1979Damian
Dialled in
Joined 10 years ago
User Profile
User Widgets
Contributions
Re: UDP issues on SuperHub3 - collective thread
Unfortunately when I upgraded to 1gbps around 18 months ago, VM forced customers making that upgrade to take a SH4 (due to some issue at the time with the SH5 and VMs mesh solution). Ironically, even if you didn't have a mesh network, VM insisted on saddling the customer with another so-called 'SuperHub' that once again contains the flaws Intel Puma SOC that craps itself when decent volumes of UDP traffic are sent its way. Not sure I can face dealing with VMs telephone operatives, just to try and get a SH5 TBH.610Views0likes0CommentsRe: UDP issues on SuperHub3 - collective thread
You mean, apart from whenever a user wants to use certain types of application that are UDP traffic heavy and the SH3 takes a dump... The issues relating to this are nothing to do with DOCSIS and the inherent weakness/defect regarding the Intel Puma chipset are well known and documented to anyone with an interest in this kind of thing. (a quick search online will find plenty of articles relating to this issue, which is NOT a VM specific issue). It's a similar principle to if Qualcomm's latest flagship mobile SOC (system on a chip) was massively more power hungry than expected and as a result had to be seriously throttled to prevent overheating of the phone/tablet etc. If Samsung, LG and Sony were using the chip, you wouldn't say that the root cause was a Samsung issue, you'd say it's a Qualcomm issue.2.1KViews0likes0CommentsRe: UDP issues on SuperHub3 - collective thread
@Rod-IT - I couldn't have said it better myself. Using @jpeg1's earlier argument, if I was watching a Youtube video for something work related (maybe it's a training video) then I should have no expectation that it should work and should move myself over to a business connection! 🤣 (Nothing like trying to obscure the actual point someone is trying to make by being obtuse) I only mentioned home working as an example to illustrate what I thought was a perfectly reasonable AND innocuous usage type for a premium "home" broadband connection. But in hindsight I should have just used the Youtube example as it perfectly illustrates the point that we're trying to make and makes a mockery of the justification/argument plus forward by @jpeg1.1.9KViews1like3CommentsRe: UDP issues on SuperHub3 - collective thread
jpeg1 wrote: 1979Damian wrote: @jpeg1 I'd hardly call making a few calls via Slack/MS Teams as being "business use", ... If you are being paid to use the Internet at home, that's business use. You are earning your income from your broadband connection. Virgin Media is a residential service, with equipment provided for that purpose. If it does not work for that purpose, you can complain, as many do. Virgin do not say it will be suitable for work. If you rely on it to earn your living, then you take the risk that it may not be suitable. There is a suitable service and equipment available, and if you or your employer are not prepared to pay for it that is your choice. @jpeg1 okay so if we're going to play semantics. Lets say that a VM broadband customer who only uses their home internet connection for personal use e.g. web browsing, email, Netflix etc but has family/friends they cannot physically visit (either due to Covid or geographical issues) decides they want to keep in contact via video. And the software solution chosen leans heavily on UDP (which many video call applications do) this then causes the SH3/SH4 to crap it's pants, what does the customer do to resolve the issue? (besides leave VM or have to resort to using their mobile phone) Outside of my obvious sarcasm, the point I'm trying to make is that there are legitimate tasks i.e. non-work related that a residential VM customer might want/need to carry out and currently there's no guarantee that the customer can do something as simple as make a group video call (many groups of friends or families are now doing this to keep in touch) so hiding behind the argument of "if you're using your home internet connection for something work related then you'll need to take out of a business account" is avoiding the root of the issue. Ultimately VM knows that there are underlying functional defects within the hardware they supply to their customers that under certain conditions causes a catastrophic drop off in connection performance (worst case scenario is the modem become unresponsive), they also refuse to allow customers to use their own modem to work around THEIR problem. At least if the tech savvy amongst us had the option of using our own hardware to resolve the issue it wouldn't be quite as annoying, but VM seems to wants to have its cake and eat it, on the basis that: No, YOU cannot use you're own modem to resolve an issue that we won't try to fix No, WE won't bother trying to fix the issue, in fact as a customer you'll struggle to get us to acknowledge that there actually IS an issue I guess the take away from this would be as far as VM are concerned, if you're affected by this issue then either put up with it or move to a different ISP. (To be clear, I don't personally suffer with the issue on a regular basis due to how I use my home broadband. But I do get annoyed when large companies use their size to screw (other) people over i.e. deny all knowledge (formally) of an issue, it's the equivalent of a 2 year old sticking their fingers in their ears when being told off and going "Lalalalalalalalala.....not listening")1.9KViews2likes0CommentsRe: UDP issues on SuperHub3 - collective thread
@jpeg1 I'd hardly call making a few calls via Slack/MS Teams as being "business use", not in the way most people would understand the term i.e. running a business from the property. For someone actually running a business from an address supplied by VM, then I fully agree that the customer should consider paying extra for a "business" tier product. Why the hell would anyone think that the appropriate solution to the issue is for someone who traditionally worked in an office, but due to Covid-19 is now working from home and as a result has ended up having to use their home broadband to carry out simple tasks like calling people to have to/or want to change to a "business" tier product. Frankly I find your post entirely disingenuous, given the current (global) circumstances I don't see how any rational person would consider the scenario I outlined above as "running a business" from home and thus requiring a "business" tier product to support REALLY basic tasks that people would otherwise take for granted as not being a problem. It would be like Vodafone telling a customer that because they are making several hours of video calls a day this can only be "supported" by changing to a "business" tier product which would necessitate new hardware. This DOES NOT and SHOULD NOT require a "Business" account, I (or anyone else in the above position) are perfectly entitled to expect "the fastest broadband in the UK....blah blah blah" to not be fundamentally handicapped when we need to carry out a task which actually is NOT very taxing/demanding. The "issue" is caused by a long known weakness in the Intel Puma chipsets used in the SH3 and SH4 routers, VM has know about this weakness for a LONG time but chooses to ignore it because they known it will cost them £££ to put right i.e. new routers with a different chipset and potential reputational damage.1.8KViews3likes13Comments