Talk:HughesNet/Archive 1

message: Hey, why not do an article on HughesNet? We have linked to it anyways...
Move this article to HughesNet, because they are the same thing. 69.19.14.26 03:40, 4 April 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  HughesNet 

message: Some POV responses were inserted, uncited. Some of them aren't even true. Don't worry, I removed them.
Note: My counterarguments just demonstrate the falseness of the claims, not the reason for deletion. The reason the counters were deleted was due to uncited POV...
Here they are: 
* The overwhelming number of application types such as web browsing, email, instant messaging, music file download, etc. all work fine even with this less than 800 ms delay due to techniques called TCP spoofing and Performance Enhancement Proxies (PEP).  It is only unacceptable delay for online shooter interactive games.
**Obviously POV. Uncited. Bad grammar.
***The most common internet applications are web browsing (using HTTP over TCP), email (using SMTP over TCP), instant messaging (using TCP or UDP), music file downloads (using HTTP over TCP), etc. see application protocols under [].  These Internet applications over TCP provide acceptable latency and jitter over GEO satellite links through the use of Performance Enhancement Proxies [].  Only applications that "require fractions-of-a-second user inputs (such as multi-player “twitch” games or real-time equities trading) are not recommended" see HughesNet FAQ []
***Please cite a source that stes that Hughesnet works perfectly exccluding any video games.
****There are multitudes of studies showing TCP performance over satellite [] and there are over 280,000 users of HughesNet that show TCP works over satellite.  TCP does not "break" over satellite.  In fact you will never find your desired "citation needed" for the latency criticism because these games actually do work.  TCP does not fail to communicate.  The video games do not fail because of the latency.  It is the subjective opinions (and POV) of users of the GUI of the video games that it is "unusable".  It is a human factors problem of slow response times that makes it perceived as being "unusable", not an actual application or TCP or satellite communication problem.  Just because it takes to long to react to shoot your gun in the video game making you die doesn't mean that you can't shoot your gun.  It is a GUI usability issue of the latency required by the application in order to achieve effective game play, not a communication failure of TCP.  So HughesNet does "work perfectively" because it adheres to IETF TCP standards.  HughesNet's communication transport also "works perfectively" for online interacitve video games, if you don't mind the GUI delay (from a subjective point of view).  You should just cite the HughesNet's own FAQ which states it with a NPOV [] and use its language otherwise it will remain with no citation (and be deleted?).
*****HughesNet's own FAQ is a bit POV, as I literally cannot log on to Nintendo Wi-fi. I cannot play Xbox  live since i have a 5 second gui lag. I cannot play Counter-Strike or Unreal because of the lag. The delay breaks the game, it's not just graphics. -- Chris Ccool2ax contrib. 19:07, 28 May 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  POV "Responses"