Quote:
Originally Posted by BenMcr
No it wouldn't. Producing VMNG300 modems for a small set of users would be expensive, because you wouldn't have the scale of production that Virgin previously had.
|
Then go back into mass production. A lot of areas aren't even 100Mb capable yet (and even when they are a majority are happy enough with 10Mb or 30Mb), so those modems will be fine for another couple of years. Case in point: I've only just retired my Ambit 250. After six years of service and several speed upgrades.
Quote:
Originally Posted by BenMcr
Also you would then have to have processes and codes and training from order to install to include a 'What equipment do you want' step - which again would cost
|
I'm sorry - are you inferring that people previously trained in the deployment of the VMNG300 and still working for VM have spontaneously forgotten how these things work?
That aside, the beauty of the thing is it's simplicity. The web GUI is simpler than the Ambit 250/256 it replaced in part. It does what it needs to do and doesn't need rebooting all the time when on certain UBRs. Which the Super Hub can't claim to do. I mean, in my experience it doesn't even work properly as a non-DHCP switch!
Quote:
Originally Posted by BenMcr
Long term you would then have to design any future products or services knowing that two seperate types of kit may be supplied to a customer - again a cost that is avoidable.
|
Better two types of kit in case one works and the other doesn't, than pinning all hopes to just one which works fine in some areas but not others, before even considering the possibility that there are manufacturing faults which VM have more or less admitted to by saying they're keeping the same black curve case yet having someone else manufacture the innards. If the design is changed in any way, technically that means there is a Super Hub Mk I and a Super Hub Mk II - exactly the sort of avoidable cost that you alluded to is what VM are heading towards.
Quote:
Originally Posted by BenMcr
This is why the modem only mode is being introduced, so those that want to use their own kit can do so - solving the issue for good (I hope)
|
A feature that was available in R25 with SSH, but was then dummied out for no good reason. I still fail to see the logic of removing a feature a lot of users wanted then adding it back again months later. It stands to reason the people having significant problems with the Super Hub would be able to follow a "Enable Bridge Mode on your Super Hub" post on VM's community forum and would have headed off a lot of people moaning that it still isn't here, in the middle of May. It's VM digging themselves a deeper hole and doing things so lacking in common sense heads could explode.
Quote:
Originally Posted by BenMcr
Technology moves on.
|
You know, I've seen this lame excuse proffered by many people suckered into the common "newer = automatically better" technology arms race. The same kind of people who would replace a perfectly good Macbook Pro with another only incrementally better, not because they need the extra power but because they've been brainwashed into the conspicuous consumption cycle which is totally at odds with the current, valid interest in minimising carbon footprints and all that pseudo-hippie stuff that actually makes a lot of sense. It's a dinosaur mentality, and those that cling to it deserve to go the same way.
(Sorry, my sense of theatricality got the better of me there. You've gotta admit though, it makes for more entertaining reading.)