Cable Forum - 50M Superhub is nowhere near as bad as people say!

Cable Forum (https://www.cableforum.uk/board/index.php)

- Virgin Media Internet Service (https://www.cableforum.uk/board/forumdisplay.php?f=12)

- - 50M : Superhub is nowhere near as bad as people say! (https://www.cableforum.uk/board/showthread.php?t=33676964)

Re: Superhub is nowhere near as bad as people say!

Quote:

Originally Posted by Sephiroth (Post 35244106)

Only someone with their head in the sand on this issue would come out with that observation.

My remark was pretty clear. You lot are dead silent on the fact that VM are going to extraordinary lengths to have this wretched device performing even basic functions. And they're not there even yet.

Your heads are so deep in the sand that you cannot take this on board and, of course, you can't back down now. Ten people complaining. Jeez!

Of course, when in doubt, resort to insults - effective debating technique.:rolleyes:

I (and others on the forum) do not deny there are problems - just not the wide-spread endemic problems that you, and others, appear to be positing. I (and I am not a VM employee) and at least 15 of my neighbours have had the new hub installed since February,and at work I know at least another 10 who have also had the hub installed - all of them are working fine (and no, none of us are transferring multi-gigabytes in our internal lan, but then again, not that many people do...) - this doesn't mean others aren't having issues, and that VM are trying to resolve them, but I would have thought that in a random sample of 25, if the problems were that widespread, it would have come up. But then again, this, like most of the postings in this thread, is anecdotal, and no basis for a truly factual discussion.

Again, this is not saying others aren't having problems, so perhaps just because I don't agree with you doesn't mean my head is in the sand, it is just about trying to bring a sense of proportion to the debate.

It does seem to be binary with some people, when in fact the reality is fuzzy.

btw, "can't back down" - that is exactly what I mean about a sense of proportion; it's only a discussion on an internet forum, not life or death. I would love for the facts to come out about the failure/problem rate with the new hubs, just to bring some facts to the discussion.

Re: Superhub is nowhere near as bad as people say!

Quote:

Originally Posted by Stuart (Post 35244062)

I am not denying that the Superhub needs improvement. However, people are implying that it is causing massive problems for large sections of VM's customer base, and I am sorry, but the evidence provided does not bear that assumption out. Even on a quick scoot through VM's official forums, I found maybe 10 people having problems that were apparently due to the hub.

http://lmgtfy.com/?q=virgin+problem+with+super+hub

There is quite a "few" pages apparently on google.

Re: Superhub is nowhere near as bad as people say!

1) I actually consider the use of the lmgtfy website to be patronising and rude. A link to the search results would suffice.

2) You can google most things and come up with a lot of hits.

3) How do you know people aren't merely registering on multiple forums and posting the same things? It does frequently happen.

Re: Superhub is nowhere near as bad as people say!

people can debate what the numbers of faults are for the superhub all day long...

One fact that is not disputed is there are problems with the superhub..

Backed by the company issuing a statement over it.

And if it wasnt that big of an issue then why have virgin media forced to go public after a length of time denying any issues at all? Perhaps because it is that big of an issue for them..

Re: Superhub is nowhere near as bad as people say!

Quote:

Originally Posted by Hugh (Post 35243960)

that's a fairly major insinuation there by yourself - can you provide any examples of this, please?

Sorry, was in a rush and didn't proof read properly. That should read something like:

VM staff/CF members insinuating it's own customers/other members are lying is quite another.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mick Fisher (Post 35243966)

Reminds me of the last time I ventured into Curry's looking for a coffee maker. I asked a sales assistant for advice regarding a particular model to which he gave the stock reply "My Mum's got one and she thinks it's OK!"

Ha! There's dozens of those stock phrases, isn't there? My favourite is when I went to buy some guitar strings and they didn't have the brand I wanted so offered me another one, with the old "made in the same factory mate" excuse. My reply was "Yes, they also make the Telecaster and the Stratocaster in the same factory, but that doesn't make it the same effing guitar does it?" :D

Quote:

Originally Posted by Stuart (Post 35243977)

Actually, it's about 4 or 5 people (not sure of the exact numbers, but it's only a few) who are going into a lot of the threads attacking the Superhub. That's not evidence of a poor device at all.

Semantics eh? Wonderful thing(s).

Another way to look at it would be there are half a dozen people eloquently and thoroughly describing the flaws in the product in great detail, and many dozens of others shooting the odd piece of dialogue into the proceedings, often agreeing with the standpoint of it being an inferior product, but not being visible enough to qualify as "the usual suspects".

Like I said, semantics. Selective interpretation. ;)

Quote:

Originally Posted by Sephiroth (Post 35243979)

But if the router is fronting a whole load of devices, it's right to be able to rely on the router's firewall functions.

As someone who has a bunch of games consoles on the network, this is exactly the case. There needs to be at least a half-decent hardware SPI firewall on the home router, or IMO it doesn't count as a fully-fledged router (there are other conditions too but here isn't the place to debate my definition in thousand-word detail).

Quote:

Originally Posted by Masque (Post 35243991)

Are you making this up as you go along, as that is what this seems to me and anyone else reading this

Take this comment and apply it to the quote that inspired my comment in the first place, and reference that with me pointing out more than once that you tend to mix facts with your own speculation and have admitted to such even once. When I speculate (and I'm not alone) I will always try to use a qualifier prefix phrase like "I'm guessing that" or "Based on what I've seen" to distinguish it as my opinion, not a fact.

Quote:

Originally Posted by TJS (Post 35244011)

I have easily transfered a 12 GB Itunes library (compressed as a zip so 1 file) over wifi; the signal is fine; the intrernet hits 49 / 4.7 mbs no matter what time i test; and it doesn't restart or cut off. which is far more then can be said about the BT homehub

That is incredibly interesting... a 12GB zip file. Was that from one wireless device to another, or a wired to a wireless? If it was the latter, what was the respective speed for each? I'm trying to validate my "bad batch" theory, and if you're able to get a big file across from gigabit LAN to 300Mbps N WLAN or vice versa then it adds weight to it. What I mean is, you might have got a good one and me a bad one for example.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Hugh (Post 35244130)

Of course, when in doubt, resort to insults - effective debating technique.:rolleyes:

I'd say "head in the sand" is a mild derogatory remark at best, barely an insult at all. Considering the frustration implied by Seph's post I'd say he'd being remarkably restrained.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Stuart (Post 35244145)

3) How do you know people aren't merely registering on multiple forums and posting the same things? It does frequently happen.

You could also assume people are creating sock puppets on this forum, too. This is kinda what I mean about CF members subtly insinuating other CF members are warping the truth or what have you.[COLOR="Silver"]

---

I think the biggest insult here is superhub detractors being painted as people who just like the act of moaning and will find fault with anything VM say or do when this is somewhere between a gross over-simplification and sweeping, inaccurate generalisation.

It seems none of the pro-superhub camp, or those just trying to "keep the peace", consider that people care about other people getting a top service from their broadband connection yet based on their own experiences and those of others fear that this is not the case, and that less technically-minded people are having problems but don't have a clue why, or know how they can solve them.

This is ironic considering the superhub was rolled out to prevent exactly this kind of thing. It was supposed to be a "set and forget" device, not one that has to be rebooted all the time as has been the experience of many users whose traffic (LAN or WAN) has been above average. Or even in some rare cases when it's below average.

You'll notice, for example, that despite the fact I have a brand new VMNG300 modem I've continued to vicariously deride the superhub. My problem is solved, yes, but this has not been the case for everyone, and if dwindling supplies of the previous flagship modem are to be believed some people are either going to have to downgrade to get an Ambit 256 (excellent CPE although dated now), lump it or leave VM for one of it's lacklustre competitors.

The way I see it I want everyone to have the same outstanding service that I do, and consider it an insult to be labelled as a miscreant.

How's that for a lucid, verbose manifesto? ;)

Re: Superhub is nowhere near as bad as people say!

Quote:

Originally Posted by zekeisaszekedoes (Post 35244193)

VM staff/CF members insinuating it's own customers/other members are lying is quite another.

Only in your mind as you are unwilling to believe what other people print when it is pro Superhub and as far as I am concerned that is tough luck on your part.

Quote:

Originally Posted by zekeisaszekedoes (Post 35244193)

I would love to know how you can even think that I can mix facts with speculation as you say, when in reality it is the other way around, just you once again trying to put people in a poor light as part of your agenda.

Well no one is going to post anything that is in any way business sensitive just to prove that your little agenda is wrong as all you are trying to do is set people up but sadly once again it is another massive fail.

I have an idea, all you guys with issues try moving to an area like mine where the are no issues.:rolleyes::rolleyes::rolleyes::D:D:D

Re: Superhub is nowhere near as bad as people say!

I'll stick with living in Twickenham over living in Liverpool, but thanks for illustrating earlier comments in nice, sharp focus.

Re: Superhub is nowhere near as bad as people say!

Quote:

Originally Posted by Stuart (Post 35244093)

Nope. For real..

Now you are just trying to wind me up and I can't be bothered to bite. :D

Re: Superhub is nowhere near as bad as people say!

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mick Fisher (Post 35244231)

Now you are just trying to wind me up and I can't be bothered to bite. :D

I am not.

Re: Superhub is nowhere near as bad as people say!

Quote:

Originally Posted by Masque (Post 35244202)

Only in your mind as you are unwilling to believe what other people print when it is pro Superhub and as far as I am concerned that is tough luck on your part.

I honestly believe there are people getting good service with these things as I've said before, just that enough people aren't that it constitutes a pretty serious problem and firmware errors aside I'm interested in seeing if there's other problems (the Cisco/Motorola UBR differences, the "bad batch" theory") etc.

Thanks for proving my point about one member throwing insinuations and character defamation out there though. This is an absolute textbook example of what I'm referring to, when one CF member trashtalks another and takes focus off the real issue, which in case you hadn't noticed I was attempting to debate at length.

Additionally I find it amusing you've suddenly decided you know exactly what I think too, when you clearly don't even based on everything I've posted here to date. :)

Quote:

Originally Posted by Masque (Post 35244202)

I would love to know how you can even think that I can mix facts with speculation as you say

Because you do it all the time, and I'm hardly the first to pick up on it or the first to call you on it. By the way your constant "it's you that does that, not me!" defense isn't helping your case one bit. Have the decency to admit you're wrong once in a while, for goodness sake. It would do your credibility a world of good.

Re: Superhub is nowhere near as bad as people say!

I'm in Superhub perfection land and still had issues with mine.

Just a thought on the silly name thing. If you keep using the standard name for it in complaints, it means people googling will find those complaint threads better. If you use silly names, then people will just be finding masque's million + posts saying how many weeks his has been running fine for. Food for thought :p

Re: Superhub is nowhere near as bad as people say!

Quote:

Originally Posted by zekeisaszekedoes (Post 35244193)

I am not arguing semantics. Just figures..

I am also not arguing that it's a good product. It's not. It has faults. If those faults are fixed, it could be good. I would also like to see VM offer a choice of modem or superhub (not all of us need another router).

However, if I were arguing semantics, I could argue that certain members (on both sides) are trying to browbeat other members into agreeing with them.

Re: Superhub is nowhere near as bad as people say!

Quote:

Originally Posted by Skie (Post 35244236)

all in same thread so it will all get read anyway ;)

Re: Superhub is nowhere near as bad as people say!

Quote:

Originally Posted by zekeisaszekedoes (Post 35244235)

Thanks for proving my point about one member throwing insinuations and character defamation out there though. This is an absolute textbook example of what I'm referring to, when one CF member trashtalks another and takes focus off the real issue, which in case you hadn't noticed I was attempting to debate at length.

Glad to see that you have finally realised what you are attempting to do, the is hope at the end of the tunnel.

I know the Superhub haters dislike facts and then try to say otherwise especially when posted by people who work with this equipment day in day out.

---------- Post added at 21:10 ---------- Previous post was at 21:06 ----------

Quote:

Originally Posted by Stuart (Post 35244238)

However, if I were arguing semantics, I could argue that certain members (on both sides) are trying to browbeat other members into agreeing with them.

I find it strange that people who do not support Virginmedia equipment and are also not trained or even have access to our tools or knowledge base can even think that we the support staff in most cases have the wrong information, anyone that thinks this needs to sit down and really have a think about such outlandish remarks.

Re: Superhub is nowhere near as bad as people say!

Quote:

Originally Posted by zekeisaszekedoes (Post 35244193)

Sorry, was in a rush and didn't proof read properly. That should read something like:

VM staff/CF members insinuating it's own customers/other members are lying is quite another.

Ha! There's dozens of those stock phrases, isn't there? My favourite is when I went to buy some guitar strings and they didn't have the brand I wanted so offered me another one, with the old "made in the same factory mate" excuse. My reply was "Yes, they also make the Telecaster and the Stratocaster in the same factory, but that doesn't make it the same effing guitar does it?" :D

Semantics eh? Wonderful thing(s).

Another way to look at it would be there are half a dozen people eloquently and thoroughly describing the flaws in the product in great detail, and many dozens of others shooting the odd piece of dialogue into the proceedings, often agreeing with the standpoint of it being an inferior product, but not being visible enough to qualify as "the usual suspects".

Like I said, semantics. Selective interpretation. ;)

As someone who has a bunch of games consoles on the network, this is exactly the case. There needs to be at least a half-decent hardware SPI firewall on the home router, or IMO it doesn't count as a fully-fledged router (there are other conditions too but here isn't the place to debate my definition in thousand-word detail).

Take this comment and apply it to the quote that inspired my comment in the first place, and reference that with me pointing out more than once that you tend to mix facts with your own speculation and have admitted to such even once. When I speculate (and I'm not alone) I will always try to use a qualifier prefix phrase like "I'm guessing that" or "Based on what I've seen" to distinguish it as my opinion, not a fact.

That is incredibly interesting... a 12GB zip file. Was that from one wireless device to another, or a wired to a wireless? If it was the latter, what was the respective speed for each? I'm trying to validate my "bad batch" theory, and if you're able to get a big file across from gigabit LAN to 300Mbps N WLAN or vice versa then it adds weight to it. What I mean is, you might have got a good one and me a bad one for example.

I'd say "head in the sand" is a mild derogatory remark at best, barely an insult at all. Considering the frustration implied by Seph's post I'd say he'd being remarkably restrained.

You could also assume people are creating sock puppets on this forum, too. This is kinda what I mean about CF members subtly insinuating other CF members are warping the truth or what have you.[COLOR="Silver"]

---

I think the biggest insult here is superhub detractors being painted as people who just like the act of moaning and will find fault with anything VM say or do when this is somewhere between a gross over-simplification and sweeping, inaccurate generalisation.

It seems none of the pro-superhub camp, or those just trying to "keep the peace", consider that people care about other people getting a top service from their broadband connection yet based on their own experiences and those of others fear that this is not the case, and that less technically-minded people are having problems but don't have a clue why, or know how they can solve them.

This is ironic considering the superhub was rolled out to prevent exactly this kind of thing. It was supposed to be a "set and forget" device, not one that has to be rebooted all the time as has been the experience of many users whose traffic (LAN or WAN) has been above average. Or even in some rare cases when it's below average.

You'll notice, for example, that despite the fact I have a brand new VMNG300 modem I've continued to vicariously deride the superhub. My problem is solved, yes, but this has not been the case for everyone, and if dwindling supplies of the previous flagship modem are to be believed some people are either going to have to downgrade to get an Ambit 256 (excellent CPE although dated now), lump it or leave VM for one of it's lacklustre competitors.

The way I see it I want everyone to have the same outstanding service that I do, and consider it an insult to be labelled as a miscreant.

How's that for a lucid, verbose manifesto? ;)

It was from 1 macbook to another over wifi; according to activiyt monitor it averaged arround 8.3 MB/s; but then my macbook is quite old (mid 2009) so only has 145 mb/s spec 802.11n and not full support for 300 mb