Re: Superhub 2
 

5 external antennas?

Re: Superhub 2
 

Νo 5 external ... 1-2, but again maybe was just gossip

Re: Superhub 2
 

No home visit here but my levels are pretty much borderline and I'm in the trial.

Re: Superhub 2
 

Part of my objection is if I'm going to have to use it as a standalone modem, I'd rather just be given a standalone modem to begin with. I'm forced to take a router, so it has to be compared to a router. I'd rather they just gave me a SACM like they used to, then I'd be happy to compare it to a modem. But the fact is, it isn't. This applies equally to any successor VM are rumored to be bringing out.

Principally if I get given a piece of kit where I'm going to turn off 80% of the components of, then frankly it'd been cheaper for everybody to have the option of leaving them out to begin with.

Re: Superhub 2
 

Qasi, this can be viewed from many angles. You've chosen one. I could moot another.

The SH is a SACM with optional router functions to get you going while you buy your own higher spec router.

Indeed, that would be the best line for VM to punt.

Re: Superhub 2
 

I don't think anyone is going to argue that the Superhub has issues - both in terms of wireless and as a router. The real issue is how Virgin handled it - poor marketing, an unwillingness to admit problems and poor testing (all the problems were well known before the Superhub Launched - and I was at Virgin when this was going on, I was part of the people that tested it - we made it very clear about the issues and they released it anyway).
At least Virgin is doing something about it with this new model, hopefully they'll make it more stable and boost the range - we can only but hope that the testing is more thorough this time. I know for a fact that Virgin had a release date in place for the SH before it even went into testing and the person who trained it out to me made a point of saying "When the testing is a success, the modem is going to be released on XXXX" because he knew how bad it was going to be.
All that aside, all we can do is wait and see how this one does. Any improvement is a good step, but we all know that there'll always be SOMEONE who isn't happy.

Re: Superhub 2
 

It's not the one they *are* punting though, as you've said yourself.

In and ideal world everyone would be doing the best thing.

Meh, I vote the Comcast way, both in terms of SACMs and traffic management.

---------- Post added at 12:40 ---------- Previous post was at 12:38 ----------

That would be interesting to see. The existing Superhub theoretically already transmits at the legal limit. Unless I'm right, which would be bad.

Re: Superhub 2
 

It may well do, but if I recall correctly, it has either a terrible antenna or none at all (I remember someone opening one up and they found a bog standard wireless card in there - like what you'd get on a cheap laptop - please correct me if I'm wrong, though). It certainly gets sub-par range than most routers so there's room for improvement somewhere.

Re: Superhub 2
 

Any relation to what it could be?:

http://www.downloads.netgear.com/fil...oC_21Dec12.pdf

Re: Superhub 2
 

The Wifi cert quotes a "Model/SKU #: CG4000TD, VMDG485" so probably. The CM specs are identical (no improvement) over the current SH though, so if they wanted better wireless quite why they didn't go for the cheaper option of upgrading the upgradeable wireless card on its own is beyond me.

---------- Post added at 14:49 ---------- Previous post was at 14:13 ----------

Notably, the Wifi certification includes 802.11h, something the original Superhub was missing.

802.11h allows ten times higher transmit power and selection from a total of 19 channels at 5Ghz instead of just 4 channels without it. Without 802.11h, i.e. as is the case now, the 5Ghz band has no more capacity and considerably less range than 2.4Ghz

Re: Superhub 2
 

I am not sure of course but i think is this one
http://www.cableforum.co.uk/board/35525122-post214.html

Maybe few modify specs for exclusive use with VM
http://www.netgear.com/service-provi...3700B.aspx#one

http://www.downloads.netgear.com/fil...oC_27Nov12.pdf

Re: Superhub 2
 

That's apparently in the same range as the Superhub. It's also not Wi-Fi certified.

The new one is most likely:
http://certifications.wi-fi.org/pdf_...p?cid=WFA17015

Re: Superhub 2
 

Hmmm intresting
Can not see its specs at netgear page

Re: Superhub 2
 

That's because it's not publicly available, VM had it "custom built".

Re: Superhub 2
 

On most dual band 3x3 / 2x2 routers, it's 3 antennas, with the middle one beng the extra on 5GHz and the other two being dual band.
Also to be hoped the the dual band is upgraded to simultaneous, so that it can run both 5GHz and legacy 2.4GHz kit.

To be honest, the 2.4GHz band is a MESS - with just Wifi, it would be congested enough, but add videosenders, 2.4GHz keyboard/mouse sets and it's a wonder you get any throughput, especially when these days, a Wifi enabled router may be standard kit even if the user only connects wired.

And the Wifi channel planning (lack of) is pretty stupid...
In the UK, we have 1-13 available, allowing for two 40MHz channel pairs (1+5 & 9+13) or 4 fully spaced 20MHz, but so much kit defaults to USA 1-11 and using 1,6,11