Hughes.net?

Comments

• TheRagingGeek@lemmy.world ⁨4⁩ ⁨weeks⁩ ago

  As someone who had to support resold Hughes net networking I can tell you that satellite internet is great at downloading large bulks of information, otherwise you run into a problem of physics, adding 88,000 miles of round trip to your internet connectivity(1 hop to space then back to Hughes network gateway on earth, then back to space and then to you) are going to be super latency, gaming is not recommended nor is streaming, it can also be hella spotty as any weather events at your location or at hughes(which I think is in North Carolina?) will impede the line of sight needed between the dishes. I’ve never heard a good experience with satellite.

  source

  • IWW4@lemmy.zip ⁨4⁩ ⁨weeks⁩ ago

    I live on the Chesapeake Bay,thanks for the info. I am glad I asked folks the responses are universally negative.

    source
• toiletobserver@lemmy.world ⁨4⁩ ⁨weeks⁩ ago

  My friend had it, it was super slow it didn’t work at all.

  source

  • IWW4@lemmy.zip ⁨4⁩ ⁨weeks⁩ ago

    Thanks man, that seems to be the universal response.

    source
• Max_P@lemmy.max-p.me ⁨4⁩ ⁨weeks⁩ ago

  It’s one of those use cases where I would very reluctantly take the L and order Starlink.

  Classic satellite Internet is borderline unusable. Forget about any sort of call or video chat, you’ll be seconds behind on watching streams. If you want to stream yourself, it won’t be great and the stream delay will be horrible.

  You can do bulk download, like downloading large games, that’s about the only thing that works well.

  Also last I heard, the data caps and bandwidth were also really crap.

  source

  • IWW4@lemmy.zip ⁨4⁩ ⁨weeks⁩ ago

    Ok bud, yeah I really don’t want feed the nazi, I have Verizon, but I live on an island and wires are vulnerable. This isn’t critical but I would like to reduce the cable

    source

    • Max_P@lemmy.max-p.me ⁨4⁩ ⁨weeks⁩ ago

      Hughes will work okay as a backup internet if that’s what you’re after. Typically when people talk about Hughes they’re really desperate and satellite is the only option at all.

      I would very much rather not feed the nazi either, but that was my only Internet option I’d probably have to consider it. Although I also probably wouldn’t consider moving somewhere without decent connectivity, given I’m a sysadmin and really need the bandwidth.

      source

      • -> View More Comments
    • BombOmOm@lemmy.world ⁨4⁩ ⁨weeks⁩ ago

      If you are within visual sight of the mainland, you can use a pair of point-to-point communication dishes to get internet from the mainland and beam it to yourself. These dishes, only having to communicate over a few miles and with direct line-of-sight, are pretty reliable.

      source
• Zorsith@lemmy.blahaj.zone ⁨4⁩ ⁨weeks⁩ ago

  They are well known for being just about the worst ISP imaginable.

  source

  • IWW4@lemmy.zip ⁨4⁩ ⁨weeks⁩ ago

    Oh shit!!

    Thanks for the heads up

    source
• jordanlund@lemmy.world ⁨4⁩ ⁨weeks⁩ ago

  Hughes.net is slow and has an absurdly low data cap. I wouldn’t personally use it.

  There’s Starlink… but, you know, “Elon”.

  Other than that you have Viasat. About the same price as Starlink.

  www.viasat.com

  Unlimited data but “Download speeds are up to up to 25- 50 Mbps, 25-100 Mbps or 25-150 Mbps based on location.”

  source

  • IWW4@lemmy.zip ⁨4⁩ ⁨weeks⁩ ago

    Yeah I scoped out viasat, but Hughes was cheaper. Are you pleased with viasat?

    source

    • jordanlund@lemmy.world ⁨4⁩ ⁨weeks⁩ ago

      I don’t use any satellite personally, I have fiber, but I had to evaluate them for other reasons.

      Viasat seems the most… viable. ;) But the speeds… oh… the speeds.

      At least they don’t have the data caps.

      source

      • -> View More Comments
• terminhell@lemmy.dbzer0.com ⁨4⁩ ⁨weeks⁩ ago

  Former hughes repair guy here. If it’s your only choice, sure. But it’s utter trash. It’s susceptible to so many environmental conditions. Certain geographical areas can experience various service levels too. Data caps will sneak up on you faster than you realize too. Not to mention the pole or tripod mount that has to be installed, yard dug up and holes drilled into the house. Seen plenty of tripod mounts be ripped off a roof, damaging the roof in the process.

  Anyways…avoid any satellite isp if possible.

  source

  • IWW4@lemmy.zip ⁨4⁩ ⁨weeks⁩ ago

    I will follow your advice, and not get it. thanks man.

    source
• Kolanaki@pawb.social ⁨4⁩ ⁨weeks⁩ ago

  I used to work for a WISP and the number one thing I heard from most of our customers was how shitty Hughsnet is. I have never heard a good thing about them. The only reason anyone ever had them was because they didn’t know about terrestrial based WISPs.

  source

  • IWW4@lemmy.zip ⁨4⁩ ⁨weeks⁩ ago

    Thanks man!

    I am researching WISPs now

    source
• Ydna@lemmy.world ⁨4⁩ ⁨weeks⁩ ago

  My father had it when he was trying to consolidate his utilities. It was nearly unusable even for watching a 720p youtube video. Whenever I visited his house, I elected to work offline rather than pull my hair out

  source

  • IWW4@lemmy.zip ⁨4⁩ ⁨weeks⁩ ago

    Oh wow! Thanks fir the response

    source
• iamericandre@lemmy.world ⁨4⁩ ⁨weeks⁩ ago

  They have it out here in the more rural parts of North Carolina and it’s pretty bad.

  source

  • IWW4@lemmy.zip ⁨4⁩ ⁨weeks⁩ ago

    Ahh ok

    source
• BombOmOm@lemmy.world ⁨4⁩ ⁨weeks⁩ ago

  Any sat internet that does not use low earth satellites is a giant pain. Pings measured in seconds, very low bandwidth, and very low data caps.

  Pick basically anything else if you have the option.

  source

  • IWW4@lemmy.zip ⁨4⁩ ⁨weeks⁩ ago

    Ok will do

    source