At request of Amanda, I opened a new thread, and included a capsule synopsis, copied in part here.
Intermittent bogus high data usage is BILLED by HN9000 modem
(as has been confirmed to be a known BUG in the internal firmware) -- but NOT received by the customer. This was confirmed by Tier 3 support, who agreed that we had both (at that point) just watched the modem claim that I had depleted 2 GB of data in a time that would be physically IMPOSSIBLE for the system to have accomplished. (He laughed.)
Is this NOT in the problem logs????????????????????
Evidently the information in the Hughes problem logs is either woefully incomplete, or falsified. (And, yes, that IS another major concern!)
In my experience, the phenomenon may persist for some time, literally depleting much of a month's supply, unless the problem is caught and the modem is powered off.
I have seen this problem for over two years now, and have a 30 year background in electronics, circuit design, RF, software, and computers - so have quite a bit of understanding about what I have seen, even if Hughes's tools will NOT isolate the problem. It took me literally MONTHS to get to a Hughes engineer with sufficient expertise ("Tier 3") even to understand, and finally ADMIT, the problem.
It is NOT fixed!
In short -- it associated with the HN9000 modem (and I don't care WHO built it!)
(I've been through 3 by now - ALL of them have the problem.)
I don't want anything to do with so-called "champions". They can't even look at the logs, and since I don't want their self-aggrandizing "help" anyway, I have no desire to type an encyclopedia so they can impress each other with who can be more boorish. As I said, if I want to be abused, and waste a lot of time as well, I can always call Hughes 'support' and get offended directly.
Update (as of 10 October, 2016)
Which I did today. To the tune of two full hours wasted.
I called because I saw a repeat of a problem from about a month ago, where upload speeds (two separate 6 MB audio files, relatively small, which usually uploaded in between 1 minute to 90 seconds) suddenly took between 10 and 15 minutes to finally ftp to the host server where I place the daily news show files. A 10-to-one degradation; signal levels fine (180 receive), status green, etc, but a concern, which was amplified when I saw (simply by comparing the data usage on the Hughes pie-chat allowance tool; yes, poor granularity, but I don't have to argue here with "champions") showed an approximate 200 MB (!) of billing.
NO other PC on the network, not so much as a cell phone, and NO other processes running except the browser, which was idle except for the upload tool.
Rather than POR'ing the modem, which I was confident WOULD 'probably' fix the problem, unless the newly-replaced hardware (xmit/receive, at the dish) had already failed. (NOTE: during the time that equipment WAS IN FAILURE, the upload speed test STILL showed "in spec", at over .200 MB/s; it was packet drops, retransmits, etc, that evidently destroyed the real-world performance.)
I was thankful that the live person who finally picked up the phone was in Brownsville. (Angela, who was quite helpful, knowledgeable, and in general a pleasure to work with.) This time the upload tests (download had no issues) showed measured speeds from a bit below normal (60% or so of what I usually see, via interfrog or testmy -- all the way down to 50 - 65 - 70 kbps).
After 45 minutes, we were cut off, and while I waited, and expected a call back (we had discussed such) she did not.
When I finally got back to another live person, things went downhill. She wanted to start the test over, and didn't seem to care either that I'd already been on the line for a long time (I did ask to be reconnected to Angela, to pick up where we had been interrupted, but she was "busy" by this time) and then tried to argue with me about data usage. I had been measuring; each of the combined tests SAID they consumed over 200 MB. She said that was not true. But the Hughes status meter by this time show that an ADDITIONAL 400 MB had been consumed by the tests we'd run since I'd been on the phone. And whereas Angela had said, "don't worry about it," she had checked and would replace the allowance consumed by the testing, I was told the exact opposite now. And, furthermore, Hughes had evidently "blacklisted" me, and decided that no matter HOW much time I wasted, or data was lost, or how much was consumed in Hughes-mandated testing before she'd even consider any escalation, I was "SOL".
I asked at that point to speak to a manager, and was given another run-around. Quite some time later, I spoke to one "Val Montey" (sp) who proved to be all that I have come to expect, and loathe, from Hughes so-called "customer service". "Are you refusing to [endure] additional testing?" he demanded, over and over in the tired "broken record" technique. He did confirm that it was Hughes intention (and he did a &^%* fine job) to see just how sincerely they could provoke a customer.
I ran the whole gantlet, and had Ashley read back what I explicitly told her to type in the logs, since I knew Hughes' game precisely by now. ("Customer REFUSES to..." jump through each and every hoop we demand, no matter how many times we demand it; and we won't even TELL the sap how much of his rapidly-depleting, slow, but costly data we intend to waste THIS time before WE say "enough." And he's gonna foot the bill, too, while we make it REALLLLLLL clear just how trivially we regard HIS time!!! After all, this sucker hasn't got anything better to do than be on the phone with us, and besides -- look at all the FREE [sic - good grief!!!! ] stuff we've already given him. Why, he should pay us for the privilege.)
I try to run a small ranch in my "spare time". And had a lot of plans for this afternoon. ALL WASTED, now, thanks to Hughes.
Two hours later, she asked me to reboot the modem. As I'd already told her, I fully expected the problem to disappear, which it did.
And the ONLY thing of interest I learned was that Hughes (Do I have Amanda to thank for that? I am curious) has decided to up the ante - and see if they can't REALLY P#$$ me off, by adding explicit insult to the injury of wasting hour, after hour, after hour, and demonstrating AGAIN why calling that number is THE last thing I ever want to do.
"Is there anything MORE we can do for you?" they always ask, as if wasting two hours of my time, fixing nothing, escalating nothing, charging me a whole day's allowance of data for the privilege, wasn't already enough?
I said in the other thread, Amanda, that I would be willing to perform a test IFF [IF and ONLY IF] it would be instrumented and monitored from your end by someone with the technical expertise to actually interpret what was going on. (No, I can see dropped packets, re-transmissions, etc, and I have some grave doubts at this point about just how detailed the logging internals in the modem really are. I do know what limited things I have been told by Tier 3, some time ago now, and also that what I've been told is evidently NOT what you have seen in the files.
But my experience with Hughes suggests strongly that this continuing problem WILL NOT be fixed, unless it comes from some other source. I was told explicitly (Tier 3) that the tests they were able to run at that time DID NOT point to where "the leak" was. I understood that to mean a special purpose tool (which I was darned good at writing and building! - and including at least new event logging) would be required. (Hence my frustration at the corrosive Arrogant Flaming Idiot who condescending wrote that it " fully logs every possible and potential event, even things that you can't imagine.)
BTW - "what files?" from the other thread. The files you've said you read, and that SEEM to claim I'm a liar. I know of my multiple conversations, over a several week period (multiple Secret Decoder Ring access codes, changed weekly) to multiple people (by whatever title). I don't know if I still have the names or not (were you one of them? I think I may remember an Amanda, but I haven't found my notes, don't know if I still have them, since it was quite a while ago by now. I didn't think I'd have to "prove" anything! Once upon a time, I thought "customer service" meant that, and I dealt with a number of expensive database and "Problem Tracking System" solutions over two different companies -- so it never occurred to me, until this most recent disgusting adventure with "community", that Hughes' ability to TRACK what they were doing to customers was just as pitiful as how they treated them.
So here is the bottom line, Amanda. I have said (and no less than two field hardware support techs have laughed in agreement) that Hughes 'customer support' is without question and BY FAR the absolute worst I have ever had the misfortune to have to deal with.
Case-in-point: The rare really good one (Angela) today told me, "of course I can", when I asked her early during the testing process if she could please send a modem reset to my system "from your end" once we had learned what could be learned today. And I won't tell you about the privileged part of the conversation we had after that, when I told her of "support" people NOT in Brownsville, who not only could NOT do so when I recently asked, but told me it was impossible (I refer to TWO such, including that manager that you referenced thusly:
"Cu wants me to reset the modem from my end.
Explained cu that he can just power cycle it.
Cu does not want to do it, he wants me to reset it.
Explained cu that tool does not allow me to do that since it's fully operational.
Cu is upset..." )
No. Customer was INFURIATED.
And he was a gem compared to Val Montey, who at least made it clear to me how they play your game, as per above. "Customer refuses to jump when we tell him how high," is the Executive Summary. No, he won't escalate. No, he won't send a message to anyone. No, I can't speak to his manager. No, he couldn't care LESS how long I've been on the phone already. No, he doesn't care how much of my pitiful data allowance has ALREADY been wasted, nor how much more will be. No, he clearly doesn't care WHAT the customer wanted when he called. But "what else can I do for you?"
Suspiciously, he gave me the same line I saw here on this forum in the last few days, from you. About how much "free" data and VALUE (why, almost $200!) Hughes had "given" me -- but the "gravy train was over." No mas. From now on, if I am stupid enough to waste my time repeating tests for Hughes, I have to waste my data AS WELL AS MY [valueless] time!
I don't know how much you make, and it's none of my business. (Nor is the converse, much less so of "champions.") But when I worked as a very senior engineer developing new data storage products, and doing the very highest-level support we had for products I had previously designed, $200 wouldn't have paid for two hours of my time. I wasted more than that today!
No - I'm retired now, and doing everything I do on the web (for which I pay the satellite and equipment bills from my own pocket) solely as a "labor of love," with no compensation whatsoever. And I certainly can't afford to waste even $20. But when your company tells me that they don't intend to offer even a TOKEN attempt at customer satisfaction after putting up with your phone system, IT SPEAKS VOLUMES.
Amanda, I was told four YEARS ago that a higher performance plan WAS available. I signed up for it on the spot. Then I was told, "so sorry," guess we lied. But it'll be available Real Soon Now. Keep checking in with us. Which I did for two years, before I got wise. By then I was getting the Bug that Hughes Denies.
It is no secret that had I ANY other option than Hughes, I'd have left this pain-in-the-you-know-what "service" without so much as a "goodbye." (I DO very much feel, however, that to do so would be wrong. I worked for a company for many years that regarded "service to the customer" as a Core Principle...and actually "walked the talk." Thus this lengthy letter. But I have now performed MORE than "due diligence" when it comes to informing Hughes, in spite of roadblocks like Val Montey, that they have a MAJOR PROBLEM.)
I have filled out the [worthless] feedback surveys. Never seen so much as a hint that anybody even bothers to read them, or I'd have gotten a call by now. I've requested that my number, and a request for a call, be entered in the logs, more times than I can count. Has that EVER happened? Today, seeing how your nearly-worthless system was being gamed, I explicitly tried to get Ashley to read me back at least a few of my comments. That doesn't mean YOU will see them, of course. But we both know that "cu refused" ...to do the usual will certainly be in the boilerplate.
Amanda, I'd like to see just ONE THING from Hughes:
Is there ANYBODY in Hughes Executive Management who gives a DAMN (sorry, but I need to be blunt!) that Hughes treats customers like...oops...I'd have to use another bad word to finish that.
My conversation with a man like Val today (was that even his real name?) makes it clear to me that there is a "culture issue" at Hughes. Not only is the "customer NOT 'always right', the customer isn't even a consideration. (Obviously, the clock is running, get rid of 'em. If you can make 'em really mad in the process, great - after all, what can they DO about it?)
I have filled out the [worthless] feedback surveys. Never seen so much as a hint that anybody even bothers to read them, or I'd have gotten a call by now.
I worked with good managers who made it VERY clear to me just how important it was to treat a customer as if we actually valued their business. I've seen good people I respect get on a plane to make that clear to them in person.
I see Hughes say, "$#@& you," and not even make a pitiful, cheap, token effort in that regard. In fact, utterly the opposite.
If you - or anyone else in Hughes management in a position of actual authority, would like to talk, I am available on Monday and Wednesday afternoons, Colorado time, at 303-775-3994, after I upload my daily shows. But I'm done typing, have learned all I need to about this "community," and I won't call That Number again unless the system is down, or I have another option and can tell you to take it out.
Mark G. Call
(my Hughes email generally doesn't work, amazingly, but that's never been fixed either)