50M Superhub is nowhere near as bad as people say! - Page 40

jonop360 · 22-06-2011, 21:39

Quote:

I'm thinking there was a batch of poor super-hubs; as I am a recent customer and mine is flawless so far

must have been i remember sitting there reading posts where they were having no problems whilst mine was dire it felt like i was taking crazy pills.
all sorted now though so all good

kwikbreaks · 23-06-2011, 05:12

Perhaps there's a second bad batch then as my replacement was as bad as the first one. VMNG300 from CEO office due today or tomorrow so I no longer care.

zekeisaszekedoes · 23-06-2011, 14:11

VMNG300 rules, you won't regret it. Up to 100Mbps, remember!

qasdfdsaq · 24-06-2011, 01:58

Should be able to do 200mbps fine too, tbh.

I'm curious what this 145mbps mode some people say "fixes" their superhub actually is. In theory it shouldn't exist. The nearest available 802.11n modes are 130, 135, 144(.4), 150. There is no 145.

TJS · 24-06-2011, 07:41

Quote:

Originally Posted by qasdfdsaq

Should be able to do 200mbps fine too, tbh.

I'm curious what this 145mbps mode some people say "fixes" their superhub actually is. In theory it shouldn't exist. The nearest available 802.11n modes are 130, 135, 144(.4), 150. There is no 145.

Hmm, im not sure. I have my router on the 300 MB/s but because my laptop is 2+ years old now it only had the '802.11n-draft' so maxes out around 145 mb/s

kwikbreaks · 24-06-2011, 07:42

That's just what it's called on the hub config page. It uses a single channel instead of bonding two. It looks like the process the WiFi runs in craps out because of a bug when bonding so physically there is still a signal but no software running to accept connection requests. The same happens in 145Mbps mode but less often.

qasdfdsaq · 25-06-2011, 03:13

Still ambiguous though, single channel without bonding should be 130, or 144 with short GI, there still is no 145. Still, given 40Mhz/Bonding/HT is notoriously hard to implement well, I'm guessing that's what it is. But I don't like the config page listing a speed that doesn't exist.

kwikbreaks · 25-06-2011, 08:00

The taskmanager on my Windows 7 shows the connection as 130Mbps when it's set to 145. My hub doing a backup to a SAN that runs at ~17MBps (136Mbps) wired managed ~31Mbps when set to 145 and crashed out after a while (all 3 times I tried it) when set to 300 it managed a peak of ~ 51Mbps according to taskmanager. The hub had to be rebooted after each crash before wireless clients could connect. I should maybe move my laptop closer that the 4-5 meters it is from the hub.

Still it's nowhere near as bad as people say! and in line with forum T&C as pointed out to me by a moderator here I won't offer any unfounded criticism of it.

=====

My VMNG300 still hasn't materialised

kwikbreaks · 25-06-2011, 11:30

VMNG300 arrived and activated now. Bye Bye Superhub.

Sephiroth · 25-06-2011, 21:08

Quote:

Originally Posted by kwikbreaks

.......
Still it's nowhere near as bad as people say! and in line with forum T&C as pointed out to me by a moderator here I won't offer any unfounded criticism of it.

=====

My VMNG300 still hasn't materialised

What about well founded criticism, then, Kwikkie?

Skie · 25-06-2011, 22:45

Quote:

Originally Posted by Sephiroth

What about well founded criticism, then, Kwikkie?

The virgin staff have secret information that says the superhub is perfect. No criticism can defeat this.

**Hugh** · 25-06-2011, 22:48

Quote:

Originally Posted by Sephiroth

What about well founded criticism, then, Kwikkie?

Nothing wrong with well-founded criticism - some people seem to confuse that and insulting and childish language and behaviour, though.

There is no denying that some people have had problems, and that some people haven't - it's when posters insist on stating only one side of the argument can be true and behave and post in an inappropriate manner, denigrating others, that problems arise.

For instance, no one has ever stated that the superhub is perfect, just that they haven't had problems with theirs - this then gets twisted into a straw man argument, like in the post above.

Nopanic · 25-06-2011, 22:58

Quote:

Originally Posted by Skie

The virgin staff have secret information that says the superhub is perfect. No criticism can defeat this.

Lets not make things up..

kwikbreaks · 26-06-2011, 06:59

Quote:

Originally Posted by Sephiroth

What about well founded criticism, then, Kwikkie?

All I can say is that over 6 months I had 4 hubs (3 on install day) and not one of them worked properly.

Forcing failures from the final hub to prove a point was easy and I have no doubt that every single one would behave in the same way so long as a proper 300Mbps N connection is used. As it happens I can easily run wired and avoid the problems which on mine were limited to WiFi. Others can't and it seems that some hubs have cable connectivity issues too although I suspect that is probably due to crashing router firmware.

From the WiFi performance I got I think anyone on 100Mbps had better either run wired or downgrade because I doubt the hub wireless can get anywhere close to 100Mbps and certainly not without crashing. I wouldn't use its WiFi on 50Mbs.

qasdfdsaq · 26-06-2011, 07:20

Just for a little bit of perspective, my Â£10 DIR-615 combined with the old DWA-140 USB adapter supplied by VM would hit about 95mbps with the wireless set to 144mbs, and up to 170mbps with the wireless set to 300mbps mode. Without crashing.