I'm not angry. I'm actually very cold blooded about it. Having lived in a rural area for the last nine years, I'm accustomed to struggling for Internet access, though I had hoped those days were over.
EchoStar 19 is an extraordinary piece of engineering. I've read everything about it that I could find. But HughesNet has about nine months of experience with it now, with customers on line. Before that, I believe they did about three months of testing. They should know that bird by now, and they have nine months of performance data and history to work with. As you guess, I do have a secondary agenda. That's to help give HughesNet fair warning that the great reviews that Gen5 got in its first months are in danger of going down the drain, causing HughesNet to slide right back into its old reputation of not meeting customer promises, with some of the industry's worst customer service. Again, Liz is wonderful, but she is just one person in a rather large company. Reading between the lines, I get the impression that the engineers sometimes blow her off, with the attitude that customer service has to jump through hoops to prove that there is a problem until the point is reached that engineers are cornered and can no longer deny it. In my tech career, I saw that over and over. As a manager who didn't have to, one of the reasons I went to Cisco school, Oracle DBA school, etc., learned C and some other languages, and knew Unix (not to mention our business) better than they did was so that engineers couldn't get away with trying to snow me. With 80 percent of the so-called engineers I ever worked with, denial was their first instinct. I hope your experience went better than that. :-)
Companies should acknowledge and explain problems so that false rumors don't get started. That's why HughesNet should tell us what the problem is and tell us when it will be fixed. As for user forums, complaining customers are inevitable when there are widespread problems. Many pesky, routine, newbie problems can be fixed by user-to-user support. That's why even Apple supports user forums. But user forums light up like Christmas trees when companies drop the ball. Why fight the complaints rather than the problem?
I can assure you they're not fighting nor avoiding the problem(s). Some things are likely being prioritized over others for various reasons. The complexity is how those fixes can be engineered in order to fix those problems and perhaps enhance the overall system without creating new ones across 95 seperately served beams over 17 spatially disparate gateways. And that's just the known ones on J2. There are others served on J1.
Given our past experience, that should provide evidence of something else: Not enough engineering personnel on staff to deal with every possible known issue in the kind of timeframe people are demanding. Whether the margins are there to support increasing that staff is another story, but you can clearly see there are only 2 exceptional admins (both with the patience worthy of sainthood, imo) visible here, when there used to be several.
And yes, business culture in how they deal with these things has changed significantly. Even Apple isn't nearly as forthcoming as they once were (as if the past several months of security gaffes will show). And yes, I certainly made sure I knew when I was being snowed by an engineer/developer - they got away with it once or twice, but didn't last very long if it continued past that. In some cases I even 'helped' them to move on. 😒
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.
And with this post you're once again making the assumption that everyone who is having speed issues is having them because of something on Hughes' end.
As listed below, Hughes has acknowledged beam issues and continues to do so (which is also why I often first ask people what beam they are on), but again, assuming every speed issue is the cause of HughesNet, and essentially saying, in so many words, "The speed tests are a waste of time. Don't bother with them." is not only shortsighted, but also tantamount to sabotaging the help people could be getting with their speed issues, whether it's intentional or not.
Also, with regard to one specific thing you said, if you don't think that network card drivers can have an effect on the performance of one's computer when it comes to the net.........
BTW, and please take this in the formal manner intended, I'd venture to say that most of HughesNet's customers ARE ignorant when it comes to their devices, and the net as a whole, and it gets worse as time goes on. That's not a presumption. That's reality. Remember when you had to physically enter a slew of parameters just to connect via dialup? Now you can connect to WiFi by pressing a button. When people don't need to know, they don't bother to learn. Click a button and it works, and when it doesn't, for most it's "Uh Oh."
God, thank you for saying that, IntotheWoods, and saying it well. I have read all of the subsequent posts on this thread as well.
You can't have this many customers, all with the same issue, all getting the same hoop-jumping runaround from TechSupp, none getting a resolution...then not admit that this is simply an issue of a failure to provide adequate service - a provider failure of some kind.