I am not getting the service I pay for so I used to write and complain about it. Now they have me blocked on Facebook. I can no longer send a message when I have a problem or comment on their page. Is anyone else blocked? It sure would be nice to have an internet company that cared and did their best to work with their customers. I have been with Exede for about 4 years now waiting for better service. That is a long time to be kept waiting. I don't know what to do. My choices are Exede or Hughes Net. I did a speed test at speedtest.net...several actually at different times tonight and my highest DL was 7.75 and UPLoad 0.94. I have put up with this for several years now.....waiting for better service. I don't think it is ever going to happen with this company. I kinda want to upgrade but feel that I would still have too many problems. Has anyone upgraded to the unlimited plan that had problems before? I have the 10mbs plan right now and free time from 12-?6AM and pay $60 and change a month.
Posted 2 years ago
Stephen Rice, Champion
You consider 7 mbps to be terrible? If the service is so horrible, you should have ditched Exede/Viasat after your contract was up two years ago.
I don't blame them for blocking you.
I don't blame them for blocking you.
(Edited)
That is awful easy to say when you have more options to choice from.He is probable in same boat I am in no other options to choice from.Oh you don't have to worry just as soon as soon as something better comes alone I promise to leave you with my band width.Nothing more need to be said.
I got unlimited 12 silver package...mine is on and off so far all day every day..so pissed
_large.jpg)
Have you tried: Viasat Internet mobile app
Have you tried: Viasat Internet mobile app
How do your signal stats look: Click Here
Are you using a router?
Is PC hooked direct to SB2 modem via Ethernet cable?
How do your signal stats look: Click Here
Are you using a router?
Is PC hooked direct to SB2 modem via Ethernet cable?
Thanks for the signal checker, I needed this. I have the unlimit 12 plan, I have had only 1 problem. Customer support was fantastic! Im running between 12 and 15 mbps. I should have cancelled verizon long ago. Sorry to hear everyone having problems. I cant complain
Stephen Rice, Champion
Nothing is wrong with her service. She has been complaining on Facebook so she could get extra data and credits to lower her bill. Viasat got tired of it and blocked her on Facebook so now she is here to complain.
Wait they give out data and credits if you complain enough holy crap i need to get on that band wagon then. I would love free data with my already, wait..... Unlimited unthrottled data.......
Stephen Rice, Champion
She is complaining about 7 mbps down and 1 mbps up. Let that sink in before you start offering to help her.
Some DSL connections barely do 3 mbps down and 256k up.
Some DSL connections barely do 3 mbps down and 256k up.
(Edited)
david, Champion
Yea, I saw that. I was wondering what you could do at 12Mbps that you can't at 7.75Mbps with the 10 gig plan.
Blocking might be an IP issue, or user configuration issue.
Video buffering can be resolved via Download Manager.
Modem/PC issue might be on her side. If using router with QOS engaged, this can cause slow speeds (aka buffering).
"Too many" rambling thoughts...
Video buffering can be resolved via Download Manager.
Modem/PC issue might be on her side. If using router with QOS engaged, this can cause slow speeds (aka buffering).
"Too many" rambling thoughts...
I'd be very happy with that
Deku (The #1 Hero Data Saver), Champion
just so ya know :3 i have a program called IDM (a.k.a internet download management) and so far... ive bought the 1 year license thing and the 1 year was almost up... so ive bought the entire life time license :3 so whenever i go onto youtube the little thing pops up at the right hand corner of every video and says download video and it either gives me a choice of what format i want to download... (i always tend to download the 480p ones :3 ) BUT!!! youll have to install it to the google chrome or the sparrow browser or whatever web surfing ya do :3
BUT!!! the life time license is ONLY onto 1 computer... BUT!!! i know how to bypass that and get it onto MULTIPLY computers :3 BUT!!! here is the link if ya want to buy it :3 also... every website i go to always has that download video little thing at the right hand corner and you just click it and you can rename it as what you want... and itll download once downloaded you can go into your downloads folder and look for the folder video and click onto the folder video and play it :3 BUT!!! i use VLC which you can download also which is for free :3 to play your work videos (i tend to play all video formats onto VLC :3 cause its awesomeness!!! i even play my youtube videos, anime videos, how to videos, ect. ect. :3 )
HERE IS THE LINK TO THE IDM!!! (a.k.a internet download management :3 your gonna HAVE to buy the life time license just once AND ITS YOUR FOREVER!!! MAKE SURE DO NOT LOOSE THE LICENSE KEY NOR ANY OF THE INFORMATION THEY SEND YA VIA EMAIL!!! CAUSE THOSE ARE YOUR ONLY ACCESS FOR WHEN THEY SEND YA THE KEY FOR YOU TO PUT INTO THE KEY THING ONTO THE IDM!!! )
https://www.internetdownloadmanager.com/
VLC VIDEO PLAYER!!! :3 (this is free :3 )
https://www.videolan.org/vlc/
HOPE IVE HELPED YA OUT ONTO THE VIDEO THING!!! :3
the other thing... i dont know how to help ya out... but you could email viasat though :3 (i forgots what there email address was to be honest DX sorry ;-; )
BUT!!! the life time license is ONLY onto 1 computer... BUT!!! i know how to bypass that and get it onto MULTIPLY computers :3 BUT!!! here is the link if ya want to buy it :3 also... every website i go to always has that download video little thing at the right hand corner and you just click it and you can rename it as what you want... and itll download once downloaded you can go into your downloads folder and look for the folder video and click onto the folder video and play it :3 BUT!!! i use VLC which you can download also which is for free :3 to play your work videos (i tend to play all video formats onto VLC :3 cause its awesomeness!!! i even play my youtube videos, anime videos, how to videos, ect. ect. :3 )
HERE IS THE LINK TO THE IDM!!! (a.k.a internet download management :3 your gonna HAVE to buy the life time license just once AND ITS YOUR FOREVER!!! MAKE SURE DO NOT LOOSE THE LICENSE KEY NOR ANY OF THE INFORMATION THEY SEND YA VIA EMAIL!!! CAUSE THOSE ARE YOUR ONLY ACCESS FOR WHEN THEY SEND YA THE KEY FOR YOU TO PUT INTO THE KEY THING ONTO THE IDM!!! )
https://www.internetdownloadmanager.com/
VLC VIDEO PLAYER!!! :3 (this is free :3 )
https://www.videolan.org/vlc/
HOPE IVE HELPED YA OUT ONTO THE VIDEO THING!!! :3
the other thing... i dont know how to help ya out... but you could email viasat though :3 (i forgots what there email address was to be honest DX sorry ;-; )
I personally use Eagle get and the MEGAsync download agent i pay for Mega cloud service and eagle get does everything IDM does but its free.
If I could get 7Mbps down I would be so happy ... so very happy! ... from what I can tell, whatever the advertised speed you are paying for you should expect to get about 25-30% of that ...
Example: You have the Bronze 12 (up to 12Mbps down) ... you should expect around 3Mbps down
or if you have the 25Mbps down plan, then you should expect about 6-7Mbps down.
I have read hundreds of complaints on this website and if you throw out the ones saying that they are getting less than 1Mbps and the ones who are getting their full advertised speeds then 25-30% of advertised speed seems to be the standard.
Example: You have the Bronze 12 (up to 12Mbps down) ... you should expect around 3Mbps down
or if you have the 25Mbps down plan, then you should expect about 6-7Mbps down.
I have read hundreds of complaints on this website and if you throw out the ones saying that they are getting less than 1Mbps and the ones who are getting their full advertised speeds then 25-30% of advertised speed seems to be the standard.
Hundreds of complaints on a complaint forum out of 600,000 customers mean 30% of advertised speed. You are obviously not a statistician! Not the best sampling, is it. If I go to a forum for twins and all the posts are from twins, then the entire country is made up of twins. Sounds logical.
(Edited)
Be careful, your ignorance is on full display.
I said, I had read hundreds of complains on this website in a thread re: download speeds ... I should not have to clarify that my response is re: the topic of the thread.
Not all of the complaints are about speed. Not all of the threads are complaints.
Example, your complaint on this "complaint" forum has nothing to do with download speed, therefore, it gets thrown out.
Maybe I should have posted in way that a 8th grader can understand ...
You are correct, I am not a statistician by trade, but I am one by hobby and most polls and statistics are done by sampling small amounts of data and then extrapolating that data to larger bits of data. This method is used in law enforcement, banking, trading, politics, etc ...
I said, I had read hundreds of complains on this website in a thread re: download speeds ... I should not have to clarify that my response is re: the topic of the thread.
Not all of the complaints are about speed. Not all of the threads are complaints.
Example, your complaint on this "complaint" forum has nothing to do with download speed, therefore, it gets thrown out.
Maybe I should have posted in way that a 8th grader can understand ...
- I have read multiple hundreds of complaints on this website.
- I have thrown out the complaints that did not relate to speed issues.
- I have also thrown out the complaints that were on the top or bottom ... "top" = people who were getting their advertised speeds and "bottom" = people who were getting less than 1Mbps.
You are correct, I am not a statistician by trade, but I am one by hobby and most polls and statistics are done by sampling small amounts of data and then extrapolating that data to larger bits of data. This method is used in law enforcement, banking, trading, politics, etc ...
(Edited)
Technically speaking the sample you derived from here is invalid - it is skewed/biased toward those who are having issues/problems - that may or may not be a valid representation of the overall subscriber population since people having no/few problems tend not to even show up here - very few come here to praise their speeds, but those having speed issues certainly do.
It is the only data that I have at my disposal ... so you want a clarifier then, well here it is ... Of the people complaining about download speeds on a complaint board I have, IMO, reached a conclusion that about 25-30% of advertised speeds seem to be the norm ...
That's better and you've now made it clear that your not extrapolating it to the larger set of data of all subscribers in general.
So what have you done to determine the cause for your slow speeds? When does it occur? Which specific plan are you on? The list of questions goes on... there may be some steps to improve your lot or it may simply be that you're on an overloaded spot beam for now. Many of us are and have learned to work around it - none of us like it but arguing stats obtained from a flawed sample isn't going to solve anything.
You apparently feel you should be guaranteed a minimum performance level - state a number that's considered acceptable for all users. Then divide 140,000 Mbps (or 140 Gbps) by that number - that would roughly yield the maximum number of subcribers that could be supported on Viasat-1 to ensure your minimum. There's a little more to it - but should give you a relative order of magnitude of the maximum number of subscribers.
So what have you done to determine the cause for your slow speeds? When does it occur? Which specific plan are you on? The list of questions goes on... there may be some steps to improve your lot or it may simply be that you're on an overloaded spot beam for now. Many of us are and have learned to work around it - none of us like it but arguing stats obtained from a flawed sample isn't going to solve anything.
You apparently feel you should be guaranteed a minimum performance level - state a number that's considered acceptable for all users. Then divide 140,000 Mbps (or 140 Gbps) by that number - that would roughly yield the maximum number of subcribers that could be supported on Viasat-1 to ensure your minimum. There's a little more to it - but should give you a relative order of magnitude of the maximum number of subscribers.
(Edited)
Wow ... you really are an ass.
I never asked for anything. I was merely responding to the OP who was complaining about getting 7Mbps and I said that I would be very happy with that.
I then offered some anecdotal data that I had learned from reading these forums that simply stated that actual speeds seem to be running at about 25-30% of advertised speeds.
Then, for whatever reason you felt the need to pipe up with the ramblings of a mad man.
But since you brought it up, I do feel that "up to" needs to be more clearly defined. While 0.02Mbps is technically "up to 12Mbps" the sales team "assured" me over and over that I would see speeds no lower than 2-3Mbps when in fact, my speed rarely see those number ... at this point I think I'd be very happy with 2-3Mbps.
You asked, what have I done about it ...
I never asked for anything. I was merely responding to the OP who was complaining about getting 7Mbps and I said that I would be very happy with that.
I then offered some anecdotal data that I had learned from reading these forums that simply stated that actual speeds seem to be running at about 25-30% of advertised speeds.
Then, for whatever reason you felt the need to pipe up with the ramblings of a mad man.
But since you brought it up, I do feel that "up to" needs to be more clearly defined. While 0.02Mbps is technically "up to 12Mbps" the sales team "assured" me over and over that I would see speeds no lower than 2-3Mbps when in fact, my speed rarely see those number ... at this point I think I'd be very happy with 2-3Mbps.
You asked, what have I done about it ...
- unplugged and replugged
- called and called again
- 3 technician visits
Stephen Rice, Champion
You could try moving to Louisiana. The beam that covers the Baton Rouge area is awesome.
Yes "up to" does indeed need to be clarified for new subscribers before they signup, as do the terms "unlimited data", data usage threshold and (de)prioritization.
Similarly the terms "Video Streaming at Small Screen Quality Typically 360p", "Video Streaming at DVD QualityTypically 480p" and "Video Streaming at HD Quality Typically 720p" deserve some further clarification also.
Beyond Stephen's recommendation (I may actually try that one provided he buys the first King Cake) there are some other things that could be checked (things that even phone suppoprt or many installers might not be aware of - the former's expertise typically rests with reading scripts while the latter's expertise generally rests with the modem and physical install althought there are some exceptions) - but good luck with those since you shouldn't be happy to rarely see 2-3 Mbps as best. I certainly wouldn't be (with the emphasis there on rarely). However, if you qualify that with rarely do I see better than 2-3 Mbps during prime time... welcome to the club but again some actions can be taken to make it a more usable experience during prime time.
There is more for you to do including verifying what the technicians told you - but you'll need to seek that advice elsewhere than from an ass and a madman ;)
Similarly the terms "Video Streaming at Small Screen Quality Typically 360p", "Video Streaming at DVD QualityTypically 480p" and "Video Streaming at HD Quality Typically 720p" deserve some further clarification also.
Beyond Stephen's recommendation (I may actually try that one provided he buys the first King Cake) there are some other things that could be checked (things that even phone suppoprt or many installers might not be aware of - the former's expertise typically rests with reading scripts while the latter's expertise generally rests with the modem and physical install althought there are some exceptions) - but good luck with those since you shouldn't be happy to rarely see 2-3 Mbps as best. I certainly wouldn't be (with the emphasis there on rarely). However, if you qualify that with rarely do I see better than 2-3 Mbps during prime time... welcome to the club but again some actions can be taken to make it a more usable experience during prime time.
There is more for you to do including verifying what the technicians told you - but you'll need to seek that advice elsewhere than from an ass and a madman ;)
(Edited)
"but you'll need to seek that advice elsewhere than from an ass and a madman ;) "
That's too bad Gary. That ass and mad man :) can be of great help to you if you want. But all you want is to make up fake stats that show you have no clue.
That's too bad Gary. That ass and mad man :) can be of great help to you if you want. But all you want is to make up fake stats that show you have no clue.
Stephen Rice, Champion
Louisiana is a decent state. We have good food, nice people, and decent gun laws. It's still a relatively free country/state where I live. The only bad thing is our crooked politicians.
I wish someone would block me on Facebook.
Stephen Rice, Champion
I suppose I could send an email to viasatlistens@viasat.com to complain and get some sort of freebie, but honestly, I'm perfectly happy with what I have.
Unfortunately, the good people at Viasat corporate know I'm a happy customer since I brag on this forum all the time.
It would be an interesting experiment to email them, but we all know what would happen. They would just send me a pack of bubble gum and recommend a movie such as "They Live".
Unfortunately, the good people at Viasat corporate know I'm a happy customer since I brag on this forum all the time.
It would be an interesting experiment to email them, but we all know what would happen. They would just send me a pack of bubble gum and recommend a movie such as "They Live".
She's not speaking...more like Dawn's rant
Yeah they tend to block for anything other than positive criticism. If you upgrade to the lowest unlimited plan you should expect that speed in about prime time hours.
Ronald:
It's tough on cable too:-)
Prime time Blast! tier download speed SLOW
1. I do get about 240Mbps before prime time (before about 7PM or so)
2. However, during prime time (about 7PM to 11PM) I see very much lower speeds. Sometimes less than 100Mbps and very often less than 150Mbps, never goes up to 200Mbps.
Ronald, see how they complain...poor thing...100 Mbps must be a real PIA.
It's tough on cable too:-)
Prime time Blast! tier download speed SLOW
1. I do get about 240Mbps before prime time (before about 7PM or so)
2. However, during prime time (about 7PM to 11PM) I see very much lower speeds. Sometimes less than 100Mbps and very often less than 150Mbps, never goes up to 200Mbps.
Ronald, see how they complain...poor thing...100 Mbps must be a real PIA.
Stephen Rice, Champion
Is there even a notice difference is speed between 5 mbps and 200 mbps when browsing the net or streaming movies?
I'd think the only difference would be when downloading large games.
Instead of it taking 2 minutes to download a 50 gb game it might take 4 minutes. Wow.
I'd think the only difference would be when downloading large games.
Instead of it taking 2 minutes to download a 50 gb game it might take 4 minutes. Wow.
If you upgrade to the lowest unlimited plan you should expect that speed in about prime time hours.The general consensus around here is that the same would be true even on a 25 or 30 Mbps plan on Viasat-1 right now. You aren't paying for prioritized "speeds" at those levels you're paying for the potential/capability for higher "speeds" at those levels subject to current network conditions. Specifically if capacity is over utilized at a given point in time everybody suffers - the real difference between "unlimited data" plans going forward will be the data usage thresholds before (de)prioritization and levels of throttling for detected video streams.
(Edited)
RE: "paying for the potential/capability for higher "speeds"
On one slower cable system, 10 Mbps is their basic plan, but to stream say Netflix, a higher plan is required, otherwise buffering.
I suspect with tiered plans, it appears here that download speeds are proportional to your plan when congestion kicks in.
On one slower cable system, 10 Mbps is their basic plan, but to stream say Netflix, a higher plan is required, otherwise buffering.
I suspect with tiered plans, it appears here that download speeds are proportional to your plan when congestion kicks in.
(Edited)
I suspect with tiered plans, it appears here that download speeds are proportional to your plan when congestion kicks in.
There's noting in writing that expressly states that and the question has been asked on numerous occasions with no real clarification provided by Viasat.
(Edited)
I could care less if my "speed" is 5 or 200. As it has been stated many times, you can do most anything at "up to 12 Mbps" I am paying for "internet access" not "speed" my "problem" is the amount of time my beam is so congested that at times my internet is painfully slow, or not accessible at all. I could care less if my speed is 3 Mbps. I am sick of pages timing out or freezing IF my request transmits at all.
My problem with the "unlimited" plans is when the 150 "priority data" is used you get restricted "during heavy usage", what they dont tell you is on my heavily congested beam that is almost 24/7, and is usually below 1 Mbps.
My problem with the "unlimited" plans is when the 150 "priority data" is used you get restricted "during heavy usage", what they dont tell you is on my heavily congested beam that is almost 24/7, and is usually below 1 Mbps.
RE: "in writing that expressly states"
Did you read David's blog, he's a DOCSIS geek:-)
So, the config file is sent to the modem, which includes download/upload specs.
Somehow, Cisco's QOS equipment is aware of users' speeds, and then applies Congestion Management when the time comes. But, each ISP can twitch the settings, as they see fit, if they can figure it out.
Needless to say, data types (VOIP, FTP, Video, etc) get prioritized, from "me first," to "you last."
Based upon that local cable provider, premium customers get better service, during congestion. But, you could ask David at bottom of comment section, or direct via email. Ultimately, congestion is a shared experience, or rank ($$$) has its privileges. Economically, an ISP's ARPU might increase with rank being a higher priority.
Tidbit I came across
DOCSIS 1.0 - QoS profile 5 corresponds to a service providing 256 Kbps in the downstream and 64 Kbps is the upstream.
I remember those "fast days," on a WISP provider.
Did you read David's blog, he's a DOCSIS geek:-)
So, the config file is sent to the modem, which includes download/upload specs.
Somehow, Cisco's QOS equipment is aware of users' speeds, and then applies Congestion Management when the time comes. But, each ISP can twitch the settings, as they see fit, if they can figure it out.
Needless to say, data types (VOIP, FTP, Video, etc) get prioritized, from "me first," to "you last."
Based upon that local cable provider, premium customers get better service, during congestion. But, you could ask David at bottom of comment section, or direct via email. Ultimately, congestion is a shared experience, or rank ($$$) has its privileges. Economically, an ISP's ARPU might increase with rank being a higher priority.
Tidbit I came across
DOCSIS 1.0 - QoS profile 5 corresponds to a service providing 256 Kbps in the downstream and 64 Kbps is the upstream.
I remember those "fast days," on a WISP provider.
(Edited)
Unless David works or writes for Viasat he can't answer my question. It's a question regarding Viuasat's network mangement policy not the hardware/software capabilities - I know all those.
When simultaneous transmissions from multiple subscribers result in a total demand for capacity that exceeds exceeding that available on the network, the result is congestion.
The question is whether somebody paying for a higher "speed" plan receives higher priority than someone who does not when both have not exceeded their data usage threshold.
Conversely if both have exceeded their data usage threshold, does one receive higher priority over the other.
Obviously if one has and the other hasn't exceeded their data usage threshold, the answer is (or at least should be) obvious - although from the looks of things around here in this community that may not be so obvious.
When there's sufficient network capacity it's a non-issue.
It's really a question of what you're paying for when opting with a higher speed plan and that has never been made clear by Viasat since the introduction of higher "speeds" starting with the WiFi modem - being capable of higher speeds is of little use if the network capacity isn't there to begin with.
P.S. For me it's not an issue other than determining what the extra $$$ really buy me. The "speed" (a marketing misnomer since it's the theoretical maximum amount of data that can be transferred per second not how fast a bit is travelling) isn't the issue.
As best I can determine, the real difference between unlimited plans is the data usage threshold before (de)prioritization and the "speed" at which detected videos are throttled; however, simultaneous multiple activities (or multiple simulataneous users) may benefit from the increased "speed".
In fact, I recall numerous examples right here where folks upgrade to higher speed plans (at an extra cost for the Wifi Modem with speed boos) expecting that it would increase their speeds during prime time (after all I'm paying for higher speed) - needless to say it didn't. They proably did get some rocking "speeds" during the daytime - but of course weren't home to enjoy them. Any ISP (not just Viasat) touting bandwidth as speed is misleading it's subscribers. Folks would do well to determine how much "speed" they really need before assuming the more the better:
http://lmgtfy.com/?q=how+much+internet+speed+is+enough
and opinion varies based on individual needs (the nerd wallet hit is probably the best for the layman and at least uses the proper metaphor from a quick review).
When simultaneous transmissions from multiple subscribers result in a total demand for capacity that exceeds exceeding that available on the network, the result is congestion.
The question is whether somebody paying for a higher "speed" plan receives higher priority than someone who does not when both have not exceeded their data usage threshold.
Conversely if both have exceeded their data usage threshold, does one receive higher priority over the other.
Obviously if one has and the other hasn't exceeded their data usage threshold, the answer is (or at least should be) obvious - although from the looks of things around here in this community that may not be so obvious.
When there's sufficient network capacity it's a non-issue.
It's really a question of what you're paying for when opting with a higher speed plan and that has never been made clear by Viasat since the introduction of higher "speeds" starting with the WiFi modem - being capable of higher speeds is of little use if the network capacity isn't there to begin with.
P.S. For me it's not an issue other than determining what the extra $$$ really buy me. The "speed" (a marketing misnomer since it's the theoretical maximum amount of data that can be transferred per second not how fast a bit is travelling) isn't the issue.
As best I can determine, the real difference between unlimited plans is the data usage threshold before (de)prioritization and the "speed" at which detected videos are throttled; however, simultaneous multiple activities (or multiple simulataneous users) may benefit from the increased "speed".
In fact, I recall numerous examples right here where folks upgrade to higher speed plans (at an extra cost for the Wifi Modem with speed boos) expecting that it would increase their speeds during prime time (after all I'm paying for higher speed) - needless to say it didn't. They proably did get some rocking "speeds" during the daytime - but of course weren't home to enjoy them. Any ISP (not just Viasat) touting bandwidth as speed is misleading it's subscribers. Folks would do well to determine how much "speed" they really need before assuming the more the better:
http://lmgtfy.com/?q=how+much+internet+speed+is+enough
and opinion varies based on individual needs (the nerd wallet hit is probably the best for the layman and at least uses the proper metaphor from a quick review).
(Edited)
RE: Viasat's network management policy
Telephone users will most likely get FIFO service (First In First Out)...Their legal eagles then indicate Web browsing, etc....as a function of "fair share” of that capacity."
Cisco's equipment, when "fair shared" programmed for QOS, with stream rates being weighted,
LD 360p 4G Mobile @ H.264 main profile 700 kbps (6 MB/minute)
SD 480p WiFi @ H.264 main profile 1200 kbps (10 MB/minute)
HD 720p @ H.264 high profile 2500 kbps (20 MB/minute)
HD 1080p @ H.264 high profile 5000 kbps (35 MB/minute)
will bump users downward, from their chosen plan, as congestion increases. This is how it works on that small town cable system. "Fair share" connotes all users will share the "pain," but in proportion to their plan's bit rate. Rank has its privileges.
Viasat says, "If you have any questions about...Viasat’s network management practices, please...contact customer service at 1-855-463-9333."
And I say, programming CISCO's QOS is a skill, and requires a person's full undivided attention to get it right. I would suspect SNAFUs are not uncommon....and then when programmed theoretically, Internet bottlenecks may screw the programming pooch.
Telephone users will most likely get FIFO service (First In First Out)...Their legal eagles then indicate Web browsing, etc....as a function of "fair share” of that capacity."
Cisco's equipment, when "fair shared" programmed for QOS, with stream rates being weighted,
LD 360p 4G Mobile @ H.264 main profile 700 kbps (6 MB/minute)
SD 480p WiFi @ H.264 main profile 1200 kbps (10 MB/minute)
HD 720p @ H.264 high profile 2500 kbps (20 MB/minute)
HD 1080p @ H.264 high profile 5000 kbps (35 MB/minute)
will bump users downward, from their chosen plan, as congestion increases. This is how it works on that small town cable system. "Fair share" connotes all users will share the "pain," but in proportion to their plan's bit rate. Rank has its privileges.
Viasat says, "If you have any questions about...Viasat’s network management practices, please...contact customer service at 1-855-463-9333."
And I say, programming CISCO's QOS is a skill, and requires a person's full undivided attention to get it right. I would suspect SNAFUs are not uncommon....and then when programmed theoretically, Internet bottlenecks may screw the programming pooch.
Brad, Viasat Employee
Hi Patty
Please call us at 855-463-9333 if you are having issues with the service or email viasatlistens@viasat.com.
With that said 7mbps on a 12mbps plan isn't quite a concern as many activities can be done at that speed. Keep in mind that peak hours and some of the late night hours are busier times for our network and speeds usually dip during those times. Speed is never a guarantee as many factors such as network traffic, your connection, your equipment, the site you're going to, the host of the site, how many devices are connected, ect all can affect your speed hence why all ISPs post speeds as "up to".
Please call us at 855-463-9333 if you are having issues with the service or email viasatlistens@viasat.com.
With that said 7mbps on a 12mbps plan isn't quite a concern as many activities can be done at that speed. Keep in mind that peak hours and some of the late night hours are busier times for our network and speeds usually dip during those times. Speed is never a guarantee as many factors such as network traffic, your connection, your equipment, the site you're going to, the host of the site, how many devices are connected, ect all can affect your speed hence why all ISPs post speeds as "up to".
Correction Brad, it's not quite a concern anymore. https://www.exede.com/fcc-rating/
Ronald:
FCC's Test:
Download speed: Measures the download speed of each whitebox in 5 second intervals within a 30 second time interval, every 2 hours.
Upload speed: Measures the upload speed of each whitebox in 5 second intervals within a 30 second time interval, every 2 hours.
A weighted median for each service tier (weighted by subscriber counts for the tiers) is used to determine the overall ISP download speed.
FCC's Test:
Download speed: Measures the download speed of each whitebox in 5 second intervals within a 30 second time interval, every 2 hours.
Upload speed: Measures the upload speed of each whitebox in 5 second intervals within a 30 second time interval, every 2 hours.
A weighted median for each service tier (weighted by subscriber counts for the tiers) is used to determine the overall ISP download speed.
Was I supposed to read that? They were number 1 in these tests in 2013 https://www.exede.com/blog/fccreport/ They deliver speed as advertised in 2015. Maybe 2018 will be the return to bragging?
Let's hope
RE: "supposed to read that?"
The tests run on 24 hour cycles...at 2 hour intervals, which means lower primetime speeds are mixed in total data.
For me, primetime dips, but otherwise speeds are fine.
In dialup days, the same pattern...primetime sucked badly, but after the pilgrims went to bed, speeds then were good in Kbps, some 26 or so Kbps.
Unless a person has FIOS/FTTH, or really fast cable, everything else tends to have similar primetime behavior.
During Wildblue days, getting a web page to load was time-consuming during primetime. Video streaming, for get it. Wildblue investors stuffed those beams.
My pattern today is to mostly do web surfing during primetime, then later, do vid watching/downloading. Still on Exede-5 plan, with 10 Gig bucket, and LNFZ.
The tests run on 24 hour cycles...at 2 hour intervals, which means lower primetime speeds are mixed in total data.
For me, primetime dips, but otherwise speeds are fine.
In dialup days, the same pattern...primetime sucked badly, but after the pilgrims went to bed, speeds then were good in Kbps, some 26 or so Kbps.
Unless a person has FIOS/FTTH, or really fast cable, everything else tends to have similar primetime behavior.
During Wildblue days, getting a web page to load was time-consuming during primetime. Video streaming, for get it. Wildblue investors stuffed those beams.
My pattern today is to mostly do web surfing during primetime, then later, do vid watching/downloading. Still on Exede-5 plan, with 10 Gig bucket, and LNFZ.
So no?
No, unless you're really interested in statistics only gathered through September 2015. The year of the report only covers information obtained through September of the prior year as I read it. The Executive Summary has some interest I suppose from an historical perspective I suppose.
It'll be 2019 before a report covers how we're doing this year and we'll all probably know firsthand on our own by then - your tax dollars at work buit I'm more interested in shrimp ruunning on treadmills ;)
It'll be 2019 before a report covers how we're doing this year and we'll all probably know firsthand on our own by then - your tax dollars at work buit I'm more interested in shrimp ruunning on treadmills ;)
(Edited)
Viasatcon 2018 - What we bragged about in the past is not relevant today. Ignore the higher quality of service we had but smile about our lower quality of service but higher data plans.
RE: Viasatcon 2018
Rush hour traffic does suck, especially in cities like St. Louis, Dallas, LA, etc.
Yeah, here's an example: Righteous Brothers Edition
One's perspective is narrowly focused upon an ISP's primetime performance, and is without an awareness of previous sat history, for consumers. As indicated, when Viasat bought Wildblue, in 2009. Wildblue's execs had "slugged" a number of beams with too many customers (where higher population densities existed). Viasat terminated new sales in those beams, for many months. Even in my Exede-5 beam today,
and, it has been this way since commercial aircraft came onboard, several years ago.
Flashback
2007-Nov-30 - If you look in the DSL and cable forums, you will find plenty of people on oversold networks getting a fraction of advertised speeds during peak hours. The CR's say the same thing to them, it's their computer.
2008-Feb-24 - Hughes, Wildblue,Starband, Skywayusa ALL SUCK
This last cite, was very true for those in populated beams...Suck means an user waited/waited for a web page to load during primetime...Real Suck...but during non prime hours, speeds were better, and much better, after midnight.
Currently, Viasat is attempting in the near future "to provide that cable-like experience," but until big commercial/government accounts and aircraft are off-loaded to VS-2, performance will not change much on VS-1. There will be primetime dips, but at other times, in most all beams, performance will be good.
One point to bear in mind, streaming went "viral" and was disruptive to all ISPs.
August 23, 2012 - Video streaming problems: Who's to blame, ISP or computer?
With land based ISPs, they can upgrade their infrastructure, with satellite ISPs, a new satellite would have to be lauched. VS-1 was operational in 2012, when streaming was gaining momentum. February 14, 2005 is when Youtube was started, and VS-1 was in design stages several years later. As article above indicates in 2012, streaming was sucking to land based users.
Turn off streaming, and VS-1 would have plenty of bandwidth. Hence, streaming went ballistic, and Viasat is attempting to address this issue with vid bit rates plans.
Footnote - I went to Google's Video Quality Report, and noticed this
Could there be a reason why Google says this? Streaming is "off the charts," and all satellite ISPs have a fixed bandwidth per each satellite.
Rush hour traffic does suck, especially in cities like St. Louis, Dallas, LA, etc.
Yeah, here's an example: Righteous Brothers Edition
One's perspective is narrowly focused upon an ISP's primetime performance, and is without an awareness of previous sat history, for consumers. As indicated, when Viasat bought Wildblue, in 2009. Wildblue's execs had "slugged" a number of beams with too many customers (where higher population densities existed). Viasat terminated new sales in those beams, for many months. Even in my Exede-5 beam today,
and, it has been this way since commercial aircraft came onboard, several years ago.
Flashback
2007-Nov-30 - If you look in the DSL and cable forums, you will find plenty of people on oversold networks getting a fraction of advertised speeds during peak hours. The CR's say the same thing to them, it's their computer.
2008-Feb-24 - Hughes, Wildblue,Starband, Skywayusa ALL SUCK
This last cite, was very true for those in populated beams...Suck means an user waited/waited for a web page to load during primetime...Real Suck...but during non prime hours, speeds were better, and much better, after midnight.
Currently, Viasat is attempting in the near future "to provide that cable-like experience," but until big commercial/government accounts and aircraft are off-loaded to VS-2, performance will not change much on VS-1. There will be primetime dips, but at other times, in most all beams, performance will be good.
One point to bear in mind, streaming went "viral" and was disruptive to all ISPs.
August 23, 2012 - Video streaming problems: Who's to blame, ISP or computer?
With land based ISPs, they can upgrade their infrastructure, with satellite ISPs, a new satellite would have to be lauched. VS-1 was operational in 2012, when streaming was gaining momentum. February 14, 2005 is when Youtube was started, and VS-1 was in design stages several years later. As article above indicates in 2012, streaming was sucking to land based users.
Turn off streaming, and VS-1 would have plenty of bandwidth. Hence, streaming went ballistic, and Viasat is attempting to address this issue with vid bit rates plans.
Footnote - I went to Google's Video Quality Report, and noticed this
Could there be a reason why Google says this? Streaming is "off the charts," and all satellite ISPs have a fixed bandwidth per each satellite.
You are comparing Viasat with residential IP's. I am comparing Viasat with, strangely enough, viasat. Degraded QoS in comparison to prior years in 2018. Your argument is that in 2012, in the early days of a disruptive technology, unprepared land based ISPs were providing poor service. In comparison in 2012 viasat's product paled in comparison to these land based isp's. It still does actually. However it had a high and consistent QoS in 2012. And just in case you want to mention it again, Viasat is better than dial up. Direcway's one way satellite was also better than dial up (though it used dial up for uplink) to offer another hollow argument that has nothing to do with the price of tea in China. I get it, you are happy with your 10gb plan, that you don't care that all of the hype about viasat 2 fell to nothing so far, and that the long term degradation of viasat doesn't bother you. -golf clap-
RE: " in 2012 viasat's product paled in comparison to these land based isp's."
Support your assertion...VS-1 came "online" then. I cited this: August 23, 2012 - Video streaming problems: Who's to blame, ISP or computer?
Now This: Jan 21, 2013 An obscenely slow Internet connection when you're paying for a fast one - Interronator is paying Time Warner for 20mbps Internet service, but is only getting about .7 (note the decimal point).
I believe your beef is about primetime...well in the rush hour, we have the
Righteous Brothers Edition
and the
Extreme road rage caught on camera
Major complaints I am aware of is related to streaming, not web browsing...during primetime hours. Last I knew in most all beams, Viasat performs well in non-primetime hours. Streaming is the issue, in primetime hours.
Support your assertion...VS-1 came "online" then. I cited this: August 23, 2012 - Video streaming problems: Who's to blame, ISP or computer?
Now This: Jan 21, 2013 An obscenely slow Internet connection when you're paying for a fast one - Interronator is paying Time Warner for 20mbps Internet service, but is only getting about .7 (note the decimal point).
I believe your beef is about primetime...well in the rush hour, we have the
Righteous Brothers Edition
and the
Extreme road rage caught on camera
Major complaints I am aware of is related to streaming, not web browsing...during primetime hours. Last I knew in most all beams, Viasat performs well in non-primetime hours. Streaming is the issue, in primetime hours.
Footnote Jan 21, 2013 Almost no one gets the Internet performance that their ISP advertises.
Related to streaming? Interesting, so there goes that whole bit about the loss of net neutrality not changing anything... I wasn't complaining about primetime. Though its ridiculous when 2mpbs constitutes upto 25mbps in primetime, it's also ridiculous that out of primetime 12 or less often constitutes upto 25mbps on a wired connection. While, as your wisdom would provide, this is faster than dialup or sending smoke symbols, it is slower than the 12 mbps I got all day long on my liberty plan, my evolution plan, and all the prior plans I've had since 2012. Now it's fast than sending messages with a chalk board but it has a lesser QoS than it had when Viasat used to take pride in what it offered to customers. But you assume it's about primetime so insert reference about road rage. There's all the hype amounting to bunk. There's the overall degradation of their custom service since 2012. Yes, it's true, they will never make me a speaker at Viasatcon 2018.
RE: "...loss of net neutrality..."
Read legal terms of service...FCC allowed:.
FCC Open Internet Order 2010 - The Open Internet Order "creates two classes of internet access, one for fixed-line providers and the other for the wireless Net."[1] These regulations adopt an aggressive net neutrality stance towards fixed line broadband providers but a more lenient approach towards wireless providers.
RE: "ridiculous when 2mpbs"
Read Viasat's legal....I most likely have a 2005 copy, but the fine print has indicated primetime slowdowns will exist.
It's not "ridiculous," as stated before, Viasat is attempting to bring a better service. As since Wildblue days, it has slowly gotten better. Streaming is what has created bottlenecks...it has gone ballistic...DirecTV/DISH/Youtube/Vimeo/, and many more options.
RE: road rage
Like I said, I do web browsing, email, during primetime mostly. Vids mostly during LNFZ, or in non-primetime. Expectations and reality are not always in sync, and those expecting upto speeds during primetime are Internet illiterate.
As noted before (above)
"However, during prime time (about 7PM to 11PM) I see very much lower speeds. Sometimes less than 100Mbps and very often less than 150Mbps, never goes up to 200Mbps."
25% to 50% speed reduction on a fast cable 200Mbps plan during primetime
Read legal terms of service...FCC allowed:.
FCC Open Internet Order 2010 - The Open Internet Order "creates two classes of internet access, one for fixed-line providers and the other for the wireless Net."[1] These regulations adopt an aggressive net neutrality stance towards fixed line broadband providers but a more lenient approach towards wireless providers.
RE: "ridiculous when 2mpbs"
Read Viasat's legal....I most likely have a 2005 copy, but the fine print has indicated primetime slowdowns will exist.
It's not "ridiculous," as stated before, Viasat is attempting to bring a better service. As since Wildblue days, it has slowly gotten better. Streaming is what has created bottlenecks...it has gone ballistic...DirecTV/DISH/Youtube/Vimeo/, and many more options.
RE: road rage
Like I said, I do web browsing, email, during primetime mostly. Vids mostly during LNFZ, or in non-primetime. Expectations and reality are not always in sync, and those expecting upto speeds during primetime are Internet illiterate.
As noted before (above)
"However, during prime time (about 7PM to 11PM) I see very much lower speeds. Sometimes less than 100Mbps and very often less than 150Mbps, never goes up to 200Mbps."
25% to 50% speed reduction on a fast cable 200Mbps plan during primetime
(Edited)
Something about wildblue and things got better: I think that was covered under dial up being faster than smoke signals. Yes Viasat 1 is faster than the much older wildblue satellite. It is also faster than the other gen 3 satellites. Viasat is attempting to bring better quality? Interesting and in their efforts they have made things a worse quality in every single avenue of their business. I'm sorry but honestly I have to ignore the other apologetics with a TLDR since they really don't attempt to address anything I've said in any honest manner. Good day.
