Hughesnet Community

HughesNet versus 4GLTE

cancel
Showing results for 
Search instead for 
Did you mean: 
ml520
Junior

HughesNet versus 4GLTE

After waiting months only to find out that Hughes won't offer any relief from their horribly slow performance, I picked up a 4GLTE router from our regional wireless provider yesterday. Even though speeds are only clocking in at 2-3Mbps, it is lightning fast compared to Hughes...even when Hughes is running 30Mbps at 2am. On the 4GLTE I can watch videos without buffering, web pages load almost instantly, Amazon works, and I can actually download emails using a client without the process timing out (no joke!). The difference is just phenomenal. So what gives? Why does Hughes, even when running at top speed, still not achieve close to the performance of 4GLTE running at 1/15th the speed?

 

On a side note, I don't have to worry about sweeping snow off of a dish in the winter or degraded performance due to weather, and it costs less for more bandwidth, is totally portable, doesn't require a tech to set it up, and I get to work with an extremely helpful local agent... in person...who actually calls me back after doing research for me that I didn't even ask him to do.

21 REPLIES 21
MarkJFine
Professor

Keep in mind that not everyone here has the option to do this. For many people this is their only way to go, with little to no reliable mobile signal year-round.

 

I'm happy you're getting something that works for you, but you can look at this one of two ways:

a. Go you, for being so clever; or

b. Don't go you, since you probably had that available to you all along and should have done that to begin with.

 

Real classy gloating about it here tho. 👍🏼


* Disclaimer: I am a HughesNet customer and not a HughesNet employee. All of my comments are my own and do not necessarily represent HughesNet in any way.

If anyone has the right to gloat it's the long-time Hughes customers that have been receiving pi$$ poor service from them and getting the run-around for months while they continue to sell subscriptions on an already overloaded network. I've had sketchy cell coverage from day one here, so I actually didn't think the router was an option or that the speed would be sufficient but the local wireless guys let me have a try and, what do you know, it works like a charm! Costs have also recently come down so it made sense to give it a try at this point.

 

Do you have any answer to my question, or are you just upset that someone is actually getting some relief from poor service?


@ml520 wrote:

Do you have any answer to my question, or are you just upset that someone is actually getting some relief from poor service?


1. Why would I have an answer to a rhetorical question?

2. Why would I even be upset (hint: I'm not)?

 

I'm simply pointing out that you're not considering how petty and vindictive this makes you look. Most people would just take it in stride that they solved their own problem and go on their way without having to belittle those that are unable to do so. But, if that makes you feel better...

thatsnoneofmy.jpg


* Disclaimer: I am a HughesNet customer and not a HughesNet employee. All of my comments are my own and do not necessarily represent HughesNet in any way.


 

I'm simply pointing out that you're not considering how petty and vindictive this makes you look. Most people would just take it in stride that they solved their own problem and go on their way without having to belittle those that are unable to do so. But, if that makes you feel better..

 


Actually, aside from the question about performance, the intention was to encourage others to look at alternatives because it's clear to me that Hughes is not going to help them. I wasn't aware that 4GLTE routers even existed as standalone devices, and I assume others might not be aware of the alternatives, either. If this appears belitting to anyone then I apologize, but based on the other posts that I've seen you troll this forum with, that appears to be the least of your concerns.


@ml520 wrote:

 If this appears belitting to anyone then I apologize, but based on the other posts that I've seen you troll this forum with, that appears to be the least of your concerns.

1. Recommend you look at the tone of your original post again.

2. This is not about me. It's about you.


* Disclaimer: I am a HughesNet customer and not a HughesNet employee. All of my comments are my own and do not necessarily represent HughesNet in any way.
GabeU
Distinguished Professor IV


@ml520 wrote:

 

Actually, aside from the question about performance, the intention was to encourage others to look at alternatives because it's clear to me that Hughes is not going to help them. 


You should change that to "Hughes may not be able to help them," as Hughes is helping those they can, as is evidenced in more posts every day.  


Ryzen 5 3400G | MSI B450M Pro-M2 MAX | 16GB Corsair Vengeance DDR4 3000 | XPG SX8200 Pro 512GB NVMe | Windows 10 Pro
BirdDog
Assistant Professor

I have a good 4G LTE signal and use my hot spot as a backup to my HughesNet. Thing is, my cell plan is 3 GB and my HughesNet plan is Gen 4 Ultra 50/50 for $89/month plus lease and taxes.

 

My HughesNet is performing well for some time , I can stream, download, etc., whatever I need to do. To get a similar plan on cell data would be outrageous and btw the fine print says they can restrict speed after 22 GB.

 

I'm lucky to be grandfathered on a lower cost plan and very good beam/gateway but that is life. My beam could suffer a catastrophic failure tomorrow, my gateway could have a major system failure.

 

Been with HughesNet for at least 14 years now and my personal experience has been positive overall.

 

Only saying not all customers are not satisfied. Many, maybe the majority, are satisfied.

 

Good luck getting a 100 GB (50/50) monthly plan on cell 4G LTE for anything close to what HughesNet costs.

 

I understand some are having serious speed issues but the Mods here will help and work with those that work with them, regardless the experience with phone, chat, email, facebook, etc.

 

 

GabeU
Distinguished Professor IV

@BirdDog

 

I have the same experience here, for the most part.  I've had them for a little over 13 years now, and my overall experience has been very good.  After all, what are the alternatives for me?  Dialup or nothing.  My cell reception isn't really good enough make cell based internet a viable option, and even if I got a little better signal, not only would I not have the data I needed, it would be slower. 

 

Except during the most extreme of slowdowns, I'm able to do everything I need to do without much issue, and if there is any, it's very minimal.  And even during those occasional extreme slowdowns, about the only thing I have a somewhat difficult time with is Youtube, and I can live without Youtube for a short time if the minimal buffering bothers me too much.  


Ryzen 5 3400G | MSI B450M Pro-M2 MAX | 16GB Corsair Vengeance DDR4 3000 | XPG SX8200 Pro 512GB NVMe | Windows 10 Pro
BirdDog
Assistant Professor


@GabeU wrote:

@BirdDog

 

I have the same experience here, for the most part.  I've had them for a little over 13 years now, and my overall experience has been very good.  After all, what are the alternatives for me?  Dialup or nothing.  My cell reception isn't really good enough make cell based internet a viable option, and even if I got a little better signal, not only would I not have the data I needed, it would be slower. 

 

Except during the most extreme of slowdowns, I'm able to do everything I need to do without much issue, and if there is any, it's very minimal.  And even during those occasional extreme slowdowns, about the only thing I have a somewhat difficult time with is Youtube, and I can live without Youtube for a short time if the minimal buffering bothers me too much.  


I've been able to do Netflix at low def even when speed is 1-1.5 Mbps, maybe even lower. The lower def doesn't bother me. I can understand those who are getting in the Kbps speeds though. Was there myself several years back and it stunk.

 

It seems Amazon and other sites need a lot faster connections than Netflix does. Even if I had a constant 50 Mbps connection I would not do HD (or even 480p) streaming on a capped data plan like satellite.

 

I'm up fairly early so can download quite a bit during Bonus time if need be and usually faster then.


@BirdDog wrote:

I have a good 4G LTE signal and use my hot spot as a backup to my HughesNet. Thing is, my cell plan is 3 GB and my HughesNet plan is Gen 4 Ultra 50/50 for $89/month plus lease and taxes.

 

My HughesNet is performing well for some time , I can stream, download, etc., whatever I need to do. To get a similar plan on cell data would be outrageous and btw the fine print says they can restrict speed after 22 GB.

 

I'm lucky to be grandfathered on a lower cost plan and very good beam/gateway but that is life. My beam could suffer a catastrophic failure tomorrow, my gateway could have a major system failure.

 

Been with HughesNet for at least 14 years now and my personal experience has been positive overall.

 

Only saying not all customers are not satisfied. Many, maybe the majority, are satisfied.

 

Good luck getting a 100 GB (50/50) monthly plan on cell 4G LTE for anything close to what HughesNet costs.

 

I understand some are having serious speed issues but the Mods here will help and work with those that work with them, regardless the experience with phone, chat, email, facebook, etc.

 

 


I get 30MB from Hughes (I'm hardly ever awake to use the 50MB "after hours" bonus bytes) and pay nearly $90 a month for it. I can get two 4GLTE routers added to my current wireless plan for less than $90, and that gives me 44MB that I can use anytime. I never exceed the 30MB on Hughes, so that's plenty (22MB is plenty).

BirdDog
Assistant Professor


@ml520 wrote:

@BirdDog wrote:

I have a good 4G LTE signal and use my hot spot as a backup to my HughesNet. Thing is, my cell plan is 3 GB and my HughesNet plan is Gen 4 Ultra 50/50 for $89/month plus lease and taxes.

 

My HughesNet is performing well for some time , I can stream, download, etc., whatever I need to do. To get a similar plan on cell data would be outrageous and btw the fine print says they can restrict speed after 22 GB.

 

I'm lucky to be grandfathered on a lower cost plan and very good beam/gateway but that is life. My beam could suffer a catastrophic failure tomorrow, my gateway could have a major system failure.

 

Been with HughesNet for at least 14 years now and my personal experience has been positive overall.

 

Only saying not all customers are not satisfied. Many, maybe the majority, are satisfied.

 

Good luck getting a 100 GB (50/50) monthly plan on cell 4G LTE for anything close to what HughesNet costs.

 

I understand some are having serious speed issues but the Mods here will help and work with those that work with them, regardless the experience with phone, chat, email, facebook, etc.

 

 


I get 30MB from Hughes (I'm hardly ever awake to use the 50MB "after hours" bonus bytes) and pay nearly $90 a month for it. I can get two 4GLTE routers added to my current wireless plan for less than $90, and that gives me 44MB that I can use anytime. I never exceed the 30MB on Hughes, so that's plenty (22MB is plenty).


I think you mean "GB" instead of "MB".....no?

 

Sure can't get 44 GB on my cell plan for same as HughesNet.

Whoops, yes. Should be GB, not MB.

I sincerely hope your Hotspot works well for you. For the long run. Ours was good for a few weeks and then it wasn't.

We left our nice FiOS Internet behind when we moved to a rural area in NY. Researched my options and went with the Mobile Hotspot from Verizon. (I don't remember how many Gs it was...we're talking 2012).

I then spent the next two years banging my head off the desk because the Hotspot would drop signal, reset, etc.

When it worked, it was incredible. When it didn't work, it was awful. And it was awful most of the time.

The signal was unreliable and the strength fluctuated all of the time. We still have this issue with our cell phones today. I had them replace the device a number of times. Upgraded to the best device offered. Nothing helped.

After two years of hotspot **bleep**, we switched to Hughesnet. Some day, maybe we'll have ground-based broadband...and when that happens, I'm out of here.

So I'm glad your Hotspot works well for you. But pray it stays that way!

Funny how 4G LTE is a whole different animal than 3G EVDO out here in the boonies 9 miles crowfly from the tower. I never could take advantage of the 10 GB allowance that came with my phone until I got a new 4G LTE capable phone. What used to be 1xRtt at double dialup speed with 3G phones is now up to 16 Mbps with the new phone.

 

Back in the last decade I had a Cradlepoint router and a 3G modem that worked well for a while. Then Vz lost or gave up the CDMA 1900 band and the 3G went to 1xRtt. That's when I finally bit the bullet and switched to Hughes.


@Sweetpea3829 wrote:
I sincerely hope your Hotspot works well for you. For the long run. Ours was good for a few weeks and then it wasn't.


Thanks ... cell coverage here kind of depends on where you locate the device, so for phones it can be a bit of a pain. With a stationary router it seems to be working out well. Signal strength is usually only a couple of bars but so far it has exceeded my expectations and is the fastest service I've ever had....bearing in mind I moved from 56kbps dialup years ago to Starband satellite to Hughes satellite, so I've never had the true broadband experience in my home.


@GabeU wrote:

@ml520 wrote:

 

Actually, aside from the question about performance, the intention was to encourage others to look at alternatives because it's clear to me that Hughes is not going to help them. 


You should change that to "Hughes may not be able to help them," as Hughes is helping those they can, as is evidenced in more posts every day.  


Time will tell. I've seen a few get repointed with great service for a day or two and then back to slow speed. Regardless, the fact that many of us have been waiting months for any kind of response, and the fact that they're still selling the service, is evidence of contempt for their current customers.

bare65
Advanced Tutor

@ml520

Totally portable huh?

 

how about you come on out here to the mojave desert boonies, 100 miles from anything in any direction, with your fancy 4GLTE wireless doodad and see how well it works then...

 

I can tell ya..it WON'T and not even your extremely helpful local agent will be able to assist you without a signal!

 

But hey, you can always come on over to my house and use my HughesNet satellite internet to email your agent. Smiley Tongue

 

@MarkJFine

 

"I'm happy you're getting something that works for you, but you can look at this one of two ways:

a. Go you, for being so clever; or

b. Don't go you, since you probably had that available to you all along and should have done that to begin with"

 

LMAO! I'm leaning toward (b)

 


@jezra wrote:

@bare65 "fully portable" doesn't mean "works everywhere". My plan is to operate my 4GLTE from a solar panel and deep cycle battery.  It won't work everywhere, but it will be portable and should work well in areas with extremely weak signal reception.


That's awesome! See if you can find a router that has a built-in battery. Then it gets really portable! 🙂 

Sounds like a good setup. I definately coud have used it at my old house, If I stood in the front yard I could get maybe 1 to 2 bars. Where I'm at now I have to drive 12 miles on a curvy canyon road to get a  signal. I'll keep this in mind though because we tend to move a lot.


@bare65 wrote:

@ml520

Totally portable huh?

 

 

 

 


Of course it doesn't work *everywhere* but it's a helluva lot more portable than a satellite dish!

 

I've been using satellite Internet since the introduction of Starband. Then Hughes came along and I was quite happy with it until last year when I switched to Gen 5. I had no reason to investigate alternatives until that point.