Re: freezing, pixelation here too

texasguy37 · ‎05-18-2009

prof153 wrote:

On a more positive note, Alex did send me a PM asking for my billing and contact information. He said that he can look this over remotely and see how the lines are performing, then determine next steps. I appreciate this forum (and the software) and hope that we can get it resolved, because the pixelation and stuttering/halting is pretty constant and really distracting.
Thanks
Ian

Thanks for the update.

prof153 · ‎05-29-2012

Thank you all - I'll certainly post an update as this progresses and hopefully gets resolved... Ian

prof153 · ‎05-29-2012

worse tonight....

sigh...

prof153 · ‎05-29-2012

Here's the latest update. Inside tech came and said it's an outside issue and put in a request for an(other) outside (splicing) technician. He came this morning (Sunday) and said his loop test shows that we are 6700 feet from a box, and that Uverse never should have been installed here - simply too far away. So now we're in a position of having canceled our DISH service, satellite lines were cut to install Uverse, we canceled our previous DSL, and moved our previous AT&T phone lines to Uvers VOIP.
I guess the next step is to see what needs to be done to restore what we had - if anyone has a number besides the main 800 number that I should be using, I'd really appreciate it.
Cannot thank you all enough on this board for your help so far. Really helped me to understand better what was happening.
Thank you
Ian

aviewer · ‎03-11-2010

prof153 - I scrolled through the posts and do not see any mention of pair bonding or INID. This type of installation was designed for lengths over 3000 feet. Is the tech saying t is not good up to 6700 feet? Do you have an inid?

prof153 · ‎05-29-2012

Yes, I do have an inid - 2 bonded pairs, right from the beginning. This is the third or fourth tech who said it was too from the box to work reliably, and they had measured it at 5400 feet - his loop test today showed 6700 feet - and he did say it was too far, even for pair bonding - INID. Hope that's helpful. Ian

db821arc · ‎04-17-2012

You do know that the person defending the program is Somejoe who also wrote the program so I am afraid that you hurt is feeling by saying you do not trust it 100%. That tool is not supported by AT&T. Myself I did not install for the simple reason I do not know the programmer or his ability. He is not recognized by Norton and Norton does not recommend downloading it. Since so much of it is Jargon I can not read it would have no use for me. So please be careful and don't hurt anyone's feelings. And before Somejoe attacks me for not liking his program I want to remind him that is my right not to use his program and I am in no way saying it is worthless. I only download software that I trust. I have a lot of banking and financial information on my computer and I have a lot of security that I will not bypass.

SomeJoe7777 · ‎01-30-2008

No hurt feelings, I promise.

Any individual needs to decide for themselves what software they run on their computer. I have no problem with that.

But I do draw the line at recommending to others that they don't use the program simply because of a vague, unsubstantiated "I don't trust it". If someone is going to make the accusation that the program isn't to be trusted, then they need to provide some concrete evidence to back up that assertion. Otherwise, it's an invalid recommendation that I intend to refute.

I didn't spend hundreds of hours coding this program and then giving it away for free just for random people to start posting disparaging things about it without a shred of proof.

fearlessuser · ‎05-26-2012

SomeJoe7777 wrote:
No hurt feelings, I promise.

Any individual needs to decide for themselves what software they run on their computer. I have no problem with that.

But I do draw the line at recommending to others that they don't use the program simply because of a vague, unsubstantiated "I don't trust it". If someone is going to make the accusation that the program isn't to be trusted, then they need to provide some concrete evidence to back up that assertion. Otherwise, it's an invalid recommendation that I intend to refute.

I didn't spend hundreds of hours coding this program and then giving it away for free just for random people to start posting disparaging things about it without a shred of proof.

You must have missed this before, so let me say it again:

Let's clear this up once and for all: I DONT THINK THE TOOL IS GARBAGE. I HAD AN ISSUE THAT I WANTED TO POINT OUT TO SOMEONE. THAT DOESNT MEAN EVERYONE WILL HAVE THE SAME ISSUE. I CAN FIND THE INFORMATION THAT I WOULD FIND USEFUL WITHOUT THE TOOL. ANYONE THAT WANTS TO USE IT, FEEL FREE. I'M NOT TRYING TO STOP ANYONE FROM USING THIS TOOL, SORRY IF YOU TOOK ANY OF MY POSTS AS EVER SAYING NOT TO USE IT, BUT I NEVER ACTUALLY SAID "DONT USE IT". I DONT HATE THE DEVELOPERS OF THE TOOL. I'M SURE THEY'RE GREAT PEOPLE, ITS COOL THAT YOU MADE A TOOL LIKE THIS, I WOULD LIKE TO GET INTO PROGRAMMING TO FIGURE OUT HOW YOU DID IT.

fearlessuser · ‎05-26-2012

And since you asked, I decided to reinstall for now. Here's what you wanted to show that the information it's giving me for the recommended profile, the ONLY thing I said that I had an issue with, is wrong. I have no need to be on the 25mb profile. I've been working without any service affecting issues since I've been on this 32mb profile. Why get lower grade of service based on that if there is nothing actually affecting the service? This was the ONLY thing I brought up that I didn't trust about the tool, not anything else in the tool I've pointed this out a few times. Since you are the developer, something I wasn't aware of, I would think you would want some information about issues with the tool to improve it. With all the numbers that are red, I never see anything affecting the service. This time it at least says i should be on a 25mb profile instead of the 19mb profile, which is closer to being right. Are there corrected blocks? Yes. Are they service affecting? Not at all. Guidelines are just guidelines. They aren't always black and white. Lots of things have a grey area, this seems to be one of them.

As far as the reboots, its not happening this time. Could have been an issue when it was installing the first time, but its all ok now. Never said it was junk because it was rebooting my PC either.

SomeJoe7777 · ‎01-30-2008

If you're not having service problems under those conditions, that's great for you. But two things: 1) That's unusual. Most people with a VDSL line that's overcommitted have service problems. 2) Your line is not running within VDSL specs. There is insufficient room on your line to properly run the 32/5 profile. The required amount of error correction for proper operation exceeds what your line is capable of. This causes uncorrected errors.

I would almost guarantee that if you push your data transfer up into the > 25Mbps range, you will most likely immediately see service problems. Tune to 4 different HD channels (or record 3 HD and 1 SD channel) and start a download from a web server. There is a high chance that your IPTV service will begin pixelating and freezing as the line begins to take uncorrected errors. (The Internet service might look like it's OK, since TCP retransmissions will hide the errored blocks of the download).

Again, UVRT does not detect service problems. It detects abnormal or out-of-specification conditions that could cause service problems. It does not "guess" or mess with "gray areas". The calculations of whether the line is running properly or not are given by discrete mathematical formulas that don't lie.