View Full Version : Superhub Can Someone Explain WHY the SuperHub is so...bad?
ethan103
13-06-2011, 22:47
Is there any explanation why the SuperHub is casuing all the problems like latency issues?
I mean the old Modem works great so how did VM manage to do so bad with the SH?
Doubt you will every really find out the full truth of the matter. Most VM staff here wont have been involved with the things 'birth' and even if they were I doubt you would get the full details anyway because its all confidential (and probably embarrassing :p )
A good guess is that they simply went with the cheapest thing that ticked a few of the marketing teams boxes. They certainly rushed it out unfinished.
ethan103
13-06-2011, 23:25
Doubt you will every really find out the full truth of the matter. Most VM staff here wont have been involved with the things 'birth' and even if they were I doubt you would get the full details anyway because its all confidential (and probably embarrassing :p )
A good guess is that they simply went with the cheapest thing that ticked a few of the marketing teams boxes. They certainly rushed it out unfinished.
LoL,
Idk, would it have been hard for VM to use the old modem anyway as I hear it does 200 Mb anyway so 100 Mb would be easy to handle...
Or perhaps have a modfied version of it within the Superhub...all it is i guess is wireless linked with the modem...
Fspiders
14-06-2011, 09:49
Well the modem part of the superhub works just fine.
After months of frustration I finally gave in on the wireless side of the hub and now use it as a modem for my Belkin wireless router. Not had a single drop out for weeks compared to the 4 or 5 times an hour using the hub.
Regards.
There are some issues with the superhub for some customers but not everyone is affected.
I for one have brilliant wireless speeds and connection from it and its worked great for over 7 months.
Some think its the type of kit on the UBR that causes problems for some connections. However that doesn't explain the wirless problems. Some people have gotten the wireless to be stable simply by changing some of the settings within the SH.
ethan103
14-06-2011, 16:52
There are some issues with the superhub for some customers but not everyone is affected.
I for one have brilliant wireless speeds and connection from it and its worked great for over 7 months.
Some think its the type of kit on the UBR that causes problems for some connections. However that doesn't explain the wirless problems. Some people have gotten the wireless to be stable simply by changing some of the settings within the SH.
Well my set up is wired as I have no need for wireless.
Is the SuperHub providing the same ping times in wired setups as the old VMNG300?
My pings are usually between 15-40ms wired and wireless.
Works fine for me :)
consistently get around 13 - 20 ms ping on speedtest.net; on online games i can get as low as 5 - 8 ms pings to servers; I've seen as low as 4 ms on half life 2 death match before :)
https://www.cableforum.co.uk/images/local/2011/06/67.png (http://www.speedtest.net)
Download Failed (1) (http://www.pingtest.net)
I was averaging 30ms with the superhub on my regular TF2 server. Went to the VMNG300 and now average 15ms.
Well I get this on my connection from 2 different servers.
https://www.cableforum.co.uk/images/local/2011/06/76.png (http://www.speedtest.net)
https://www.cableforum.co.uk/images/local/2011/06/77.png (http://www.speedtest.net)
ethan103
14-06-2011, 20:10
Well I get this on my connection from 2 different servers.
https://www.cableforum.co.uk/images/local/2011/06/76.png (http://www.speedtest.net)
https://www.cableforum.co.uk/images/local/2011/06/77.png (http://www.speedtest.net)
Hmm, with your SuperHub, you get almost double the latency on the Manchester Server and almost 1/3 more on the Birmingham one than me :confused:
https://www.cableforum.co.uk/images/local/2011/06/78.png
https://www.cableforum.co.uk/images/local/2011/06/79.png
Were they better with the VMNG300???
markie1966
14-06-2011, 21:03
Works fine for me :)
consistently get around 13 - 20 ms ping on speedtest.net; on online games i can get as low as 5 - 8 ms pings to servers; I've seen as low as 4 ms on half life 2 death match before :)
https://www.cableforum.co.uk/images/local/2011/06/67.png (http://www.speedtest.net)
Download Failed (1) (http://www.pingtest.net)
u jammy **** (joking)
everytime i play games these days i get told to clear off cos of the packets loss
really wish i hadnt upgraded to the superhub
i was getting better ping with no packet loss when i was on 10mb
u jammy **** (joking)
everytime i play games these days i get told to clear off cos of the packets loss
really wish i hadnt upgraded to the superhub
i was getting better ping with no packet loss when i was on 10mb
Have you tried phoning virgin to report lag in your area? (no idea what difference that will make)
A good guess is that they simply went with the cheapest thing that ticked a few of the marketing teams boxes.:tu: Yes, it would all be about money and marketing, not about customer service.
Other guesses: they couldn't agree a cheap-enough or short-enough new contract with the modem-only supplier; and they wanted a device they could call a hub, to compete with BT's advertising.They certainly rushed it out unfinished.... and still got people to pay for it ...
markie1966
14-06-2011, 21:46
yep iv tried a few times
posted on the forums....engineers have visited....shown them screenshots of winmtr and tbb showing packetsloss and been fobbed off with the usual high utilisation...or another excuse
got to the point where i couldnt be arsed playing games cos its useless
:tu: Yes, it would all be about money and marketing, not about customer service.
Other guesses: they couldn't agree a cheap-enough or short-enough new contract with the modem-only supplier; and they wanted a device they could call a hub, to compete with BT's advertising.... and still got people to pay for it ...
Total nonsense.
The superhub was brought out to make things simpler for customers to set up their broadband and create a network in the home, rather than farting around with a separate modem and router.
For the majority of customers it's done exactly that. BT homehubs aren't exactly perfect themselves. I mean they are now on the third model of it.
markie1966
14-06-2011, 22:02
Total nonsense.
The superhub was brought out to make things simpler for customers to set up their broadband and create a network in the home, rather than farting around with a separate modem and router.
For the majority of customers it's done exactly that. BT homehubs aren't exactly perfect themselves. I mean they are now on the third model of it.
total nonsense??
hes right about the customer service...its degraded badly over the last year
as for making it simpler....try saying that to all the gamers that have posted venting their anger at the superhub dropping connections or lagging
and bt on their 3rd hub....fair enough if they are....but at least they are improving their hub everytime....how many versions of the superhub will there be before vm get it right???
Hmm, with your SuperHub, you get almost double the latency on the Manchester Server and almost 1/3 more on the Birmingham one than me :confused:
Were they better with the VMNG300???
I had an Ambit 256 before the Superhub and I get better speed and ping with the Superhub.
He wasn't saying customer service has gone down hill.
It's not about the gamers. It's about the majority of the vm customer base, who would find the superhub simpler to use. The gamers is why there is a modem only mode being introduced.
VM have got the superhub right in some respects and as I say it's been working perfectly fine for me in every way.
Total nonsense.
The superhub was brought out to make things simpler for customers to set up their broadband and create a network in the home, rather than farting around with a separate modem and router.Really? I've got broadband and an adequate network in my home with separate devices - it isn't broken, so what made VM decide I want them to fix it for me?
For the majority of customers it's done exactly that.And for many posting on here, it hasn't. Are they all just wrong?
Why did VM pick such an apparently limited and unreliable device? (answer IMO: it was cheap.) Why did no-one in VM think that some high-spending customers might have also spent a lot of money on their home network, and only require VM to supply a modem? (answer IMO: they did, but modem resupply was too pricey.) Why did they rush it out before it was ready - fact: multiple firmware updates in 6 months = it was not ready - (answer IMO: faulty supply decisions mean it's all they have.)
BT homehubs aren't exactly perfect themselves. I mean they are now on the third model of it.I didn't say they were perfect, I just said VM wanted something to advertise against them.
---------- Post added at 22:33 ---------- Previous post was at 22:29 ----------
The gamers is why there is a modem only mode being introduced.It should have been there on day 1, not still waiting 6 months later.
VM have got the superhub right in some respects and as I say it's been working perfectly fine for me in every way.But only in some respects, and you can't just dismiss the complaints, or say it'll be ok eventually. To those having problems with it, the fact that it works perfectly for you is totally irrelevant - they want their's to work as well.
They didn't but for new customers it's easier. As I already said modem mode will be available for customers that want to use their own routers and currently there is a work around to use your own router.
It was only cheaper in the sense they aren't paying two suppliers, one for the modems and another for the routers.
It was not rushed out at all. I know for a fact it was tested for months before the launch. During that testing everything went perfectly. That's why it launched. Howev once it was with a wider audience there were a few bugs that were missed in testing. Not every eventuality can possibly be covered in testing.
Reason for the multiple updates was that once a bug got found VM attempted to resolve it ASAP rather than Waiting to fix a few at the same time.
The vast majority of Superhub users have no issues and the are well over 300,000 in circulation and this is growing by the day.
The vast majority of Superhub users have no issues and the are well over 300,000 in circulation and this is growing by the day.Are all the people who say they are having problems just wrong? Should they all just go away? Are VM going to cancel their contract if VM cannot make VM's service and VM's equipment work adequately? And re-imburse what VM have already charged?
Are all the people who say they are having problems just wrong? Should they all just go away? Are VM going to cancel their contract if VM cannot make VM's service and VM's equipment work adequately? And re-imburse what VM have already charged?
It is a small percentage of customers with issues and modem mode will help remedy that issue plus the is a second supplier coming online in a few months with another version of the Superhub which will look identical and perform in the same way as the existing model by which time modem mode will be on both devices.
The second Superhub is to ensure a constant supply of equipment as both companies will continue to supply the Superhub.
They didn't but for new customers it's easier. As I already said modem mode will be available for customers that want to use their own routers and currently there is a work around to use your own router.No one defending 'super'hub seems to answer the question - why was modem mode not available on day 1?It was not rushed out at all. I know for a fact it was tested for months before the launch. During that testing everything went perfectly. That's why it launched. Howev once it was with a wider audience there were a few bugs that were missed in testing. Not every eventuality can possibly be covered in testing.Then the testing should have been carried out with a wider audience. And the roll-out should have been stopped when the bugs were discovered.
---------- Post added at 22:57 ---------- Previous post was at 22:55 ----------
It is a small percentage of customers with issues So what? I'll resort to repeating part of my own post: Are all the people who say they are having problems just wrong? Should they all just go away? These are customers having problems now. Are VM just ignoring them?
markie1966
14-06-2011, 23:22
it was tested for months??
not try gaming for a few minutes when on a break from looking at websites?? just on the off chance that some people on vm actually use it for gaming??
i mean all the adverts in mags and papers telling the gaming community that theres "fewer lags so ur gaming experience is better on vm"....didnt they even TRY gaming as a test??
ffs stop defending a product that DOESNT provide the end user what vm claim it provides
im not talking about the speeds here...for me they are fantastic
but try gaming using a pc, xbox, ps3 and see how many disconnects you get...or how badly u lag....which RUINS gameplay
just fix the damn thing so it does what vm claim it does
btw are u really saying that this new modem mode will eliminate lag for gamers?? can i have that in writing????
jonop360
14-06-2011, 23:39
had a new swuperhub put in on sat morning because the old on rebooted everyday then died for around 16 hours,
the difference is like night and day
were i was getting 2.000 banwidth
on blackops before im now getting full 10.000
were able to run 2 xboxes at the same time now with no lag at all
this new one so far is fantastic perhaps like me you just got a dodgy one try getting it swapped
I game wirelessly on the superhub with my PS3 and 360 and have a great connection. Lag is fine and so are the speeds. It's never dropped out on me while gaming either.
So for me it's perfect, no issues at all.
markie1966
14-06-2011, 23:47
I game wirelessly on the superhub with my PS3 and 360 and have a great connection. Lag is fine and so are the speeds. It's never dropped out on me while gaming either.
So for me it's perfect, no issues at all.
swap yours for mine then?? :)
Fspiders
14-06-2011, 23:57
Never mind gaming!
In wireless mode my hub drops several times an hour even with no computers connected wired or wireless. So it's nothing to do with my set up or my wireless devices or my network.
Just the plain simple fact of enabling wireless causes my hub to stop working correctly within an hour.
As it's my second hub I doubt changing it will help. All was fine until they upgraded to the r26.
Not everyone is using wireless so that will drop the amount of complaints and even I've not bothered complaining any more. Just waiting for the modem update part now.
kwikbreaks
15-06-2011, 09:34
I'd guess that the majority use wireless. I'd also guess that the majority are pretty clueless but have found a reboot gets it going again for a while and think that is normal and acceptable behaviour. Certainly rebooting is less aggro than calling offshore support who will almost certainly get you to reboot then claim a fix when it works .
I've just had mine replaced. The first one had WiFi issues (mostly an inability to connect fixed by rebooting). As I don't use wireless much this only usually shows up when I get visitors who try to connect and I have to reboot the hub so they can. I'll see how the new one goes but range wise it is dire just like the one it replaced.
My recommendation is if you have a Superhub and it doesn't work properly complain on the VM community board and try for a replacement. If they have to replace all the duff ones (multiple times if necessary) perhaps they'll put more effort into getting it right. That said if this one fails I'll probably try the CEO office for a modem.
it was tested for months??
not try gaming for a few minutes when on a break from looking at websites?? just on the off chance that some people on vm actually use it for gaming??
i mean all the adverts in mags and papers telling the gaming community that theres "fewer lags so ur gaming experience is better on vm"....didnt they even TRY gaming as a test??
ffs stop defending a product that DOESNT provide the end user what vm claim it provides
im not talking about the speeds here...for me they are fantastic
but try gaming using a pc, xbox, ps3 and see how many disconnects you get...or how badly u lag....which RUINS gameplay
just fix the damn thing so it does what vm claim it does
btw are u really saying that this new modem mode will eliminate lag for gamers?? can i have that in writing????
Gaming works fine for me :) Get an average of 5 - 20 ms latency on Half life 2 death match + team fortress 2 (only 2 games i've played so far but i had people commenting how low my latency was when the score board was shown at the end of each game; as i was getting arround 5- 20 and they were all abou 40 - 120 ms
qasdfdsaq
15-06-2011, 11:43
For the majority of customers it's done exactly that. BT homehubs aren't exactly perfect themselves. I mean they are now on the third model of it.
Course, VM went onto the second version of their 'Hub' after what, 3, maybe 4 months? And the Business service (Edit: and according to Masque the consumer service too) is rumoured to be using a new, third version, after what, less than a year?
BT's taken at least 4 years to go through 3 versions, which were released only to accomodate new hardware technologies that the old ones couldn't support.
I'm don't even dare touch on what VM's reasons are...
---------- Post added at 11:43 ---------- Previous post was at 11:40 ----------
It should have been there on day 1, not still waiting 6 months later.
Closer to 7 months now.
ethan103
15-06-2011, 12:40
Course, VM went onto the second version of their 'Hub' after what, 3, maybe 4 months? And the Business service (Edit: and according to Masque the consumer service too) is rumoured to be using a new, third version, after what, less than a year?
BT's taken at least 4 years to go through 3 versions, which were released only to accomodate new hardware technologies that the old ones couldn't support.
I'm don't even dare touch on what VM's reasons are...
---------- Post added at 11:43 ---------- Previous post was at 11:40 ----------
Closer to 7 months now.
Only Business customers? :td:
Chrysalis
15-06-2011, 12:51
Total nonsense.
The superhub was brought out to make things simpler for customers to set up their broadband and create a network in the home, rather than farting around with a separate modem and router.
For the majority of customers it's done exactly that. BT homehubs aren't exactly perfect themselves. I mean they are now on the third model of it.
this is contradicted by jb66's reports, with no disrespect to other staff, I would expect a field tech to be more in touch with customers than managers and even call centre staff.
Also the SH is the first VM device I have had to fiddle with a lot to get working and I wasnt even using the famous wireless interface on it.
Customers having to double nat, setup 2nd access point's, change wireless speeds etc. is simpler?
---------- Post added at 12:49 ---------- Previous post was at 12:44 ----------
The vast majority of Superhub users have no issues and the are well over 300,000 in circulation and this is growing by the day.
are we going to go over this again?
given there is many flaws in this statement.
1 - VM's call centres are not very good at marking down the right diagnosis for a given problem, hence jb66 been told superhub problems are noise issues O_o.
2 - a silent customer isnt necessarily a happy customer.
3 - this contradicts online forum support complaints.
4 - call centre staff who I have spoken to and it seems also others on this forum have spoken to have told customers they get flooded with superhub related calls.
my sister may be getting a superhub soon, I wont step in or give her any comments, I will wait for her to use it for a week or so and then ask her about her experience on it.
---------- Post added at 12:51 ---------- Previous post was at 12:49 ----------
I'd guess that the majority use wireless. I'd also guess that the majority are pretty clueless but have found a reboot gets it going again for a while and think that is normal and acceptable behaviour. Certainly rebooting is less aggro than calling offshore support who will almost certainly get you to reboot then claim a fix when it works .
I've just had mine replaced. The first one had WiFi issues (mostly an inability to connect fixed by rebooting). As I don't use wireless much this only usually shows up when I get visitors who try to connect and I have to reboot the hub so they can. I'll see how the new one goes but range wise it is dire just like the one it replaced.
My recommendation is if you have a Superhub and it doesn't work properly complain on the VM community board and try for a replacement. If they have to replace all the duff ones (multiple times if necessary) perhaps they'll put more effort into getting it right. That said if this one fails I'll probably try the CEO office for a modem.
this sounds plausible enough to me. Many people dont like ringing call centres and would find rebooting the SH say daily as adequate. Also many people may turn it off when not in use anyway so it may only be up for an hour or so at a time.
Sephiroth
15-06-2011, 13:25
Total nonsense.
The superhub was brought out to make things simpler for customers to set up their broadband and create a network in the home, rather than farting around with a separate modem and router.
For the majority of customers it's done exactly that. BT homehubs aren't exactly perfect themselves. I mean they are now on the third model of it.
If Stephen is explaining from his inside knowledge why the SH was brought out, then can he explain why those same people trying (and failing) to make it simpler for folks, didn't consider the substantial number who would want their own router rather than the slugged router functions in that wretched SH?
If Stephen is offering a personal impression, then it should be balanced out by criticising VM's failure to acknowledge that many thousands of users are sufficiently sophisticated to need/want more than the slugged functions of that wretched SH.
BT HomeHubs are neither here nor there in this debate.
zekeisaszekedoes
15-06-2011, 13:39
It was not rushed out at all. I know for a fact it was tested for months before the launch.
Not thoroughly enough it would seem, therefore it was rushed out.
During that testing everything went perfectly. That's why it launched.
Probably because it wasn't tested across all of the network, and put under any serious pressure. I mean, it'd have to be a case of that, seeing as it fails at a lot of very basic routing tasks which have been commonplace for DECADES.
Howev once it was with a wider audience there were a few bugs that were missed in testing. Not every eventuality can possibly be covered in testing.
Excuse me... a FEW bugs? There are loads. I found some within an hour of plugging it in. Also, missing mainstay features like proper Dynamic DNS and port forwarding being inconsistent. As I've said before, the routing side (part of the reason it was introduced) is severely underwhelming.
Reason for the multiple updates was that once a bug got found VM attempted to resolve it ASAP rather than Waiting to fix a few at the same time.
And apparently a lot of those rushed out firmware updates either don't fix the bugs for everyone or introduce new ones or make other existing ones worse. I think there's less than 100 people in the secret community forum beta pool, and going from what they've posted most of those aren't particularly technically adept (some of the cluelessness about having the alpha modem mode patch rolled out makes me wonder why they were chosen at all).
I don't see why you're doing so much damage control. Attempting to blanket these clear, measurable problems and hoping they'll go away is exactly the reason people get exasperated, here on CF and everywhere else.
Now if Masque would like to chime in about how his works perfectly connected to his Edimax, that everyone will eventually have the superhub like it or lump it, that VMNG300s are rare as hens teeth etc then this thread will be complete. :D
ccarmock
15-06-2011, 13:54
Only Business customers? :td:
I think the point is there is going to be a seperate device for the business customers, as the service VirginMedia Business will offer need features not available in the versiopn offered to residential customers.
When I was talking to VMB sales about this and whether it would be the same device the comment I got was oh yes the residential one - that's the Netgear and now the Cisco one and said no as far as I am aware the business.
Wonder if this does mean the 2nd option for residential customers is Cisco then.
Chrysalis
15-06-2011, 14:01
The superhub was tested pre launch, how do I know?
on alex browns blog a tester came on to say VM released when the testers were reporting bugs and saying not ready. So it was tested but was also rushed out as testers were ignored, that sounds familiar, ah yes like when the R25 firmware was rushed out after me and others reported the download/stream cutoff bug.
Not thoroughly enough it would seem, therefore it was rushed out.
Probably because it wasn't tested across all of the network, and put under any serious pressure. I mean, it'd have to be a case of that, seeing as it fails at a lot of very basic routing tasks which have been commonplace for DECADES.
Excuse me... a FEW bugs? There are loads. I found some within an hour of plugging it in. Also, missing mainstay features like proper Dynamic DNS and port forwarding being inconsistent. As I've said before, the routing side (part of the reason it was introduced) is severely underwhelming.
And apparently a lot of those rushed out firmware updates either don't fix the bugs for everyone or introduce new ones or make other existing ones worse. I think there's less than 100 people in the secret community forum beta pool, and going from what they've posted most of those aren't particularly technically adept (some of the cluelessness about having the alpha modem mode patch rolled out makes me wonder why they were chosen at all).
I don't see why you're doing so much damage control. Attempting to blanket these clear, measurable problems and hoping they'll go away is exactly the reason people get exasperated, here on CF and everywhere else.
Now if Masque would like to chime in about how his works perfectly connected to his Edimax, that everyone will eventually have the superhub like it or lump it, that VMNG300s are rare as hens teeth etc then this thread will be complete. :D
They don't need to be technically adept, as most of VMs customers probably aren't. The technically minded are more than likely a minority in this case.
Wonder if this does mean the 2nd option for residential customers is Cisco then.
No.
Sephiroth
15-06-2011, 19:16
They don't need to be technically adept, as most of VMs customers probably aren't. The technically minded are more than likely a minority in this case.
That's a very poor justification for your viewpoint. In any case, it turns out the this wretched SH demands technical adeptness in order to get round its warts.
But let's grant what you say, for a moment. Let's say that there is a silent majority using the SH for basic internet functions that suit the slugged features of this wretched device. Is that a good reason why the rest of the customer base should suffer for the lack of features and the bugs that have lurked for 7 months now? Those people have been screwed over and have strongly voiced their views on a number of forums. Minority or not, VM has screwed them over.
The silent content majority is no jusification for not providing a proper solution to vociferous, suffering minority.
---------- Post added at 19:16 ---------- Previous post was at 19:10 ----------
Wonder if this does mean the 2nd option for residential customers is Cisco then.
Try another continent.
markie1966
15-06-2011, 20:49
Gaming works fine for me :) Get an average of 5 - 20 ms latency on Half life 2 death match + team fortress 2 (only 2 games i've played so far but i had people commenting how low my latency was when the score board was shown at the end of each game; as i was getting arround 5- 20 and they were all abou 40 - 120 ms
well i dont....my packetloss is usually between 2 and 10 %..u try playing games with that sort of latency
---------- Post added at 20:49 ---------- Previous post was at 20:41 ----------
The vast majority of Superhub users have no issues and the are well over 300,000 in circulation and this is growing by the day.
vast majority indicates there is a lot of users with problems...you even quote "a small percentage" in your next post...all of which means you actually admit there IS something wrong
im very satisfied with the speed that i can download at....but not the latency when i try to game
im only asking 2 things...
1 why was this superhub released without testing EVERY outcome??
2 when will it be PROPERLY fixed so i can enjoy a game of cod or two???
yep iv tried a few times
posted on the forums....engineers have visited....shown them screenshots of winmtr and tbb showing packetsloss and been fobbed off with the usual high utilisation...or another excuse
got to the point where i couldnt be arsed playing games cos its useless
This is to the same IP address you did on your pingplotter graph; I had to use a different tool though as i am on OSX so i'm not sure how useful this is to you
https://www.cableforum.co.uk/images/local/2011/06/65.png
Now if Masque would like to chime in about how his works perfectly connected to his Edimax, that everyone will eventually have the superhub like it or lump it, that VMNG300s are rare as hens teeth etc then this thread will be complete. :DHe has already - #22.
He has already - #22.
See signature below;) :td:
Closer to 7 months now.OK. And in another thread on here, Masque tells us that in a few weeks or so we should have modem mode.
(my underlining) - well at least they're maybe going to do something about it, sometime, when it suits them. I guess their own target date of late May 2011 has been missed. In the meantime, you'll just have to put up with it.
Those who remember the old days of ntl: running the cable system in the UK will no doubt remember the phrase "COMING SOON!"
markie1966
15-06-2011, 22:45
This is to the same IP address you did on your pingplotter graph; I had to use a different tool though as i am on OSX so i'm not sure how useful this is to you
https://www.cableforum.co.uk/images/local/2011/06/65.png
i really really envy u lol
i can only dream of 0% packetloss :(
btw what settings have u disabled on the superhub to get those results?
markie1966
15-06-2011, 22:52
i really really envy u lol
i can only dream of 0% packetloss :(
btw what settings have u disabled on the superhub to get those results?
my latest to game server
qasdfdsaq
16-06-2011, 01:09
Those who remember the old days of ntl: running the cable system in the UK will no doubt remember the phrase "COMING SOON!"
Coming soon:
Giving customers back the choice of how they want to use their internet connection, something everyone else has been taking for granted for decades.
Sephiroth
16-06-2011, 08:40
On the question of user choice, since Stephen has mentioned the BT HomeHub, it is worth pointing out that not only can you use your own router, you can substitute your own VDSL2 modem for BT Infinity.
VM, on the other hand, have been so unwise as to force its users down a lame route. This is what angers me more than the lameness of that wretched SH itself.
i really really envy u lol
i can only dream of 0% packetloss :(
btw what settings have u disabled on the superhub to get those results?
Just the firewall + IP flood detection; everything else is default
https://www.cableforum.co.uk/images/local/2011/06/60.png
Heres another one from this morning.
---------- Post added at 11:13 ---------- Previous post was at 11:09 ----------
There is a windows version of the plotting software that I am using availible for download to;
http://www.visualroute.com/download.html
do a trace using that so we can compare easier :D
---------- Post added at 12:00 ---------- Previous post was at 11:13 ----------
4 Servers picked completely at random; just to show the average latencies i get using a superhub on the 50 mb package
https://www.cableforum.co.uk/images/local/2011/06/19.jpg
---------- Post added at 12:09 ---------- Previous post was at 12:00 ----------
https://www.cableforum.co.uk/images/local/2011/06/20.jpg
---------- Post added at 12:16 ---------- Previous post was at 12:09 ----------
https://www.cableforum.co.uk/images/local/2011/06/21.jpg
---------- Post added at 12:21 ---------- Previous post was at 12:16 ----------
https://www.cableforum.co.uk/images/local/2011/06/22.jpg
---------- Post added at 12:29 ---------- Previous post was at 12:21 ----------
https://www.cableforum.co.uk/images/local/2011/06/61.png (http://www.speedtest.net)
SuperHub, Firewall + IP Flood Detection disabled.
Virgin 100MB...
https://www.cableforum.co.uk/images/local/2011/06/58.png
Be* ~22MB LLU...
https://www.cableforum.co.uk/images/local/2011/06/58.png
ethan103
16-06-2011, 13:32
I just dont wanna give up my super low pings when switching to superhub ;-(
I just dont wanna give up my super low pings when switching to superhub ;-(
look up a bit to my post; post 52 :)
Can anyone posting screenshots please use attachments rather than large images. Thanks.
SuperHub, Firewall + IP Flood Detection disabled.
Virgin 100MB...
http://www.imranmohammed.com/cf/trace1a.png
Be* ~22MB LLU...
http://www.imranmohammed.com/cf/trace1b.png
Could you re-do those using this software
http://download.visualware.com/pub/vr/vrle.exe
It would be easier to compare to the graphs I have put up and seems to be easier to read :)
ethan103
16-06-2011, 13:40
look up a bit to my post; post 52 :)
Thats all good an everything (well, the servers were hardly full :-P )
But a lot of people say the SH adds to latency, even on wired by about 10ms ;-(
Thats all good an everything (well, the servers were hardly full :-P )
But a lot of people say the SH adds to latency, even on wired by about 10ms ;-(
Any tests you want me to try so we can compare? :)
ethan103
16-06-2011, 13:43
Any tests you want me to try so we can compare? :)
Birmingham Server:
https://www.cableforum.co.uk/images/local/2011/06/55.png
:angel:
https://www.cableforum.co.uk/images/local/2011/06/56.png
---------- Post added at 13:45 ---------- Previous post was at 13:44 ----------
https://www.cableforum.co.uk/images/local/2011/06/57.png
ethan103
16-06-2011, 13:47
Birmingham Server:
https://www.cableforum.co.uk/images/local/2011/06/55.png
:angel:
Birmingham Server ;-P
Also the Wellington Server in New Zealand would be a nice compare :)
Mick Fisher
16-06-2011, 13:48
On the question of user choice, since Stephen has mentioned the BT HomeHub, it is worth pointing out that not only can you use your own router, you can substitute your own VDSL2 modem for BT Infinity.
VM, on the other hand, have been so unwise as to force its users down a lame route. This is what angers me more than the lameness of that wretched SH itself.
:gpoint: :clap:
Birmingham Server ;-P
Also the Wellington Server in New Zealand would be a nice compare :)
https://www.cableforum.co.uk/images/local/2011/06/54.png (http://www.speedtest.net)
https://www.cableforum.co.uk/images/local/2011/06/53.png (http://www.speedtest.net)
ethan103
16-06-2011, 13:54
---------- Post added at 13:45 ---------- Previous post was at 13:44 ----------
I get an average of 14ms to bbc.co.uk ....[COLOR="Silver"]
---------- Post added at 13:54 ---------- Previous post was at 13:53 ----------
[QUOTE=TJS;35258754]https://www.cableforum.co.uk/images/local/2011/06/54.png (http://www.speedtest.net)
Big difference in Ping:
https://www.cableforum.co.uk/images/local/2011/06/45.png
https://www.cableforum.co.uk/images/local/2011/06/46.png
Is it because your using the SuperHub?
Guess we cant find out ;-(
You appear to have all ignored my request not to post large screen shots and instead post them as attachments.
ethan103
16-06-2011, 14:00
You appear to have all ignored my request not to post large screen shots and instead post them as attachments.
I've not posted large screenshots?
I've not posted large screenshots?
Well if you check out post #65 which is yours, oddly you appear to have quoted said screenshots.:rolleyes:
[QUOTE=TJS;35258748]
---------- Post added at 13:45 ---------- Previous post was at 13:44 ----------
I get an average of 14ms to bbc.co.uk ....[COLOR="Silver"]
---------- Post added at 13:54 ---------- Previous post was at 13:53 ----------
Big difference in Ping:
https://www.cableforum.co.uk/images/local/2011/06/45.png
https://www.cableforum.co.uk/images/local/2011/06/46.png
Is it because your using the SuperHub?
Guess we cant find out ;-(
hmm just restarted my laptop; and this.
https://www.cableforum.co.uk/images/local/2011/06/47.png (http://www.speedtest.net)
---------- Post added at 14:06 ---------- Previous post was at 14:05 ----------
https://www.cableforum.co.uk/images/local/2011/06/48.png (http://www.speedtest.net)
---------- Post added at 14:07 ---------- Previous post was at 14:06 ----------
https://www.cableforum.co.uk/images/local/2011/06/49.png (http://www.speedtest.net)
---------- Post added at 14:07 ---------- Previous post was at 14:07 ----------
https://www.cableforum.co.uk/images/local/2011/06/50.png (http://www.speedtest.net)
---------- Post added at 14:08 ---------- Previous post was at 14:07 ----------
https://www.cableforum.co.uk/images/local/2011/06/51.png (http://www.speedtest.net)
---------- Post added at 14:09 ---------- Previous post was at 14:08 ----------
https://www.cableforum.co.uk/images/local/2011/06/52.png (http://www.speedtest.net)
---------- Post added at 14:12 ---------- Previous post was at 14:09 ----------
Laptop hadn't been restarted since the 10.6.7 update for OS X which was near the end of march
Are we trying for the longest and most pointless post in Cableforum history as that is so way of topic we may need another server.:D
That was on topic; comparing th esuperhub ot the VMNG300 :)
Pinging servers the other side of the planet is nothing at all to do with the superhub. Back on topic everyone
Pinging servers the other side of the planet is nothing at all to do with the superhub. Back on topic everyone
Is there any explanation why the SuperHub is casuing all the problems like latency issues?
Considering a good chunk of the argument people have against the superhub is that it makes the latency poor; then yes it is.
The fact that a good majority of websites you visit and game servers you use are outside of the U.K. also makes it a good test of how the isp performs.
Edit: that came across ruder then intended sorry :)
Could you re-do those using this software
http://download.visualware.com/pub/vr/vrle.exe
It would be easier to compare to the graphs I have put up and seems to be easier to read :)
Attached, vm_trace.jpg for VM, be_trace.jpg for Be*
qasdfdsaq
16-06-2011, 16:07
Anything short of a ping -t is NOT an accurate or even useful test of latancy.
Even then with VM's DPI and protocol shaping who knows what is anymore.
ethan103
16-06-2011, 16:56
Considering a good chunk of the argument people have against the superhub is that it makes the latency poor; then yes it is.
The fact that a good majority of websites you visit and game servers you use are outside of the U.K. also makes it a good test of how the isp performs.
Edit: that came across ruder then intended sorry :)
I agree!!
Not being rude but from what I would call "bad" is that pretty much everyone says the SuperHub adds about 10ms to Latency.
As you can see from the speedtests and pinging vaerious servers around the UK and even as far as New Zealand,
The Superhub does indeed add around 10ms or even more in some cases....
I dont understand why it does this, even on a wired connection??
Considering a good chunk of the argument people have against the superhub is that it makes the latency poor; then yes it is.
Once past the reaches of the UBR latency of the superhub is irrelavent so pings half way round the world won't make any difference and is more likely to skew any results. So please keep the posts relevant to the topic..
Sephiroth
16-06-2011, 21:26
Once past the reaches of the UBR latency of the superhub is irrelevent so pings half way round the world won't make any difference and is more likely to skew any results. So please keep the posts relevant to the topic..
Well, that isn't true for the following reasons:
1/
Routing issues in the VM network can be spotted or at least suspected in the tracert
2/
Peering issues can be spotted or at least suspected in the tracert whether or not the rest goes round the world
3/
The above can exonerate the SH or by converse reinforce suspicion of the SH.
Exploring avenues is what this seems to me.
I agree!!
Not being rude but from what I would call "bad" is that pretty much everyone says the SuperHub adds about 10ms to Latency.
As you can see from the speedtests and pinging vaerious servers around the UK and even as far as New Zealand,
The Superhub does indeed add around 10ms or even more in some cases....
I dont understand why it does this, even on a wired connection??
I agree the SuperHub does add at least 10ms minimum in comparison to the VMNG300 at least from my observations.
Routing and peering is not the topic of this thread.. Exploring is one thing but if you want to explore world wide pings in the hope that it may be effected by the superhub is stretching the reasoning a bit. All I'm suggesting without going into mod mode again is to keep it relevant and don't overstretch the topic too much ;) Perhaps the creation of a new thread exploring world wide pings would be a better option
Sephiroth
16-06-2011, 21:38
That's your opinion - and you have the power to go into mod mode and dow whatever you want.
But the question is about "Why the SH is so bad" and added latency is an accusation. So bottoming out whether or not that is a reason why the SH is so bad is indeed a valid part of the discussion.
I can't see why you'd get so officious about this.
Chrysalis
16-06-2011, 22:14
Once past the reaches of the UBR latency of the superhub is irrelavent so pings half way round the world won't make any difference and is more likely to skew any results. So please keep the posts relevant to the topic..
not entirely true ;)
you suggesting eg. if I ping bbc.co.uk or some other random place that the difference wont be noticeable. It is.
Can you verify you are saying discussing the higher latency of the superhub is no longer allowed in this thread?
What I'm suggesting is that unless you can ping the exact same site from the exact same location using the two different set-ups (superhub and non-superhub) then the result will be skewed by the differing states of the existing traffic/route for the difference in either time or location.
You can talk all you want about latency but pinging round the world and constantly posting said results doesn't add anything relevant to the latency discussion.. Or is anyone suggesting that skewed results are relevant or that the pings are static depending on route??? :rofl:
What really needs to be done is close local pings that can be done with minimum effect from other internet traffic which will measure the latency of the devices involved otherwise you're just measuring the variability of the routes..
So please guys keep it relevant
Chrysalis
16-06-2011, 22:50
Ok so if I post say 2 tracert's form here a single location, one from the superhub and one from the vmng300 at the same time of day that is allowed?
qasdfdsaq
17-06-2011, 04:16
We should all be pinging the local UBR/gateway since that's the only hop the Superhub (in theory) should be affecting. That said it's also concievable that there's a bug that delays packets that have travelled, e.g. over a certain number of hops for some reason. Anything's possible. But 10ms is a lot of latency to add and I quite doubt the SH is that bad.
Chrysalis
17-06-2011, 05:47
why would it only affect 1 hop? there is nothing special about the gateway.
I have posted numerous tbb graphs which show the endpoint and as such the entire route is affected. I also see it on smokeping graphs I have at 3 different locations.
As a % the affect on USA endpoints is less as the base latency is much higher, so it would be less noticeable.
I personally have never said base latency goes up by 10ms, I think the affect on base latency at least for me is about 1-2ms, but jitter and as such average latency is significantly higher.
I also believe the effect is dependable on UBR utilisation, some people are able to get sub 3ms jitter on their superhub's. So it will be in my view more noticeable when on a higher utilised port.
Ok so if I post say 2 tracert's form here a single location, one from the superhub and one from the vmng300 at the same time of day that is allowed?
Only if you can do the pings both at exactly the same time is the result relevant ;) The internet traffic along said route can change from second to second changing your results..
Only if you can do the pings both at exactly the same time is the result relevant ;) The internet traffic along said route can change from second to second changing your results..
but surely if you do it at the same time one will take priority or follow a different route.. :D
Which is the whole point... :rofl: You can't measure latency accurately over an ever changing medium... :rofl:
Which is the whole point... :rofl: You can't measure latency accurately over an ever changing medium... :rofl:
I was siding with you :D
Which when you think about it, means there is no real fair test online, you would need a test lab, with excellent equipment.
Closest you'd get is pinging the UBR but even then it would be dependent on how utilized the unit was
Which is why you do a large number of real-world tests of both devices. With a big enough dataset you can take into account the odd variances and come up with a decent estimation.
Nobody has done this though :p
"real world tests" will not tell you the latency.. it'll just tell you the state of the route especially as on long haul routes the latency might be less than 1% of the overall figure :rolleyes:
With extremely short routes the latency might be as much as 50%+ so you can discern if latency is having a detrimental effect
Which is why you do a large number of real-world tests of both devices. With a big enough dataset you can take into account the odd variances and come up with a decent estimation.
Nobody has done this though :p
So every single speedtest to Wellington on either the VMNG300 or the Superhub follows the exact same routing over 12,000 plus miles each and every single time. https://www.cableforum.co.uk/images/local/2012/11/13.gif
If you believe that for one second then I have this bridge for sale on a one day special offer for a great price to you only.https://www.cableforum.co.uk/images/local/2012/09/18.gif
zekeisaszekedoes
17-06-2011, 13:34
They don't need to be technically adept, as most of VMs customers probably aren't. The technically minded are more than likely a minority in this case.
Not all of them do, granted, but it stands to reason that the techie types are going to test the CPE in ways regular customers might not, plus they can articulate their experiences more accurately. If the idea is to get things fixed as quickly as possible then getting the more skilled people involved seems like the most logical choice.
IMO what you've just said is exactly the flawed VM thinking that I've referred to in the past, i.e. not testing properly enough and wondering why people are getting ticked off with unreliable kit. Makes no sense at all... completely illogical, as Spock once said.
He has already - #22.
I missed that one, but usually in threads like this he says it once or twice anyway. :D
What I'm suggesting is that unless you can ping the exact same site from the exact same location using the two different set-ups (superhub and non-superhub) then the result will be skewed by the differing states of the existing traffic/route for the difference in either time or location.
So you're recommending we have 2 CPEs on our account to test from exact same location. Um... you do know that's against the VM terms of service, right? ;)
So you're recommending we have 2 CPEs on our account to test from exact same location. Um... you do know that's against the VM terms of service, right? ;)
I never said such a thing.. I just pointed out that it would be the only way of getting a plausible result :D
Anyway at one point I had both a 2050 and a 255 running on the same cable even though it was only for a few hours when I switched from VM to VMB
Chrysalis
17-06-2011, 14:44
Only if you can do the pings both at exactly the same time is the result relevant ;) The internet traffic along said route can change from second to second changing your results..
ok I see the position is to be obstructive then thanks for making it clear.
I know all about changing conditions and such but internet routes if not congested do not change from second to second by more than a few ms.
I also always do repeat tests so if I was to post 2 traceroutes you can be sure it is something I have done at least 3 or 4 times and the post would be representative of the average at that moment.
By saying I or others cannot post traceroutes or ping times showing the affect the superhub has on the internet I feel CF has lost it and is no longer a neutral forum.
Saying things like traceroutes cannot be trusted because of changing conditions etc. is the sort of thing an isp would say to defend a poor network.
Even VM's own forums dont apply this much censorship to the superhub. Banning users, and forbiding traceroutes been posted.
Of course VM's network which is congested does have changing conditions which is the exact reason I will do multiple tests, do you really think that the fact me and others after using both devices for months and my graphs showing obvious increases of latency is talking rubbish and the network just happens to change its behaviour every single time I change the device, maybe you suggesting there is some guy flicking a switch everytime chrysalis puts in the superhub?
For your information I have used traceroute's alongside other tools to diagnose network problems for many years, this is the first time someone has tried to discredit in such a fashion of 15 years of using the internet.
---------- Post added at 14:44 ---------- Previous post was at 14:28 ----------
here is some data, not a traceroute so not gone against a mod.
http://www.thinkbroadband.com/ping/share-thumb/789fe6f4c9321708ed5e561f9b2148ad-20-05-2011.png (http://www.thinkbroadband.com/ping/share/789fe6f4c9321708ed5e561f9b2148ad-20-05-2011.html)
Did VM flick a switch or did the network suddenly change behaviour when I swapped the modem ;)
So every single speedtest to Wellington on either the VMNG300 or the Superhub follows the exact same routing over 12,000 plus miles each and every single time <snip immaturity>
Which is why you do a large number of tests. The more results you have the more realistic your data set is and the better the accuracy you will have when you come to baseline the data.
You can never get a perfect test method, but there are ways to mitigate these sort of things. Or did you lot skip statistics lessons in school?
But like I said, nothing anyone has done or is likely to do will be thorough enough to get a definitive answer as to how much of a ping increase the Superhub is adding to a connection over the VMNG300, if any. We just have to go on the limited results here.
Which is why you do a large number of tests. The more results you have the more realistic your data set is and the better the accuracy you will have when you come to baseline the data.
Once the routing goes outside of the Virginmedia network the is no way to ensure that every traceroute or speedtest follows the exact same path as it will always choose the shortest and fastest route so if the is heavy traffic elsewhere it will automatically reroute, so as you cannot control the exact route it one takes how can you be sure of any accuracy due to these inconsistencies.
Once the routing goes outside of the Virginmedia network the is no way to ensure that every traceroute or speedtest follows the exact same path as it will always choose the shortest and fastest route so if the is heavy traffic elsewhere it will automatically reroute, so as you cannot control the exact route it one takes how can you be sure of any accuracy due to these inconsistencies.
You dont need it to be consistent. If you do 10k pings over a week then you have a good baseline. You mitigate the routing inconsistencies by having such a huge sample size that it is irrelevant as to where the packets are going via and the only really consistent thing is the startpoint (which we are interested in) and destination. Do another 10k over a week with another modem and then you have your data.
You dont need it to be consistent. If you do 10k pings over a week then you have a good baseline. You mitigate the routing inconsistencies by having such a huge sample size that it is irrelevant as to where the packets are going via and the only really consistent thing is the startpoint (which we are interested in) and destination. Do another 10k over a week with another modem and then you have your data.
Pinging a website over 12,000 miles away is never going to give you consistent results.
ethan103
17-06-2011, 19:35
Pinging a website over 12,000 miles away is never going to give you consistent results.
I always get the same ping?
markie1966
17-06-2011, 20:06
Pinging a website over 12,000 miles away is never going to give you consistent results.
well ive just let winmtr run for an hour or so to a game server that i play on...surely thats consistent enough for u?? have a look at the packet loss
its bad enough that im losing 3 or 4 % locally....but the next 4 nodes are all on the vm network...ranging from 42% packet loss up to 92% packet loss
is it any wonder that some people are complaining?
i ask you once again...will this new revision or update for the superhub resolve my issues with the vm network as regards gaming...ie no packet loss for smooth gaming??? and if you say it will...can i have it in writing please?? :rolleyes:
markie1966
17-06-2011, 20:09
sorry....heres the winmtr image
qasdfdsaq
17-06-2011, 21:01
why would it only affect 1 hop? there is nothing special about the gateway.
Because the Superhub acts as a network bridge between two segments of network. One is your LAN, the other is the DOCSIS link between your CM and the gateway. Anything beyond that is dealt with by VM's core network, which in theory would act in exactly the same way regardless of whether the data came from a VMNG300, Superhub, or an Ambit modem.
Beyond the single (logical) hop DOCSIS link your data is bridge back onto a (hopefully) all IP core network again and the Superhub loses any influence it may have as it no longer directly signals anything on this section of the network.
---------- Post added at 20:56 ---------- Previous post was at 20:55 ----------
Only if you can do the pings both at exactly the same time is the result relevant ;) The internet traffic along said route can change from second to second changing your results..
Ping -t.
Averages.
Balance of probabilities.
It's not hard.
---------- Post added at 21:01 ---------- Previous post was at 20:56 ----------
Which is the whole point... :rofl: You can't measure latency accurately over an ever changing medium... :rofl:
Yes you can, as long as your definition of "accurate" is not 100.0%. There are acceptable levels of accuracy and standard deviations. Granted, you can't ever be 100% accurate, then again you can't 100% accurately state you're alive or your modem is connected. The best scientific knowledge we have is not 100% accurate.
95% or 99% accuracy is the baseline standard for pretty much all modern sciences, and is more than acceptable for everyone else. Stop being pedantic.
well ive just let winmtr run for an hour or so to a game server that i play on...surely thats consistent enough for u?? have a look at the packet loss
Now that is quite obviously completely different to what I am talking about and you know it, as I am talking about stupid repetitve speedtests and doing follow up trace routes over the same distance in the vain hope that no one notices when it takes a slightly different route on its one way journey which is no comparison to a extended connection such as you speak about.
markie1966
17-06-2011, 22:51
if u say speedtests are stupid....why does vm go on about how fast their network is??
i was referring to packet loss...not speed tests
how hard is it to admit there is a problem with packet loss??
and u still havnt answered my question...will this new firmware upgrade thats coming resolve my packet loss concerns??
yes or no....please let me know cos its getting a bit tedious to say the least paying for a product that doesnt deliver....its vm thats states that there will be no issues with latency...not me
ill put it another way....would u buy a ferrari that only had 3 wheels?
see the image taken a few minutes ago ..to the bbc..to TRY and imagine how hard it is for me to try and play a game
if u say speedtests are stupid....why does vm go on about how fast their network is??
I was referring to the continual speedtests and traceroutes attempted to Wellington in New Zealand a couple of days ago which is rather pointless as the can be be no consistency in the results over that distance due to routing.
zekeisaszekedoes
18-06-2011, 11:44
I was referring to the continual speedtests and traceroutes attempted to Wellington in New Zealand a couple of days ago which is rather pointless as the can be be no consistency in the results over that distance due to routing.
Pretty sure they were just doing that for arguments sake, not submitting it as cast iron proof of VM network problems, which you would have noticed if you had paid more attention instead of warping posts to fit your own interpretation.
Pretty sure they were just doing that for arguments sake, not submitting it as cast iron proof of VM network problems, which you would have noticed if you had paid more attention instead of warping posts to fit your own interpretation.
We know they were doing so for arguements sake but I see no warping of posts.
JethroUK
18-06-2011, 15:31
u jammy **** (joking)
everytime i play games these days i get told to clear off cos of the packets loss
really wish i hadnt upgraded to the superhub
i was getting better ping with no packet loss when i was on 10mb
Treat yourself to one these jiggers (http://www.amazon.co.uk/gp/product/B000TV7FJ4/ref=oss_product)
Plug one into the hub and other into your console and Kazzap!
These connect like hard wired = no lag
Leave the wireless part of the hub for your PC
markie1966
18-06-2011, 16:01
Treat yourself to one these jiggers (http://www.amazon.co.uk/gp/product/B000TV7FJ4/ref=oss_product)
Plug one into the hub and other into your console and Kazzap!
These connect like hard wired = no lag
Leave the wireless part of the hub for your PC
my pc is hard wired to the superhub
and its still a pathetic connection for gaming
in every other respect...such as surfin or downloading....its perfect
i just want my packetloss to disappear so i can play games...and not have to spend time looking at her indoors lol
Hiddendeath
18-06-2011, 22:27
moaning about each other doesnt help really. And its off topic. I hate to see people moaning about each other.
Back on topic, the superhub was rushed out, marketted very well by the bods at VM, but poorly tested. I'm glad i am not using mine right now. In hindsight, and knowing that the ambit 300 can do 100 meg easily VM should have stuck with that until something more solid was available and, most importantly, had been tested properly.
vBulletin® v3.8.11, Copyright ©2000-2024, vBulletin Solutions Inc.