I recently switched from Frontier to Hughes Net here, high in a rural region of Cascade Mtns in Washington. I have Verizon cell phone which works everywhere but my home. Additionally, I have a network extender for cell & Eero mesh network for 1500 sq foot home built of logs and rock. A)With Frontier, I had good cell phone clarity using either wireless calling or extender. B) With Hughes Gen5 cell phone calls were hopeless. I switched to Hughes gen5 because my Frontier single line DSL had upload speeds at less than 0.6. & Hughes has upload speeds of 2.7. (I sell photography) However, the cell phone dilemma is grim. I also switched under the misperception I could obtain VOIP & keep my landline number w/ Hughes but learned 2 things 1) there was >60% chance I would lose my existing landline number 2) I could no longer use my fax (I asked why the promo lied & person said "Well, we are going to change that soon." C) Verizon told me the extender is incompatible with Hughes after 1st saying the ports needed to be opened by Hughes [Wrong] However D) Today I moved Verizon network extender onto Mesh Eero directly & tested wireless cell again. MUCH BETTER. Whew! I know I am just kidding myself as an extender cannot work with Hughes due to latency so this makes NO SENSE! But enjoying the tested fantasy for now. I also ascertained this while looking
1. Internet search in general and through Verizon, Microsft, Skype communities showed much hatred of Hughes Net
3. Hughes officially claimes no wireless calling as others note due to latency. My set up defies this
4. 5. Eero mesh network works --has anyone compared this to the Hughes "improve home coverage "product??
6. Anyone with Verizon, network extender and a mesh network test this combo and see if cell phone quality better?
7. I am not completely disgusted as I get to switch from limited DISH to Direct TV since joining Hughes net and the plans are better. Sorry to stray...just completing my forward momentum across the goal line, so to speak.
I did read this helpful piece in a discussion on Mcell & latency in general. Doubt anyone dumb as me but this helped me understand the issues:
"The radio signal from a satellite modem to the ISP must travel 44,600 miles (up and back) just to start off with. That equates to a latency of 238 ms. Now add to that the additional latency of the rest of the provider's satellite internet infrastructure and then the internet itself. To top it off, two-way satellite Internet connections must make the same round trip twice if data is being sent as well as received. The result is a latency that can be as much as 1,150 ms and averages 850 ms. Trying to carry on a conversation with this kind of delay will result in two people talking over each other, making a simple phone call an exasperating experience. The OP didn't say if he could get any signal at all on his cellphones at his home location, but there are cellphone signal booster/antenna solutions that can work in remote areas. Wilson Electronics would be the place to start.
Subscribed bandwidth has no bearing on latency. Look at it this way. Whether you have a garden hose (low bandwidth) or a fire hose (high bandwidth) the water still has to travel 44,600 miles roundtrip to the satellite and back. The signal in both cases is limited by the speed of light unless Hughesnet has figured out how to bypass Einstein's Special Theory of Relativity."
MB
