 |
 |
MobileInternetSatellite.comThese forums are for the customers of MobileInternetSatellite.com, RVNetworking.com, and anyone interested in the topics of two-way satellite, networking, or computers. |
|
  |
Page 1 of 1
|
[ 6 posts ] |
|
| Author |
Message |
|
Chickenman
|
Post subject: Starband v Hughes  Posted: Fri Mar 27, 2009 2:10 pm |
|
Joined: Sun Mar 18, 2007 12:21 am
Posts: 9
Location: Chicken, Alaska
|
Okay guys... How about some straight insight here. I've had Starband for forever and basically happy with it. Still using the 481 modem. I am an installer and have done many Starband installs for folks in the bush at remote locations. Seems a whole lot of these folks are thinking the grass will be greener over on the Hughes side. They have been talking to a Hughes seller  . So... what is the scoop ? How is Hughes working? I am most particular interested in how it works in Alaska. Does VOIP stuff work ? If so better than Starband ?. I;d love some input here folks. Thanks, Dick
|
|
  |
|
|
|
bjnolley
|
Post subject: Re: Starband v Hughes Posted: Sat Mar 28, 2009 12:51 pm |
|
Joined: Tue Mar 16, 2004 4:17 pm
Posts: 957
Location: Foothills of Yuma, AZ
|
|
Joe and I used to have both StarBand and HughesNet, because we sold and installed both, for mobile users.
We cancelled our HughesNet about a year ago, because it just didn't work as well.
If you monitor the different online groups for mobile satellite users, you'll see a LOT more complaints about HughesNet. However, in fairness, there are a lot more HughesNet users out there.
A big advantage of StarBand is the fact that tech support is based in Marietta, GA vs HughesNet's level 1 support, which is in Pakistan.
Another plus for mobile users with StarBand is that they can easily get installer certification, whereas with HughesNet, the policy for tripod users is "Don't ask, don't tell". HughesNet does not recognize tripod-based mobile users.
There are some HughesNet users who are quite satisfied with their service, but for us, it was definitely not nearly as good as StarBand.
I can't speak to the new HughesNet Ka-band services, but time will tell!
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Chickenman
|
Post subject: Re: Starband v Hughes Posted: Sat Mar 28, 2009 1:54 pm |
|
Joined: Sun Mar 18, 2007 12:21 am
Posts: 9
Location: Chicken, Alaska
|
|
Barb,
Tnx for the input. I am really speaking more towards the stationary users. I'm just afraid these folks are thinking Hughes will solve all the problems. In reality I try and tell them that the issues with Starband are going to be basically the same with Hughes.
If there are any Hughes users in Alaska out there I love love to hear your thoughts!
Best, Dick
|
|
| |
|
|
|
bjnolley
|
Post subject: Re: Starband v Hughes Posted: Sun Mar 29, 2009 3:16 pm |
|
Joined: Tue Mar 16, 2004 4:17 pm
Posts: 957
Location: Foothills of Yuma, AZ
|
|
Actually, the two major points apply equally well to fixed installs:
- Better performance ... works better in general ... fewer complaints
- Superior tech support ... US-based
The only one that doesn't apply is the ability to get installer certified.
When Wild Blue first came out, everyone raved about how great it worked. But, in only a few months, the loading factor created the same situation as with HughesNet and the Wild Blue complaints started.
If the grass is greener, it is on the StarBand side of the fence.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Chickenman
|
Post subject: Re: Starband v Hughes Posted: Mon Mar 30, 2009 2:25 am |
|
Joined: Sun Mar 18, 2007 12:21 am
Posts: 9
Location: Chicken, Alaska
|
|
I would have to agree with you Barb. I think Starband is the better provider.
Also, I have been hearing something about Hughes going to the KA band ? What is up with that. Would not be good news for Alaska customers.
Best, Dick
|
|
| |
|
|
|
bjnolley
|
Post subject: Re: Starband v Hughes Posted: Mon Mar 30, 2009 12:48 pm |
|
Joined: Tue Mar 16, 2004 4:17 pm
Posts: 957
Location: Foothills of Yuma, AZ
|
|
HughesNet has launched their own satellite, which will provide only Ka-band services.
Needless to say, they are consolidating existing Ku-band customers on fewer and fewer satellites, since each transponder is leased and fewer transponder means less expense for HughesNet.
They will maintain some Ku-band transponders primarily for line-of-site issues with their satellite.
As for Alaska, I guess it would depend on whether any of the spot beams are pointed in that direction??
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
Page 1 of 1
|
[ 6 posts ] |
|
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest |
| |
|
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum
|
|
|
