone will eventually have the superhub like it or lump it, that VMNG300s are rare as hens teeth etc then this thread will be complete. :D