Dish

Anybody using Hughesnet satellite for broadband internet?
Is it worth getting? Not counting equipment cost it's $59.99 a month.
I have DirecTV now and like it. About $60 for each, I know cable would
run $120 for the same service. Plus VoIP for another $40. I prefer my
cell phone. I'm moving and intend to dump DSL and landline.


--
Snap

Hey, I eat my vegetables. Potatoes are vegetables arent' they?
So I eat my French Fries and I get my vegetables.

Snap Whipcrack.............. wrote:
> Anybody using Hughesnet satellite for broadband internet?
> Is it worth getting? Not counting equipment cost it's $59.99 a month.
> I have DirecTV now and like it. About $60 for each, I know cable would
> run $120 for the same service. Plus VoIP for another $40. I prefer my
> cell phone. I'm moving and intend to dump DSL and landline.
>
>

Anything using a satellite is painful to use because of the high
latency. Everyone I know who has one has immediately migrated to any
terrestrial service that became available.

In article <s97Qh.2420$gb6.2210@trndny07>,
"Snap Whipcrack.............." <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:

> Anybody using Hughesnet satellite for broadband internet?
> Is it worth getting? Not counting equipment cost it's $59.99 a month.
> I have DirecTV now and like it. About $60 for each, I know cable would
> run $120 for the same service. Plus VoIP for another $40. I prefer my
> cell phone. I'm moving and intend to dump DSL and landline.

Can't say for sure about Hughesnet, but I cruise a fair amount and
thus use their satellites. They are SLOOOOWWW, not quite dial up, but
not all that far either. The latency is a bear,too. Now how much of
that is real, how much secondary to the fact that the cruise ship is a
moving target (something you wouldn't have to deal with obviously) and
how much is built-in to the system by the cruiselines to take full
advantage of 50 cents/minute, I can't say.

"Snap Whipcrack.............." <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
news:s97Qh.2420$gb6.2210@trndny07...
> Anybody using Hughesnet satellite for broadband internet?
> Is it worth getting? Not counting equipment cost it's $59.99 a month.
> I have DirecTV now and like it. About $60 for each, I know cable would
> run $120 for the same service. Plus VoIP for another $40. I prefer my
> cell phone. I'm moving and intend to dump DSL and landline.
>
>
> --
> Snap
>
> Hey, I eat my vegetables. Potatoes are vegetables arent' they?
> So I eat my French Fries and I get my vegetables.

Where I live it's either dial-up or satellite. I tried dial-up and canceled
the service after one week (painfully slow).

I have been with HUGHES.NET for about 9 months now and find it adequate for
day to day Internet activities. Secure sites tend to be somewhat slower
than other sites but it beats dial-up.

The commercials for HUGHES.NET are deceptive as the speed will never be as
fast as a DSL or Cable broadband connection.

Actual speed falls below DSL and fluctuates depending on time of day. I
typically see 500 Kbps during off-peak hours and about 100 Kbps during peak
hours.

There are also caps on downloads. The cap depends on the service plan you
choose and can cause problems if you download a lot.

I recommend you read the forum messages at
http://www.dslreports.com/forum/sat before locking into any contracts.

On Mon, 02 Apr 2007 13:02:16 GMT, "Snap Whipcrack.............."
<(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:

>Anybody using Hughesnet satellite for broadband internet?
>Is it worth getting? Not counting equipment cost it's $59.99 a month.
>I have DirecTV now and like it. About $60 for each, I know cable would
>run $120 for the same service. Plus VoIP for another $40. I prefer my
>cell phone. I'm moving and intend to dump DSL and landline.

I have several customers using DirecWay (HughesNet) and one just
signed up for WildBlue. Every one of these uses satellite because of
the lack of other suitable alternatives. I'll be moving one customer
to a rather messy combination of DSL, copper, and FTTF (fiber through
the forest) because of the problems with satellite. This customer is
a stock broker and cannot afford to have the system down or slow. Most
common complaints are incredible slowness at time, total dropouts
during bad weather, and very slow uploads. Encrypted pages also run
very slowly. VoIP is useless due to the latency. I suggest you look
into alternatives if they are available. If you can get DSL, cable,
or wireless internet, at where you're moving, do it.

Speaking of alternatives and DirecWay, one of my non-paying customers
(I get free dinners and ocassional firewood) has about 15 computers
and 6 houses on a single shared DirecWay satellite link. The only
reason this works is that everyone cooperated to keep the system up
and to not exceed the FAP (fair access policy). They've been talking
about dragging in a cable or wireless link for a year and it appears
that it's going to be done this summer. Satellite just doesn't have
the capacity to handle heavy traffic.

--
# Jeff Liebermann 150 Felker St #D Santa Cruz CA 95060
# 831-336-2558 (E-Mail Removed)
# http://802.11junk.com (E-Mail Removed)
# http://www.LearnByDestroying.com AE6KS

Robert <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:
> Where I live it's either dial-up or satellite. I tried dial-up and
> canceled the service after one week (painfully slow).

What about cellular? My cingular connection just went from GPRS to EGPRS
recently. That might be a bump up to the 150Kbps region.
In some areas (areas that probably have other alternatives anyway) there
are higher speed options.

Just south of where I am now, 24k dialup was it.
A friend is on starnet, and one group of families is sharing a T-1.
The cellular coverage was good in that area, so that would now be faster
than dialup.

The friend who is on starnet is near the top of a hill, and I thought he
might be able to make some cooperative wifi arrangement with someone else
that could get DSL from the nearby town, but he never pursued that because
of the tall trees on his property.

--
---
Clarence A Dold - Hidden Valley Lake, CA, USA GPS: 38.8,-122.5

On Tue, 3 Apr 2007 00:09:06 +0000 (UTC), (E-Mail Removed) wrote in
<eus5v2$6sv$(E-Mail Removed)>:

>Robert <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:
>> Where I live it's either dial-up or satellite. I tried dial-up and
>> canceled the service after one week (painfully slow).
>
>What about cellular? My cingular connection just went from GPRS to EGPRS
>recently. That might be a bump up to the 150Kbps region.

200+ Kbps with good signal and a good device.

>In some areas (areas that probably have other alternatives anyway) there
>are higher speed options.

HSDPA: 500+ Kbps

--
Best regards, FAQ for Wireless Internet: <http://Wireless.wikia.com>
John Navas FAQ for Wi-Fi: <http://wireless.wikia.com/wiki/Wi-Fi>
Wi-Fi How To: <http://wireless.wikia.com/wiki/Wi-Fi_How_To>
Fixes to Wi-Fi Problems: <http://wireless.wikia.com/wiki/Wi-Fi_Fixes>

Jeff Liebermann wrote:
> On Mon, 02 Apr 2007 13:02:16 GMT, "Snap Whipcrack.............."
> <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:
>
>> Anybody using Hughesnet satellite for broadband internet?
>> Is it worth getting? Not counting equipment cost it's $59.99 a month.
>> I have DirecTV now and like it. About $60 for each, I know cable would
>> run $120 for the same service. Plus VoIP for another $40. I prefer my
>> cell phone. I'm moving and intend to dump DSL and landline.
>
> I have several customers using DirecWay (HughesNet) and one just
> signed up for WildBlue. Every one of these uses satellite because of
> the lack of other suitable alternatives. I'll be moving one customer
> to a rather messy combination of DSL, copper, and FTTF (fiber through
> the forest) because of the problems with satellite. This customer is
> a stock broker and cannot afford to have the system down or slow. Most
> common complaints are incredible slowness at time, total dropouts
> during bad weather, and very slow uploads. Encrypted pages also run
> very slowly. VoIP is useless due to the latency. I suggest you look
> into alternatives if they are available. If you can get DSL, cable,
> or wireless internet, at where you're moving, do it.
>
> Speaking of alternatives and DirecWay, one of my non-paying customers
> (I get free dinners and ocassional firewood) has about 15 computers
> and 6 houses on a single shared DirecWay satellite link. The only
> reason this works is that everyone cooperated to keep the system up
> and to not exceed the FAP (fair access policy). They've been talking
> about dragging in a cable or wireless link for a year and it appears
> that it's going to be done this summer. Satellite just doesn't have
> the capacity to handle heavy traffic.
>
Somebody put me on to Wildblue. It's half the equipment cost and just
$49 a month for 500kbs download and 128 upload max. They don't mention
download limits, must be in the fine print I haven't seen yet.


--
Snap

Hey, I eat my vegetables. Potatoes are vegetables arent' they?
So I eat my French Fries and I get my vegetables.

> >> Anybody using Hughesnet satellite for broadband internet?
> >> Is it worth getting?

Only if you must, but I can say, our service is good. We have 8 pcs
sharing a business account ($100 mo) and with the bigger dish/2 watt
radio, up to 1.5 Mbps DL, it's pretty good! We actually get 800-1200
most all the time. Latency is noticable, but not like dial up. It
takes a moment but then the page pours in. Except secure, as was
said. It's not treated the same way and is slow. Banking for
example. Downloads on our system are great, that's where it shines,
but watch your FAP. Study the accounts carefully before choosing,
especially each one's FAP and recover rate.

If you are sure you are using it for a while, consider the bigger
dish and radio. In the long run, it can make a difference in signal
quality and your choices for service plans. Only the bigger dish can
do bizness plans.

Installation is critical. It will make or break your experience.
Find somebody in your area that has proven success. Find the guy
that has a good relationship with the main office, knows his stuff.
This is way more complex than TV dishes. Check to see if a Hughes
reseller, like Ground Control makes sense for you. The added level of
service may be worth it. Make sure you have your installer on your
side and take care that he has time to get you a good set-up. I asked
him to optmize our uploads (weakest part) and he spent hours trying
combinations of polarization and alignment until he got it dialed in.
That's what you want.


>
> Somebody put me on to Wildblue. It's half the equipment cost and just
> $49 a month for 500kbs download and 128 upload max. They don't mention
> download limits, must be in the fine print I haven't seen yet.

>From what I can tell, Wildblue is not, generally as good as Hughes. As
somebody said, it's quite difficult to turn a profit in the satellite
internet biz. Bandwidth via rocketships is still very expensive.
Hughes is the only one that turns a profit and them just recently.
It's easy for startups to promise a lot and then as contracts are
signed, the money gets tight, they cram more people onto the same
transponders - the "contention ratio" is a big factor in your promised
"up-to" vs actual.

So I wouldn't let the cheap Wildblue gear sway you. You want the best
connection you can get within reason, that's what matters.

I did hear that WildBlue may improve with their next generation tech.
Hughes seems to have interesting new tech in the works too. The
Hughesnet gear is better, their modem is very good. They got it
right. Wildblue's modem is said to be minimal, just short of
crippled.

Also Wildblue has, to me, a more problematic FAP policy. It can leave
you stuck at dial-up speeds for days, not just hours. Though they say
it depends on how you use the internet which FAP is better... Just be
sure to understand FAP very well and read the satellite forums to
educate yourself. Do be aware that mostly people with complaints go
there. The people with working systems are busy using their internet.

VOIP. I can get computer to computer voip to work. With a delay, it's
like a walkie talkie, not duplex. Best to plan on voip not working
with Satellite. Though the $40 extra dedicated VOIP they sell may be
better, I've seen it working more or less...

Cheers,
Steve

Steve

Snap Whipcrack.............. wrote:

>>
> Somebody put me on to Wildblue. It's half the equipment cost and just
> $49 a month for 500kbs download and 128 upload max. They don't mention
> download limits, must be in the fine print I haven't seen yet.
>
>

But it still uses a satellite. I would consider it only if no
terrestrial ISPs were available.