Virgin to give new Superhub out.

[telfordcable]

You have to pay £75 fee if you want superhub

[BenMcr]

Originally Posted by telfordcable

You have to pay £75 fee if you want superhub

If you are upgrading, no you don't. It's only if you don't upgrade and you want the SuperHub do you have to pay

[pip08456]

Originally Posted by telfordcable

You have to pay £75 fee if you want superhub

You had to pay because you wanted one and weren't upgrading!

[telfordcable]

Originally Posted by pip08456

You had to pay because you wanted one and weren't upgrading!

sign

[CMP]

Originally Posted by telfordcable

sign

Go on, give us a sign!!

[KenK]

From reading this and other threads, am I right in thinking: SuperHub and 50mb now come together and are 'immature' products, so are best avoided until VM have had another several months to get them into working order? Or, will they never quite catch up with themselves?

[BenMcr]

50Mbit is a mature product. The SuperHub is new so is up to you as to whether you think it's 'immature' or not.

I've been running one for several months now and have had zero problems with it

[pip08456]

Originally Posted by CMP

Go on, give us a sign!!

Don't mock the afflicted!

[KenK]

Originally Posted by BenMcr

50Mbit is a mature product. The SuperHub is new so is up to you as to whether you think it's 'immature' or not.

But I cannot get just 50Mbit - they now seem to come as a package. A "new" part of any package makes the whole thing "new".

I've been running one for several months now and have had zero problems with it

I expect that if you use "SuperHub" in the way VM decided (in their infinite wisdom) that you should run your home network, it'll be fine. I'd prefer more control than appears, from posts on CF, to be available with it.

[pip08456]

Originally Posted by BenMcr

50Mbit is a mature product. The SuperHub is new so is up to you as to whether you think it's 'immature' or not.

I've been running one for several months now and have had zero problems with it

That's you, there seem to be plenty of people who have though. Obviously the superhub is not a true UPnP product, does not work "out of the box" and has several other problems not foreseen by VM, not least being a useable bridge mode which was voiced quite a lot here and several other forums, the VM one included.

Did you have zero problems before you figured out switching off IP Flood detection would sort out lag etc?

I think the only reason that firmware for a bridge mode to be enabled in it is due to the outcry from the power users (not necessarily heavy downloaders) about not being able to use their own routers which they've paid for out of their own pockets.

The Superhub on release was like VM saying if you want our services this is what you have to use. We are not interested in how your network is set up you have to do it our way.

I could go on about VM's attitude to customers and their needs but I've said enough so far.

[qasdfdsaq]

Originally Posted by pip08456

The Superhub on release was like VM saying if you want our services this is what you have to use. We are not interested in how your network is set up you have to do it our way.

This isn't all that unusual in the UK ISP world. Many of Virgin's competitors operate in the same way. Many ISPs include a DSL modem + router combo in their packages, some don't allow you to use the one other than that supplied (some of these can be gotten around by end-user hacks). O2/Be, often considered one of the better DSL ISPs, don't offer a bridge/bypass mode on their modem/router combos (but users can hack around this) either, in fact their routers don't even support DMZ or fixed DHCP allocations.

Also I think you're using the term "UPnP" incorrectly here. UPnP is a specific networking protocol that allows detection of other network devices on a LAN, such as a HTPC detecting a media server, and for communication between them. Often it's disabled by default as it's a security flaw. It doesn't pertain to a router working out of the box.

Mind you I previously said most of the initial feedback about the Superhub was predominantly positive but the last few pages seem to be all negative comments. Clearly the device hasn't gotten worse in the course of two weeks, it seems a different group of users are becoming more vocal now...

[pip08456]

Originally Posted by qasdfdsaq

This isn't all that unusual in the UK ISP world. Many of Virgin's competitors operate in the same way. Many ISPs include a DSL modem + router combo in their packages, some don't allow you to use the one other than that supplied (some of these can be gotten around by end-user hacks). O2/Be, often considered one of the better DSL ISPs, don't offer a bridge/bypass mode on their modem/router combos (but users can hack around this) either, in fact their routers don't even support DMZ or fixed DHCP allocations.

Also I think you're using the term "UPnP" incorrectly here. UPnP is a specific networking protocol that allows detection of other network devices on a LAN, such as a HTPC detecting a media server, and for communication between them. Often it's disabled by default as it's a security flaw. It doesn't pertain to a router working out of the box.

Mind you I previously said most of the initial feedback about the Superhub was predominantly positive but the last few pages seem to be all negative comments. Clearly the device hasn't gotten worse in the course of two weeks, it seems a different group of users are becoming more vocal now...

OK I could've worded it better but I think you get the drift.

As to only now users speaking out, there's plenty of complaints over on VM's forum as well as the few here. No doubt there's other forums with the same type of complaints (remembering of course you quite often get the same/similar people using the same forums.).

There was plenty said about no bridge mode before it was even released (months).

[qasdfdsaq]

Originally Posted by pip08456

As to only now users speaking out, there's plenty of complaints over on VM's forum as well as the few here. No doubt there's other forums with the same type of complaints (remembering of course you quite often get the same/similar people using the same forums.).

Oh I'm not saying there weren't complaints from long ago, it's certainly not just now. Just observing the first few pages of this thread had a ratio of something like 70% positive to 30% negative, whereas the last few have been near enough 100% negative. Certainly different types of users have differing opinions of the thing, but it doesn't look like the prevailing opinion is getting any better

[zekeisaszekedoes]

<rhetoric>

Again I can understand why VM have gone the Super Hub route, and can understand that looking forward for most users who don't need a bunch of in depth options it could be a good idea.

Right now though, as it stands, the product is in no way ready for that use. Worse still, it limits the "early adopters" who stereotypically are fairly technically adept and have to put up with obvious flaws and stupid bugs.

I think the consensus among some is that regardless of what kind of user you are, you might well run into troubles as you start to put heavier usage on your network. The trends of the past few years suggest everyone is slowly using more and more bandwidth, so what passes as a "light" internet use now with streaming video and some downloads would be much greater than a light user five years ago who almost never downloaded a thing and didn't even have a PC capable of streaming QVGA video. Even basing things on the lowest common denominator you can see an upward curve as people en masse become ever more reliant on the internet.

If the Super Hub is to last several years as I would guess VM are hedging, it's going to need to be a hell of a lot better than it is now. The bridge mode should already be present, we shouldn't have to moan to get it or downgrade to previous modems. If VM wants to keep both regular and more technical users happy, which in my opinion the Super Hub cannot do right now, it needs serious work.

VM are the best ISP in the UK and they still can't get it right, while Korea and similar countries sail by us with their higher speeds (out there, 50-100Mb is seen as average) and superior service. They're moving up to Gigabit this year for goodness sake! We're lagging behind because of a poor modem/router solution. And of course VM can get away with it because they have a monopoly on broadband, kind of how BT had a monopoly on analogue phone line services fifteen or so years ago.

I'm not sure if any of this is coherent, I'm just thinking out loud. I know the fiber optic network can give excellent performance because when I stay away from the Super Hub and use other equipment the results are fast and stable. Surely better to change it now than before thousands more users migrate to it and moan far louder and longer and more expensively than me and a handful of other dissenters do.

</rhetoric>

[pip08456]

VM certainly have the means necessary to be the best ISP in the UK but there are several ways in which they fail.

First and foremost has to be their script reading worse than useless offshore support.

I'm not saying support should be brought back to the UK but other providers have offshore support which are head and shoulders better than the VM cheapo offering.

VM are their own worst enemies when it comes to how they advertise against their competition.

The "download what you want when you want" with the little No1 next to it doesn't really pan out as most takers don't read it. They want to do what they've been told they can do.

Then you have oversubscription in areas.

Being a frequent visitor on the VM forum I can see the frustration caused when a user is told that support can see times of high utilisation on his "local chassis" (CTMS) but it is not at a level for them to raise the issue. When it increases (read service gets even worse) then they will pass it over to planning to arrange for it to be alleviated. After that planning will arrange a date 2 or 3 month hence to implement the changes. So if the service is c**p due to utilisation it has to get c**pier before they will do anything about it.

I'm one of the lucky ones in that I am not in an area where this happens and my only beef with them is the trafific shaping they have introduced affects even the light downloader like myself on the protocols they've introduced it.

I've said before. VM have all they need to be the best ISP but don't use it correctly. Put the customer first and don'ttreat them like a milk cow.