cancel
Showing results for 
Search instead for 
Did you mean: 

HughesNet versus 4GLTE

MarkJFine
Associate Professor

Re: HughesNet versus 4GLTE


@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

Re: HughesNet versus 4GLTE


@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

Re: HughesNet versus 4GLTE

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

Re: HughesNet versus 4GLTE

@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
ml520
Junior

Re: HughesNet versus 4GLTE


@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.

ml520
Junior

Re: HughesNet versus 4GLTE


@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

Re: HughesNet versus 4GLTE


@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
Assistant Professor

Re: HughesNet versus 4GLTE


@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.

ml520
Junior

Re: HughesNet versus 4GLTE

Whoops, yes. Should be GB, not MB.
Sweetpea3829
Tutor

Re: HughesNet versus 4GLTE

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!