Superhub2
 

I had an interesting phone call today. I have a replacement Superhub which I have not yet activated (given that it will probably still be on R30). The person with whom I spoke told me that there will be a Superhub 2, still in development. As with anything that any of we are told, I am natuarlly a little sceptical. Anyone with further info? :erm:

Re: Superhub2
 

its true. qas posted some info a while back.

Re: Superhub2
 

Apparently they're "sorting out the details". I did search CF for related threads. It will be interesting to see if they'll simply write off the Shub or replace the million plus out there. The guy that I spoke to was unsure as to whether it was a Netgear product. All he said was that it will have upgraded antennae. We'll see.

Re: Superhub2
 

it will still be whatever is the cheapest and they wont replace all the shubs just like they havent replaced all the vmng300s. To start off with it will be new customer installations and then it will be swap overs for tech visits

Re: Superhub2
 

Oh dear, deja vu. Going to bed now to plot. It does rather aggravate one though. :mad:

Re: Superhub2
 

i just hope that the new one can use 16 channels

Re: Superhub2
 

They have already tested a Superhub 2 last year which would have been the VMDG485 built Huawei but it was an abject failure.

They then were supposed to have been testing a Superhub 3 which would have been the VMDG487 but strangely that went quiet as well, they said that they were considering external antenna only if it did not spoil the aesthetics look of the device otherwise they would go with internal.

The above I read on the intranet before taking my redundancy.

Whatever type of device appears they will not replace the existing devices on the network as the majority actually work on the average connection so do not expect to get one if one ever appears on the scene.

I also rather doubt that they will grow a pair and buy a mainstream device already in use by millions around the world because that would be them admitting that they screwed up by supplying both the VMNG300 and then the VMDG480 as realistically they are both junk and not truly fit for purpose in comparison to say a Motorola SBG900/1 series device.

Re: Superhub2
 

its never too late. they could do it. like you say the majority of customers wont know the ins and outs and those that know will happily fork out for qaulity kit. those that dont can stick with the current SuperHub. simple.

Re: Superhub2
 

I cannot see it happening as no one is going to admit to such a major flop and I would not hold your breath in hope either, they tested mainstream devices then went for the junk which smells of underhand dealing rather than stupidity and to resolve this would probably mean heads rolling.

Re: Superhub2
 

they dont need to admit to anything though. just sell the higher tiers.

Re: Superhub2
 

Apparently the Bshs 2 is still a Netgear device. Upgraded antennae? Firmware?

Re: Superhub2
 

what's wrong with my vmng300?

Re: Superhub2
 

Compared to what they actually tested it is a piece of junk as the other devices could run 8 downstreams and are used worldwide by millions of users without incident.

Put it this way if you were offered a state of the art device such as the Motorola above you would bite their hand off and once it was installed you would wonder why you put up the the VMNG300 for so long.

We want racehorses on our desks not the camels foisted on us by Virginmedia, as the old saying goes you cannot polish manure ( replace with word of choice )

Re: Superhub2
 

they tried by giving it a shiny finish :p:

Re: Superhub2
 

I am not a Motorola fan, it is a poor man's Cisco

Re: Superhub2
 

Cisco aren't exactly the best brand in network technology, either. Just a name that seems to get around a lot.

Re: Superhub2
 

I'm sure if VM went to Motorola and said "we want the SBG900/1 and want it with VM branding on the case", Motorola would say "if you're buying them in the hundreds of thousands or millions you can have any branding you want on them".

Hey presto - new superhub that works and VM save face. Aren't BT now on homehub 3? Introducing new versions doeasnt seem to have done them any harm.

Cheers

Grim

Re: Superhub2
 

I dont understand why VM have this obsession with making everything the same bloody shape. It wastes a ton of space and makes placement of the devices awkward.

Just get a simple logo screenprinted onto the existing kit and be done with it. And please dont add 11 blue lights.

Re: Superhub2
 

Only 11? I may have miscounted :dunce:

Re: Superhub2
 

They are well better than either of the present illegitimised devices presently in use namely the VMNG300 and the Superhub, and surprisingly the mainstream devices like Ronseal did exactly what they say on the tin.

UBEE/Ambit and Netgear gave Virgin Media cheap nasty equipment and both went laughing all the way to the bank.

You want decent kit you go with a mainstream manufacturer and they did test Cisco devices as well but went with the camels now in use.

I do not understand why you would want to support a third rate device when we all know the is better kit out there.

---------- Post added at 08:10 ---------- Previous post was at 08:04 ----------

They never did that with any previous Motorola devices and the would be no need now as bringing out a branded device would make them look like they they actually care, if it was branded no one would trust them not to have fiddled with it in some way remember the CG3100 series the Superhub is based on has 7 or 8 antenna built in unlike the the 2 stamp sized one fitted inside the back of the device.

Re: Superhub2
 

Because for the first time ever I am not going to live in a dream world and be realistic. Yes if I could have anything I want I would want a Cisco modem and router and would even pay for it if VM said I had to. But the problem is that most customers have nevr heard of Cisco and definitely don't want to pay for it. People are with VM because they are cheap (no offence) and want tv/phone/internet for piddly amounts per month so there is no way they are going to cough up the dosh for a kick modem/router no matter how much VM how amazing it is. VM have got to find a compromise a provide something that is relatively inexpensive and WORKS. The latter being my priority and hence why I love my VMNG300; it works perfectly and has done for the last 2 years.

Re: Superhub2
 

But it is not futureproof and nor has it been for those two years regardless of how well it works.

Demanding decent kit is not living in a dreamworld either because considering the amount of devices they would order they would have been offered them at a very competitive price.

As I said above if you want your customers to have a racehorse you do not fob them off with a camel.

Re: Superhub2
 

I put this suggestion to the CEO some time ago, when asking for my SH to be replaced with my current VMNG300.
I've always suggested VM should supply a decent, solid MODEM for those who are willing to pay a one off charge for same.
However, in the reply there was no mention of this, just an email to confirm I would be getting the VMNG300.
I seem to remember some years ago, you actually had to buy your cable modem when you joined VM (or NTL as it was then), or am I dreaming?
Maybe this practice could be reintroduced.

Re: Superhub2
 

It was NTL and it will have been when they rolled out 500kb with Terayons or similar another piece of old junk.

Re: Superhub2
 

Look at how comcast work, they are solely the ISP (Internet Service Provider) and not IaMaRSP (Internet and Modem and Router Service Provider)

Comcast provide you with your bandwidth, and have a range of modems for you to buy from them, or you can buy your own modem and they will activate it on their network

Re: Superhub2
 

You do pay for it in a roundabout way which is the annoying thing. When 50mbit first came out I had to pay £50 installation fee (which I basically thought of as paying for the modem) and then another £30 "activation" charge whatever the flip that was. All the engineer did was come round, give me the modem and watch me hook it up and then make a phone call to get it activated and I ran a couple of speed tests to make sure it worked. If none of that was for the modem cost why was it £80? I thought I was going to have something similar for 100mbits but when I rang up for it they said the installation charges and whatever else were free at the time which was good. I would love it thought it they offered a cheap naf modem for free, a Cisco modem for £25 and then a combi modem/router for £60. I would love to hear the plebs on the phone when someone says "so what is the difference between them?" :) Oh hang on, I know already. "If you want to get your full speed you need the £60 one".


That was when I joined back in ~2000, I can't remember having to pay for the modem though.


sweeeeeeeeeet, that is the way it should be done

Re: Superhub2
 

Ahh the Terayon, brings back memories ....... :angel:

I still have mine and the Ambit 250 as well as a SH. Such a collection of VM's finest ;)

Re: Superhub2
 

Agreed

Re: Superhub2
 

3Com CMX for me - Cost over £100 (Can't remember exactly how much more) back when NTL rolled out their 512Mb service

Re: Superhub2
 

Re: Superhub2
 

Also impressive the level of support they provide:

http://mydeviceinfo.comcast.net/devi...&s=&so=&sc=456

Want to change DNS? We'll replace your modem with one that can. Free. Hmm...

Re: Superhub2
 

I remember paying for my old Terayon £150 IIRC, and still have it.

Re: Superhub2
 

so whats us customers agreed on? optional brought hardware? or VM pulling their finger out and either putting together a decent Hub or seperate modem and router

Re: Superhub2
 

Giving users the choice.

Re: Superhub2
 

would there be security flaws?

Re: Superhub2
 

You mean cloners?

Not if it's done right.

Re: Superhub2
 

nothing done right at VM so there goes that possibility!

Re: Superhub2
 

Not with a Docsis 3 device so please drop the bone now.:D

Re: Superhub2
 

please attempt to have a civil convo on this...

thats not true. VM pushed higher tiers with the bodged firmware for SuperHubs allowing clones to run the high speeds.

Re: Superhub2
 

It does not work on Docsis 3 and you have been told this on numerous occasions, posting the above is very civil.;)

Re: Superhub2
 

so your saying no one was able to clone 50meg with the old old old firmware? was it not r20 firmware or something SSH?

Re: Superhub2
 

could access SSH on R20 and below but not clone

Re: Superhub2
 

which done what Craig?

Re: Superhub2
 

look at this list

http://community.virginmedia.com/t5/...ht/true#M40501

If there is/was a risk of cloning, then whats to stop people resetting their superhub to factory settings, back to R19 and getting modem data from there. Infact, just disconnect your superhub from the cable and try it yourself ;)

Re: Superhub2
 

ok whatever the hell it is. can VM not get something right for once!

Re: Superhub2
 

Not the clones subject again!

Re: Superhub2
 

I'll second that, wouldn't touch the superhub with a bargepole.

Re: Superhub2
 

I touched my Superhub with a bargepole. It now has two holes in it.

Re: Superhub2
 

I touched mine with a drill and it now has two external antenna connectors.

Still not as good range as my old Buffalo router was....

Re: Superhub2
 

Copycat.

Re: Superhub2
 

Back in the day (early noughties) on NTL you had the option of buying or renting your modem. If you bought it upfront, you got a lower monthly sub (about £5 a month off, IIRC). Eventually they stopped doing that, and some time later on they stopped giving the "discount" to people who had paid for the modem, to much loud complaining and thread-starting on this very forum.

When I signed up for NTL's 512kb broadband (Roffle!) I did a quick calculation and concluded there was a reasonable chance any modem I bought from them would cough and die long before I had got £150 worth out of it. So I just rented my Terry from them. Sure enough, it didn't stay the course.

Re: Superhub2
 

Cisco is like IBM. There's an old saying - Nobody ever got fired for buying IBM. Same goes for Cisco really. If the next Superhub was a Cisco box, I wouldn't have any issues with that. Unless of course it's Cisco Linksys. Their stuff just stinks these days.

Thing is, it seems with the superhub that the hardware isn't the entire issue. I'm not sure what sort of chipset is inside the box, but my guess is it'll be some sort of System on a Chip, like so many things now, possibly with a secondary controller to run the modem side of things. Mostly they are Broadcom or Atheros these days. The deciding factor in how good it is is the OS, and the software sitting on this. We've seen this time and time again, with set top boxes (on all platforms, Cable, Satellite, and Terrestrial), as well as modems and routers. Provided Virgin can pick a solid hardware platform, and put some decent code on top, they should be fine. I can't help but feel the current generation could be improved, unless they're seeing a lot of hardware failures, in which case, you can't always fix buggy hardware in software.

Re: Superhub2
 

Worm can opened