Superhub : Superhub Firmware Beta Test

[davidthornton]

Originally Posted by Phil-ntl

Whilst I do partly agree with you, I can also understand why not. Basically they are trying to steer away from the situation of having to support multiple devices and the one fits all scenario is the simplest, most cost affective way of doing it.

To be fair, it does make very good business sense.

Sure, I understand this. Offer a modem-only solution to those who want it and charge a one off fee for the privilage, to encourage people not to take it. Also have VM disclaim responsibility for the LAN side as part of the process of a customer obtaining one.

VM only received R28 yesterday and it will have to go through in house testing first so my estimate is approx 10 days before beta roll out.

Is it still possible for Superhub users to join the programme to receive R28 beta when it is available? If so, how? I know one who wants to join.

[Phil-ntl]

Originally Posted by davidthornton

Is it still possible for Superhub users to join the programme to receive R28 beta when it is available? If so, how? I know one who wants to join.

Beta applications are closed at the moment but there may be opportunities further down the line.

More info here: Super-Hub-R28-Firmware-Beta-Test

Best to keep an eye on the official vm forum.

hth


Phil

[KenK]

Originally Posted by kwikbreaks

I also pointed out that modem mode simply gives you an oversized and probably power inefficient modem.

The NTL 256 SACM is approx 11x12x2 cm. What size is a 'superhub' in modem mode?

[BenMcr]

Not much bigger than the VMNG300 modem it replaces

[KenK]

Really? The VMNG300 is ridiculously huge as well? And it's just a SACM?

[BenMcr]

It's the box on the right

From http://www.flickr.com/photos/hendry/3684687096/

[KenK]

Ta. That'll be a "yes" then, it is enormous.

Notice the customer's own equipment beside the beloved VMNG300. If that customer upgraded that harmony would be lost - although I'm sure that cardboard furniture would appreciate the loss in weight

[WillPS]

That, if I'm not mistaken, is actually the netgear router VM supplied with 50mbps originally.

It was rubbish, and was soon replaced by a D-Link which was superb.

[kwikbreaks]

Originally Posted by KenK

The NTL 256 SACM is approx 11x12x2 cm. What size is a 'superhub' in modem mode?

The Superhub is 20.5x19x5. The stand is 6 wide but the effective width is greatly increased by the connector placement esp if (like me and the VMNG300 in the photo) you have an attenuator in the coax. The VMNG300 is 16x14x4 and also looks more "designer" than functional. It would have benefited from some holes on the bottom to make it wall mountable.

TBH the sizes are not really a problem for me as the over-bright flashing lights were enough to ensure it went behind the settee anyway.

The router in the picture looks like the Netgear WNR2000v2 which I got when I signed up (20Mbps). I think VM gave out both.

[davidthornton]

Further to my posts where I have suggested that VM offer to supply a modem only solution to those that want it, perhaps for a one off charge to discourage people from taking it instead of the Superhub and including a disclaimer that they don't support the LAN side of things, can anyone suggest an off the shelf cable modem solution, from an appropriate manufacturer, that supports DOCSIS 3.0 and more than the 4 bonded channels (which the VMNG300 is limited to)?

[BenMcr]

And the point of that would be.....?

[davidthornton]

Originally Posted by BenMcr

And the point of that would be.....?

So VM procurement can fill in all the necessary order forms and paperwork in advance, ready for when they finally decide "what a great idea they had". Would you mind sparing two minutes to post the links to those new modems that you have on your browser quick launch bar? It'll save others some time.

[Sirius]

Originally Posted by davidthornton

So VM procurement can fill in all the necessary order forms and paperwork in advance, ready for when they finally decide "what a great idea they had". Would you mind sparing two minutes to post the links to those new modems that you have on your browser quick launch bar? It'll save others some time.

???

---------- Post added at 11:50 ---------- Previous post was at 11:49 ----------

Originally Posted by davidthornton

So VM procurement can fill in all the necessary order forms and paperwork in advance,

They have stuck with the superhub this long what makes you think they will go with your idea ???

[davidthornton]

Originally Posted by Sirius

???

---------- Post added at 11:50 ---------- Previous post was at 11:49 ----------



They have stuck with the superhub this long what makes you think they will go with your idea ???

I'd be surprised if VM don't at least have an idea of what other solutions are on the market.

I wouldn't call offering an updated stand alone modem my idea. It's the obvious solution to those that want a modem only, depending on the outcome of the R28 bridge mode firmware. I do wonder why VM are going through the process of paying to write this firmware update for what is a router with a switch and wifi built in, so that it renders 90% of the device surplus to requirements. I understand the single device for "tech support" response but when the Superhub is running in bridge mode there'll be so little of the Superhub to actually support. Afterall what is there to a VMNG300 at the moment? It's plug it in and go, with a couple of status pages if you want to look at them.

Both people and businesses change their minds, adapt to new technologies, customer demands and changes in the market. VM have been offering modems for over a decade and there's going to be a number of customers who would prefer to keep the status quo. They're already relenting to some who want to keep their VMNG300 or have asked for one to replace their Superhub. Some customers will never consider a Superhub in bridge mode as keeping the status quo. Hammer to crack a nut analogy.