Quote:
Originally Posted by RB2004
Hi,
loads of people, write off the superhub, but now R30 is out.. is it a misconception and quick judgement that we should all write off the superhub as a useless piece of junk.. in favour of the VMNG300.
Previously prior to R30, I have to agree with using the VMNG300... superhub rebooted all the time, its wireless was next to unusable with constant dropouts. However R30 does seem to of resolved most of these complaints and I have to say ive not had to reboot for a long time now.
Wireless range isnt much to be desired for though lol, as is build quality.. I had a cable connection rip straight out the back.. and when I opened the unit to repair it found there to be next to 0 solder holding it in to begin with.
But I wouldnt say the superhub is still that piece of junk many people make it out to be.. .....
[RB2004's 100 meg speedtest/pingtest A image removed for convenience]
and from what I can see, anybody with is having unsatisfactory quality in regards to wireless or the inbuilt switch or routing capabilities can put the device into modem mode which makes it just like the VMNG300 anyway.. with the added bonus of supporting more channels which VM are currently rolling out.. 5 in some areas already. When the VMNG300 only supports 4 channels.
yes ok.. the service will work on 4 channels but if it is load balanced over more channels you are more likely to hit the top speed and have a more consistent speed.
So ive opened this thread as a debate and poll of oppinion.
|
Hi RB2004
A fair amount of debate has passed through this thread. The VM guys rally round each other and some don't like the nitty-gritty stuff I'm saying about the underlying faults at VM that have jaded the SH's reputation.
I think that the takeaways so far from this debate in terms of the SH are as follows:
1/
R30 has made the SH into a decent cable modem. It isn't a piece of junk, therefore.
2/
The SH (albeit without a year's worth of hassle) is necessary to support foreseeable DOCSIS 3 deployments.
3/
There is still considerable division as to just how good/bad wireless is. On one hand people are reporting instability that goes away in modem mode; others are happy with SH wireless.
4/
VM's forum tech's advise people to switch to modem mode when some of the above mentioned troubles arise. They also say there there is an upcoming firmware release but are unable to say what it will fix.
5/
The SH does not live up to the superlatives that VM use to describe it on their web site. Slugging the SH to 145 Mbps wireless, though acceptable for Internet but awkward for LAN work, is a poor advert for its unbeatability.
6/
Eventually the SH will do what it's supposed to do although I have my own doubts that wireless will ever be "unbeatable" - the SH may just get you going.
7/
There is no doubt that the customer base would like to have an effective single gateway and VM recognises that much at least. Modem Mode recognises customers who want their own LAN kit.
So everything RB2004 has said as a starter for this debate has made sense. I hope that the vote attracts a lot more people so that its result can be regarded as statistically significant.