Superhub : Can Someone Explain WHY the SuperHub is so...bad?

[kwikbreaks]

I'd guess that the majority use wireless. I'd also guess that the majority are pretty clueless but have found a reboot gets it going again for a while and think that is normal and acceptable behaviour. Certainly rebooting is less aggro than calling offshore support who will almost certainly get you to reboot then claim a fix when it works .

I've just had mine replaced. The first one had WiFi issues (mostly an inability to connect fixed by rebooting). As I don't use wireless much this only usually shows up when I get visitors who try to connect and I have to reboot the hub so they can. I'll see how the new one goes but range wise it is dire just like the one it replaced.

My recommendation is if you have a Superhub and it doesn't work properly complain on the VM community board and try for a replacement. If they have to replace all the duff ones (multiple times if necessary) perhaps they'll put more effort into getting it right. That said if this one fails I'll probably try the CEO office for a modem.

[TJS]

Originally Posted by markie1966

it was tested for months??

not try gaming for a few minutes when on a break from looking at websites?? just on the off chance that some people on vm actually use it for gaming??

i mean all the adverts in mags and papers telling the gaming community that theres "fewer lags so ur gaming experience is better on vm"....didnt they even TRY gaming as a test??

ffs stop defending a product that DOESNT provide the end user what vm claim it provides

im not talking about the speeds here...for me they are fantastic

but try gaming using a pc, xbox, ps3 and see how many disconnects you get...or how badly u lag....which RUINS gameplay

just fix the damn thing so it does what vm claim it does

btw are u really saying that this new modem mode will eliminate lag for gamers?? can i have that in writing????

Gaming works fine for me Get an average of 5 - 20 ms latency on Half life 2 death match + team fortress 2 (only 2 games i've played so far but i had people commenting how low my latency was when the score board was shown at the end of each game; as i was getting arround 5- 20 and they were all abou 40 - 120 ms

[qasdfdsaq]

Originally Posted by Stephen

For the majority of customers it's done exactly that. BT homehubs aren't exactly perfect themselves. I mean they are now on the third model of it.

Course, VM went onto the second version of their 'Hub' after what, 3, maybe 4 months? And the Business service (Edit: and according to Masque the consumer service too) is rumoured to be using a new, third version, after what, less than a year?

BT's taken at least 4 years to go through 3 versions, which were released only to accomodate new hardware technologies that the old ones couldn't support.

I'm don't even dare touch on what VM's reasons are...

---------- Post added at 11:43 ---------- Previous post was at 11:40 ----------

Originally Posted by KenK

It should have been there on day 1, not still waiting 6 months later.

Closer to 7 months now.

[ethan103]

Originally Posted by qasdfdsaq

Course, VM went onto the second version of their 'Hub' after what, 3, maybe 4 months? And the Business service (Edit: and according to Masque the consumer service too) is rumoured to be using a new, third version, after what, less than a year?
BT's taken at least 4 years to go through 3 versions, which were released only to accomodate new hardware technologies that the old ones couldn't support.

I'm don't even dare touch on what VM's reasons are...

---------- Post added at 11:43 ---------- Previous post was at 11:40 ----------


Closer to 7 months now.

Only Business customers?

[Chrysalis]

Originally Posted by Stephen

Total nonsense.

The superhub was brought out to make things simpler for customers to set up their broadband and create a network in the home, rather than farting around with a separate modem and router.

For the majority of customers it's done exactly that. BT homehubs aren't exactly perfect themselves. I mean they are now on the third model of it.

this is contradicted by jb66's reports, with no disrespect to other staff, I would expect a field tech to be more in touch with customers than managers and even call centre staff.

Also the SH is the first VM device I have had to fiddle with a lot to get working and I wasnt even using the famous wireless interface on it.

Customers having to double nat, setup 2nd access point's, change wireless speeds etc. is simpler?

---------- Post added at 12:49 ---------- Previous post was at 12:44 ----------

Originally Posted by Masque

The vast majority of Superhub users have no issues and the are well over 300,000 in circulation and this is growing by the day.

are we going to go over this again?

given there is many flaws in this statement.

1 - VM's call centres are not very good at marking down the right diagnosis for a given problem, hence jb66 been told superhub problems are noise issues O_o.
2 - a silent customer isnt necessarily a happy customer.
3 - this contradicts online forum support complaints.
4 - call centre staff who I have spoken to and it seems also others on this forum have spoken to have told customers they get flooded with superhub related calls.

my sister may be getting a superhub soon, I wont step in or give her any comments, I will wait for her to use it for a week or so and then ask her about her experience on it.

---------- Post added at 12:51 ---------- Previous post was at 12:49 ----------

Originally Posted by kwikbreaks

I'd guess that the majority use wireless. I'd also guess that the majority are pretty clueless but have found a reboot gets it going again for a while and think that is normal and acceptable behaviour. Certainly rebooting is less aggro than calling offshore support who will almost certainly get you to reboot then claim a fix when it works .

I've just had mine replaced. The first one had WiFi issues (mostly an inability to connect fixed by rebooting). As I don't use wireless much this only usually shows up when I get visitors who try to connect and I have to reboot the hub so they can. I'll see how the new one goes but range wise it is dire just like the one it replaced.

My recommendation is if you have a Superhub and it doesn't work properly complain on the VM community board and try for a replacement. If they have to replace all the duff ones (multiple times if necessary) perhaps they'll put more effort into getting it right. That said if this one fails I'll probably try the CEO office for a modem.

this sounds plausible enough to me. Many people dont like ringing call centres and would find rebooting the SH say daily as adequate. Also many people may turn it off when not in use anyway so it may only be up for an hour or so at a time.

[Sephiroth]

Originally Posted by Stephen

Total nonsense.

The superhub was brought out to make things simpler for customers to set up their broadband and create a network in the home, rather than farting around with a separate modem and router.

For the majority of customers it's done exactly that. BT homehubs aren't exactly perfect themselves. I mean they are now on the third model of it.

If Stephen is explaining from his inside knowledge why the SH was brought out, then can he explain why those same people trying (and failing) to make it simpler for folks, didn't consider the substantial number who would want their own router rather than the slugged router functions in that wretched SH?

If Stephen is offering a personal impression, then it should be balanced out by criticising VM's failure to acknowledge that many thousands of users are sufficiently sophisticated to need/want more than the slugged functions of that wretched SH.

BT HomeHubs are neither here nor there in this debate.

[zekeisaszekedoes]

Originally Posted by Stephen

It was not rushed out at all. I know for a fact it was tested for months before the launch.

Not thoroughly enough it would seem, therefore it was rushed out.

Originally Posted by Stephen

During that testing everything went perfectly. That's why it launched.

Probably because it wasn't tested across all of the network, and put under any serious pressure. I mean, it'd have to be a case of that, seeing as it fails at a lot of very basic routing tasks which have been commonplace for DECADES.

Originally Posted by Stephen

Howev once it was with a wider audience there were a few bugs that were missed in testing. Not every eventuality can possibly be covered in testing.

Excuse me... a FEW bugs? There are loads. I found some within an hour of plugging it in. Also, missing mainstay features like proper Dynamic DNS and port forwarding being inconsistent. As I've said before, the routing side (part of the reason it was introduced) is severely underwhelming.

Originally Posted by Stephen

Reason for the multiple updates was that once a bug got found VM attempted to resolve it ASAP rather than Waiting to fix a few at the same time.

And apparently a lot of those rushed out firmware updates either don't fix the bugs for everyone or introduce new ones or make other existing ones worse. I think there's less than 100 people in the secret community forum beta pool, and going from what they've posted most of those aren't particularly technically adept (some of the cluelessness about having the alpha modem mode patch rolled out makes me wonder why they were chosen at all).

I don't see why you're doing so much damage control. Attempting to blanket these clear, measurable problems and hoping they'll go away is exactly the reason people get exasperated, here on CF and everywhere else.

Now if Masque would like to chime in about how his works perfectly connected to his Edimax, that everyone will eventually have the superhub like it or lump it, that VMNG300s are rare as hens teeth etc then this thread will be complete.

[ccarmock]

Originally Posted by internetuser

Only Business customers?

I think the point is there is going to be a seperate device for the business customers, as the service VirginMedia Business will offer need features not available in the versiopn offered to residential customers.

When I was talking to VMB sales about this and whether it would be the same device the comment I got was oh yes the residential one - that's the Netgear and now the Cisco one and said no as far as I am aware the business.

Wonder if this does mean the 2nd option for residential customers is Cisco then.

[Chrysalis]

The superhub was tested pre launch, how do I know?

on alex browns blog a tester came on to say VM released when the testers were reporting bugs and saying not ready. So it was tested but was also rushed out as testers were ignored, that sounds familiar, ah yes like when the R25 firmware was rushed out after me and others reported the download/stream cutoff bug.

[Stephen]

Originally Posted by zekeisaszekedoes

Not thoroughly enough it would seem, therefore it was rushed out.



Probably because it wasn't tested across all of the network, and put under any serious pressure. I mean, it'd have to be a case of that, seeing as it fails at a lot of very basic routing tasks which have been commonplace for DECADES.



Excuse me... a FEW bugs? There are loads. I found some within an hour of plugging it in. Also, missing mainstay features like proper Dynamic DNS and port forwarding being inconsistent. As I've said before, the routing side (part of the reason it was introduced) is severely underwhelming.



And apparently a lot of those rushed out firmware updates either don't fix the bugs for everyone or introduce new ones or make other existing ones worse. I think there's less than 100 people in the secret community forum beta pool, and going from what they've posted most of those aren't particularly technically adept (some of the cluelessness about having the alpha modem mode patch rolled out makes me wonder why they were chosen at all).

I don't see why you're doing so much damage control. Attempting to blanket these clear, measurable problems and hoping they'll go away is exactly the reason people get exasperated, here on CF and everywhere else.

Now if Masque would like to chime in about how his works perfectly connected to his Edimax, that everyone will eventually have the superhub like it or lump it, that VMNG300s are rare as hens teeth etc then this thread will be complete.

They don't need to be technically adept, as most of VMs customers probably aren't. The technically minded are more than likely a minority in this case.

[Peter_]

Originally Posted by ccarmock

Wonder if this does mean the 2nd option for residential customers is Cisco then.

No.

[Sephiroth]

Originally Posted by Stephen

They don't need to be technically adept, as most of VMs customers probably aren't. The technically minded are more than likely a minority in this case.

That's a very poor justification for your viewpoint. In any case, it turns out the this wretched SH demands technical adeptness in order to get round its warts.

But let's grant what you say, for a moment. Let's say that there is a silent majority using the SH for basic internet functions that suit the slugged features of this wretched device. Is that a good reason why the rest of the customer base should suffer for the lack of features and the bugs that have lurked for 7 months now? Those people have been screwed over and have strongly voiced their views on a number of forums. Minority or not, VM has screwed them over.

The silent content majority is no jusification for not providing a proper solution to vociferous, suffering minority.

---------- Post added at 19:16 ---------- Previous post was at 19:10 ----------

Originally Posted by ccarmock

Wonder if this does mean the 2nd option for residential customers is Cisco then.

Try another continent.

[markie1966]

Originally Posted by TJS

Gaming works fine for me Get an average of 5 - 20 ms latency on Half life 2 death match + team fortress 2 (only 2 games i've played so far but i had people commenting how low my latency was when the score board was shown at the end of each game; as i was getting arround 5- 20 and they were all abou 40 - 120 ms

well i dont....my packetloss is usually between 2 and 10 %..u try playing games with that sort of latency

---------- Post added at 20:49 ---------- Previous post was at 20:41 ----------

Originally Posted by Masque

The vast majority of Superhub users have no issues and the are well over 300,000 in circulation and this is growing by the day.

vast majority indicates there is a lot of users with problems...you even quote "a small percentage" in your next post...all of which means you actually admit there IS something wrong

im very satisfied with the speed that i can download at....but not the latency when i try to game

im only asking 2 things...

1 why was this superhub released without testing EVERY outcome??

2 when will it be PROPERLY fixed so i can enjoy a game of cod or two???

[TJS]

Originally Posted by markie1966

yep iv tried a few times

posted on the forums....engineers have visited....shown them screenshots of winmtr and tbb showing packetsloss and been fobbed off with the usual high utilisation...or another excuse

got to the point where i couldnt be arsed playing games cos its useless

This is to the same IP address you did on your pingplotter graph; I had to use a different tool though as i am on OSX so i'm not sure how useful this is to you

[KenK]

Originally Posted by zekeisaszekedoes

Now if Masque would like to chime in about how his works perfectly connected to his Edimax, that everyone will eventually have the superhub like it or lump it, that VMNG300s are rare as hens teeth etc then this thread will be complete.

He has already - #22.