You're missing my point. My point is that HughesNet has to be well aware that the current rash of slow-speed complaints is a problem on the HughesNet end. I want them to acknowledge that, tell us at least a little something about what the problem is, and tell us when they are going to fix it.
You are too quick with words like "ignorance." Just so you know, I have been on the Internet since UUCP days, a Unix user since1984. I have an extra-class amateur radio license, and I play with digital data modes for fun. I've never needed satellites until the past few years (other than the old analog systems I worked with in the newspaper business years ago that were used by the Associated Press and other news services). I rode the dot-com boom while in San Francisco from an office overlooking Fifth and Mission. I have Cisco router training. I have helped oversee the installation of large new copper and fiber networks. I have dealt with earlier (and more reliable) generations of data pipes including DSL, ISDN, T1, etc. If I am ignorant, it's because I've been retired and away from it all for nine years, not because I don't understand troubleshooting. I've bought lots of data carried on lots of different pipes. In the past, if I told a provider what my speeds were, I was believed. But they knew it too, because (like HughesNet) they can see their end of the pipe. When providers didn't live up to their customer promises, they fixed it — quick.
This business I'm seeing here about network card drivers and such is just another red herring and a form of the blame-the-customer game. HughestNet tends to presume that its customers are ignorant and that all problems are on the customer's end. If it matters (it doesn't), I'm on a late 2015 27-inch iMac running Mac OS 10.11.6. I am 12 feet from the HT2000W router. My RSSI, noise, and Tx rate figures are always good and always have been. No, I will not run a copper wire to the router to eliminate WIFI from my testing, because the router is downstairs, and because WIFI clearly is not the problem.
If I were the only customer complaining, I'd look a little harder for a problem on my end and try to raise my confidence level from 99 to 99.9 percent. But all the evidence I've seen in this forum points to a HughesNet problem, and it's not just me. It's a new problem, since speeds were outstandingly good from April through September or so. It's entirely possible that our current slow speeds are not even a technical problem. For example, HughesNet might have sold data wholesale to a new commercial customer who is eating them, and us, alive. I am aware that that is speculative. But it looks like a load problem or demand problem. Morning speeds are down to a third or a quarter of what they once were, and evening speeds have fallen below 1Mpbs.
ChaCha, that's an excellent question. I don't know about Gabe, but I've seen other issues, such as the dish not being properly aligned or having become misaligned; issues with the modem itself needing tweaking or outright changing; and other things. Every time a user says there's a problem with their setup or their speed, it can be a myriad things, and sometimes it has to do with beam issues, but many times it's the customer's set up. The company needs to do some triage whenever there's a problem; they need to see what it is that's causing the issue, as many times it's easy to solve (send the user a new modem, for instance), and other times it's part of a larger issue, and they need to know that too to report aggregate information to the engineers who are working on solving the issue. It's not a simple matter; there are many variables involved.
IntoTheWoods, you make a valid point in requesting transparency from the company. But they have been pretty good at telling us what's going on. And while they have not gone into technical details, they have acknowledged that there are issues, particularly with some beams, and that the company is working to address those issues. Typically, companies don't reveal technical details about issues, just that there are issues and they're working on them. Hughesnet is not different from other companies, but they do acknowledge there are issues.
Perhaps there ought to be an issues forum on this site, so all the announcements regarding the overall health of the system can be in one place (ETA: I realize many announcements regarding the system are posted under About the Community, but that area seems to be a catch-all for all kinds of different announcements, not a dedicated site for system status announcements and updates).
Just to emphasize, here are all the things that can affect speed:
1. Distance from wifi or even how wifi is configured (affects speed as well as over-usage).
2. Corrupt DNS (even if you use Google's).
3. Issues with how the modem is configured, to include bad cable or improperly seated power plug.
4. Misaligned or banged up dish.
5. Faulty transceiver/feedhorn.
6. Foliage or other things blowing into radio route to the satellite (intermittent, yet regularly ocurring).
7. Cloud cover or severe weather also blocking the radio route to the satellite (sporadic and temporary).
8. Technical problems at the beam/gateway itself.
9. Congestion at the beam/gateway (incidentally, this doesn't necessarily mean it's oversold past capacity, just that there's a pileup of people spiking the system. An example is over-using a specific protocol happens to be using system resources greater than expected/planned, which happens to affect everyone else on that particular beam server).
10. Problems upstream from the gateway, such as misrouting at the backbone provider or outages anywhere within the path or problems with the destination site/server.
Edit: Forgot to add, congestion within your own setup: This is why they ask you to test with the LAN cable and ensure no one else is on at the time of testing. Speed usually = total expected speed / number of devices using it at one time.
Thank you Mark,
I have already reviewed possibilities 1-7 with support and these were eliminated. So I guess it is out of my hands and is a technical issue.
I ran hughes speed test at 7 am with result of 21.84 Mbps and thought I had died and gone to heaven. Twenty minutes later, the slow down began and my screens froze. Stepped away for 10 minutes and then ran speed test again at 7:30 am. This time it was 0.39 Mbps. Sigh. Beginning to wonder if there could be some truth to the possiblity that this is a single commercial customer or hacker hogging the bandwidth. How could the performance degrade so rapidly. One minute I am flipping web pages like pages in a book, the next I am frozen.
Mark, all very true. But let's add an 11th possibility, the one toward which all the evidence in recent threads here points and the one that our adjunct instructors and our professors keep evading. That's a big, bad, new HughesNet problem.
When multiple users report the same symptoms at the same time, service providers know what they need to do. When I and my rural neighbors all call in and say that our power is out, a big truck soon appears, and the power comes back on.
ChaCha, I've seen that too (the service is fast early, but it gets slower as the day wears on), and it seems to me the slowdowns coincide with more people using the service. Lately, though, the service has been consistent in the slower speed, so the slow speeds happen at all times, be it 6 am, 2 pm, or 11 pm. Today the speeds are better, and the pattern of early=fast, later=slower is being repeated. It may be caused by engineerings tweaking the system, I guess, or by a number of other things.
Wouldn't the company know if there is a DDoS attack?
Are business customers placed on the same beams as us mortals, or do they get dedicated service?
I ran hughes speed test at 7 am with result of 21.84 Mbps and thought I had died and gone to heaven.
Best to use testmy.net and not Hughes' own speed test. Hughes' own speed test doesn't isolate the potential issues outside of Hughes' own network at a centralized location. It also may use technologies that may give inconsistent results depending upon browser.
Using testmy.net provides a better evaluation standard, the ability to select servers close to your gateway, and gives you a graph that quantifies the nature of the speed better.
Mark, all very true. But let's add an 11th possibility
When the power is out, it is relatively easy to isolate and fix it without the need for rocket science. And in my neck of the woods, sometimes even that takes days. I've been without power for a week once so that explanation doesn't fly with me.
Your 11th possiblity is really the same as the Congestion possibility I described and no one is evading anything, certainly not me. I certainly hope you're not looking for an IEEE paper from me describing all the possible things that can contribute to congestion, because it would be lost on 99.9% of the people here. But I think you and I both know how it can happen. Just know that the tests first help verify there's a problem and allow the engineers to quantify the extent of the problem so they can eventually solve it.
When you have a many subscribers using new technologies that haven't been developed, let alone tested on a system that was designed and launched a year prior, how do you isolate and adapt the acceleration processing properly?
How do you deal with multiple subscribers that don't even know they're loading the system down with those technologies, when to them it's just easier to complain that it doesn't work?
You're a smart guy and have an exceptional background, similar my own, yet I don't think you're looking at the whole picture realistically.
I get you're angry (and we've all been there at one point or another - myself included). But you also know that making empty assumptions and accusations of foul play or skullduggery, mostly generated from that anger does no one any good (though it doesn't stop a good many people on here apparently). All it does is get everyone's dander up for no reason, not to mention how it spreads false rumors because people start believing it to be true - that is, for those that even bother reading any of it at all.