[BenMcr]

Originally Posted by zekeisaszekedoes

Yet like I said, the Ambit 250 has kept up with multiple user needs and survived about half a dozen speed upgrades, and really only showed it's age when the upload contention increase was done. This is personal experience, but I hardly think I'm alone here. AFAIK the Ambit 250/255/256 (all variations on a theme) is still the most deployed modem on the VM network, regardless of who VM inherited the infrastructure from. There's a reason for that: it's still a damn fine modem.

All the speed upgrades were all within the specs of the 250 modem due the specs being stable.

As I said before the 250 was the 4th Ambit modem model deployed by ntl, whereas the VMNG300 is the first D3 kit deployed.

So you can't compare stable specs and hardware with first generation and changing specs.

But we're not even at the point where bonded downstreams are being used, am I right? The VMNG300 will handle 100Mb no problem even without changing the infrastructure, and there's been mention that it could handle 200Mb too, keeping it current for the next couple of years.

Of course bonded downstreams are being used but it's what bonding is supported is the difference between the two.

It's not just the network side of things that is the difference. The SuperHub allows Virgin to streamline the customer install and support experience which is just as important as to what the tech specs are.

That's simply not true. A customer can choose between any of the deployed CPEs that VM still support, although it's not always easy. Case in point: I got the Super Hub, it was shoddy, so despite the fact VM wanted me to move to it as the CPE I refused, staying with the Ambit 250 and politely insisting on a VMNG300, which is now fully installed and works very well indeed.

That's an exception and manually arranged process, not standard process.

It's a shame that in the face of this proof, you still choose denial.

Not denying anything. I agree there have been issues, and that it would have been much better to have the modem mode in from the beginning.

However for whatever reason, that's not what happened, so we have to deal with that as it is.

Well in my case and that of countless others the Super Hub doesn't do any of that, whereas the VMNG300 does and activated much faster than the Super Hub did with far fewer resets. Latency is down too, even compared to the Super Hub running on the 20Mb DOCSIS3 overlay. As far as I'm concerned, that makes it a superior piece of kit: reliability over potential future speed increases, low jitter for the gamers.

I was talking specifically about the option you raised - the 'SSH Modem mode' I wasn't commenting about anything else.

but it seems to have backfired drastically enough that a Mk II is being rushed out.

Nothing rushed about the dual vendor, it will have always been part of the plan