The top 100 reasons why @home sux!

@homesux · Post by **@homesux** » Mon Feb 12, 2001 8:59 pm

C:\>ping -t home-www.excite.com -n 100

Pinging home-www.excite.com [199.172.146.81] with 32 bytes of data:

Request timed out.
Request timed out.
Request timed out.
Request timed out.
Request timed out.
Request timed out.
Request timed out.
Request timed out.
Request timed out.
Request timed out.
Request timed out.
Request timed out.
Request timed out.
Request timed out.
Request timed out.
Request timed out.
Request timed out.
Request timed out.
Request timed out.
Request timed out.
Request timed out.
Request timed out.
Request timed out.
Request timed out.
Request timed out.
Request timed out.
Request timed out.
Request timed out.
Request timed out.
Request timed out.
Request timed out.
Request timed out.
Request timed out.
Request timed out.
Request timed out.
Request timed out.
Request timed out.
Request timed out.
Request timed out.
Request timed out.
Request timed out.
Request timed out.
Request timed out.
Request timed out.
Request timed out.
Request timed out.
Request timed out.
Request timed out.
Request timed out.
Request timed out.
Request timed out.
Request timed out.
Request timed out.
Request timed out.
Request timed out.
Request timed out.
Request timed out.
Request timed out.
Request timed out.
Request timed out.
Request timed out.
Request timed out.
Request timed out.
Request timed out.
Request timed out.
Request timed out.
Request timed out.
Request timed out.
Request timed out.
Request timed out.
Request timed out.
Request timed out.
Request timed out.
Request timed out.
Request timed out.
Request timed out.
Request timed out.
Request timed out.
Request timed out.
Request timed out.
Request timed out.
Request timed out.
Request timed out.
Request timed out.
Request timed out.
Request timed out.
Request timed out.
Request timed out.
Request timed out.
Request timed out.
Request timed out.
Request timed out.
Request timed out.
Request timed out.
Request timed out.
Request timed out.
Request timed out.
Request timed out.
Request timed out.
Request timed out.

Ping statistics for 199.172.146.81:
Packets: Sent = 100, Received = 0, Lost = 100 (100% loss),
Approximate round trip times in milli-seconds:
Minimum = 0ms, Maximum = 0ms, Average = 0ms

And before you go saying that "we have all gone through this", know that it has been like this since mid November.

Lobo · Post by **Lobo** » Mon Feb 12, 2001 9:02 pm

you need new pooter, suh

@homesux · Post by **@homesux** » Mon Feb 12, 2001 9:10 pm

Need a new Broad Band ISP that has smarter circus monkeys. @homes are all old, fat, and stupid. And the clowns running the show don't know jack about customer service or satisfaction.

My PC runs like a dream

Brent · Post by **Brent** » Mon Feb 12, 2001 9:46 pm

ping -t home-www.excite.com -n 100

that's not a correct ping command is it?

the "home-" part ?

anyways, could just mean that web address has blocked ICMP packets (ping packets) therefore not giving a response....

well i take that back I guess that does work, I just tried it here at work and got a constant 49ms to it

I'm on a T1 here at work...

donald_k · Post by **donald_k** » Mon Feb 12, 2001 10:12 pm

I am on a T1 at school and it pings it at 30ms to home-www.excite.com but the speed of the T1 is crap (oh 500 computers all accessing it, even when I am the only one on it is still "slow") speeds on my cable are always aboive T1 speeds so I may be exxagerating but then again the phone company has been going down 99% of the time for the last two weeks...lol...and they say their DSL is more reliable than my cable....yeah right

@homesux · Post by **@homesux** » Tue Feb 13, 2001 8:22 am

This is hte site they tell use @home users to ping and run tracert's to for torouble shooting. Usually i can just run a trace to "www", but since I put myself outside the router I can no longer user "www". But when "www" did work its DNS name came back as home-www.excite.com. Reguardless @home still sux rocky mountain oysters!

Lobo · Post by **Lobo** » Tue Feb 13, 2001 8:41 am

Go somewhere else and whine, we try and help people

@homesux · Post by **@homesux** » Tue Feb 13, 2001 1:45 pm

Kiss my white @$$ u prick! Last time I checked I could post what ever I felt like.
Smart @$$ bastard.

DaveM · Post by **DaveM** » Tue Feb 13, 2001 1:54 pm

Please close this thread, Its obvious we have someone who wants to moan and whine and make people uneasy with his appearance on these boards.

Lobo · Post by **Lobo** » Tue Feb 13, 2001 1:57 pm

Well another happy man, get a 56K and whine no more, because I DON'T CARE

Suture · Post by **Suture** » Tue Feb 13, 2001 2:03 pm

You won't get much help from us with an attitude like that.

@homesux · Post by **@homesux** » Tue Feb 13, 2001 3:18 pm

I am not the pne who started with the attitude. If you do not wan't to see my post then don't read it, no one is holding a gun to your head. There are plenty of others who are in my area what can not get on the net at all, this is my way of informing them that they are not hte only ones having problems.

Lobo · Post by **Lobo** » Tue Feb 13, 2001 3:26 pm

Sir you just said they could not get on net so this is your way of informing them, what am I missing, we are here to to help people, not to keep them up to date on which telephone pole is down

oakfan52 · Post by **oakfan52** » Tue Feb 13, 2001 3:41 pm

I agree with Lobo! If you don't like the service you have two choices. Deal with it and make the best of it or unsubscribe. You can always go back to 56K or better the DSL service that is never up in your area. If you don't like it, don't use it. It's that simple

ZenOps · Post by **ZenOps** » Tue Feb 13, 2001 6:49 pm

I don't know if I should dignify this with a response but...

Of course it times out. @ Home blocks pings so that script kiddies and amateur hackers can't flood the system. You should be very concerned about ISP that do respond to pings.

rodrod5 · Post by **rodrod5** » Tue Feb 13, 2001 6:57 pm

not all servers accept ping trafic try to ping to cnet or yahoo they accept ping trafic other sites like microsoft do not same with excite that is y you get the request timed out

@homesux · Post by **@homesux** » Tue Feb 13, 2001 7:00 pm

ZenOps, you are right you should not have responded, because you have no idea what you are talking about. This IS where they tell you to PING and run tracerts to for testing, and yes it does reply.

C:\>ping www

Pinging home-www.excite.com [199.172.146.81] with 32 bytes of data:

Reply from 199.172.146.81: bytes=32 time=1342ms TTL=244
Request timed out.
Request timed out.
Request timed out.

Ping statistics for 199.172.146.81:
Packets: Sent = 4, Received = 1, Lost = 3 (75% loss),
Approximate round trip times in milli-seconds:
Minimum = 1342ms, Maximum = 1342ms, Average = 335ms

Lobo, there are quite a few users who come to me asking if I am on the net and what my pings are. I tell them to come here to look, its easier than trying to email tons of people @ hotmail. God knows @homes email server dosen't work. I also tell potential @home customers to come here and see the horror stories of @home for themselves before they go ordering it. Until I get notice that we are not allowed to post pings or tracerts here I will continue to do so, your punk @$$ attitude isn't going to stop me.

@homesux · Post by **@homesux** » Tue Feb 13, 2001 7:03 pm

C:\>ping www.microsoft.com

Pinging www.microsoft.akadns.net [207.46.131.199] with 32 bytes of data:

Request timed out.
Request timed out.
Request timed out.
Request timed out.

Ping statistics for 207.46.131.199:
Packets: Sent = 4, Received = 0, Lost = 4 (100% loss),
Approximate round trip times in milli-seconds:
Minimum = 0ms, Maximum = 0ms, Average = 0ms

C:\>ping www.yahoo.com

Pinging www.yahoo.akadns.net [216.115.105.2] with 32 bytes of data:

Request timed out.
Request timed out.
Request timed out.
Request timed out.

Ping statistics for 216.115.105.2:
Packets: Sent = 4, Received = 0, Lost = 4 (100% loss),
Approximate round trip times in milli-seconds:
Minimum = 0ms, Maximum = 0ms, Average = 0ms

C:\>nslookup www.microsoft.com
Server: proxy1.ovrlnd1.mo.home.com
Address: 24.8.86.15

Name: www.microsoft.akadns.net
Addresses: 207.46.230.218, 207.46.230.229, 207.46.230.219, 207.46.131.199
Aliases: www.microsoft.com

At least DNS is working.

Lobo · Post by **Lobo** » Tue Feb 13, 2001 7:07 pm

56K my man, then you don't have to worry, and I doubt you have many friends

rodrod5 · Post by **rodrod5** » Tue Feb 13, 2001 7:07 pm

opps sorry dude did not know that you were in the kc mo area and are affected by the jam well im sure you can still ping your gateway fine oh well

@homesux · Post by **@homesux** » Tue Feb 13, 2001 7:16 pm

Tons of friends Lobo, most with the same attitude as you. I don't take crap from them either, I give it right back to them 10 fold.

rodrod5, are you inside or outside the kscymo router? I would be interested to know if the problem is actually the kscymo router ot the overlandmo router.

Lobo · Post by **Lobo** » Tue Feb 13, 2001 7:18 pm

Sir go to [url=http://www.speedcorp.net,]www.speedcorp.net,[/url] they have neat forum and would love you

rodrod5 · Post by **rodrod5** » Tue Feb 13, 2001 7:20 pm

hey @homesux i feel for you but i would tell you to chill and not get your panties in a wad then one time a week about 11:30pm 12:00 pm cst call in and reopen the same ticket and just refresh the support that you are not happy get the cedit squared away and wait unfoutunately a problem like the one in your area takes time to solve as stated in these forums before @home knows there is a problem and is working on it i dont know about kanasa areas but it takes time to dig a trenck and lay fibre backbones and not to make excuses for 2home but sometimes they are at the mercy of others to pull that cable for them sometimes even at the mercy of compitetors who are in no hurry i do not know that this is the case here but i do know after @ home got the backbone needed in sac california they postings dorpped to note and even some happy postings i feel for ya man but i would chill till the fibre is in

ZenOps · Post by **ZenOps** » Tue Feb 13, 2001 8:01 pm

They don't have to block *all* ICMP ping packets, they may let one or two through every few seconds. Packet limiting instead of packet blocking (Prevents denial of service attacks)

Use a real tracert/pinger like neotrace www.neoworx.com and then I think you might have a valid complaint. Ping your gateway first and not www (The tech is an idiot for telling you to ping www)

juttin3 · Post by **juttin3** » Tue Feb 20, 2001 11:07 pm

this is with optimum online in ny .. my area isnt completed with new nodes yet but this is what i got..
C:\>ping -t home-www.excite.com -n 100

Pinging home-www.excite.com [199.172.146.81] with 32 bytes of data:

Reply from 199.172.146.81: bytes=32 time=100ms TTL=237
Reply from 199.172.146.81: bytes=32 time=90ms TTL=237
Request timed out.
Reply from 199.172.146.81: bytes=32 time=90ms TTL=237
Reply from 199.172.146.81: bytes=32 time=90ms TTL=237
Reply from 199.172.146.81: bytes=32 time=91ms TTL=237
Reply from 199.172.146.81: bytes=32 time=90ms TTL=237
Reply from 199.172.146.81: bytes=32 time=90ms TTL=237
Reply from 199.172.146.81: bytes=32 time=90ms TTL=237
Reply from 199.172.146.81: bytes=32 time=90ms TTL=237
Reply from 199.172.146.81: bytes=32 time=90ms TTL=237
Reply from 199.172.146.81: bytes=32 time=90ms TTL=237
Reply from 199.172.146.81: bytes=32 time=90ms TTL=237
Reply from 199.172.146.81: bytes=32 time=90ms TTL=237
Reply from 199.172.146.81: bytes=32 time=91ms TTL=237
Reply from 199.172.146.81: bytes=32 time=90ms TTL=237
Reply from 199.172.146.81: bytes=32 time=90ms TTL=237
Reply from 199.172.146.81: bytes=32 time=90ms TTL=237
Reply from 199.172.146.81: bytes=32 time=90ms TTL=237
Reply from 199.172.146.81: bytes=32 time=80ms TTL=237
Reply from 199.172.146.81: bytes=32 time=90ms TTL=237
Reply from 199.172.146.81: bytes=32 time=91ms TTL=237
Request timed out.
Reply from 199.172.146.81: bytes=32 time=90ms TTL=237
Request timed out.
Reply from 199.172.146.81: bytes=32 time=90ms TTL=237
Reply from 199.172.146.81: bytes=32 time=90ms TTL=237
Reply from 199.172.146.81: bytes=32 time=90ms TTL=237
Reply from 199.172.146.81: bytes=32 time=100ms TTL=237
Reply from 199.172.146.81: bytes=32 time=90ms TTL=237
Request timed out.
Reply from 199.172.146.81: bytes=32 time=90ms TTL=237
Reply from 199.172.146.81: bytes=32 time=90ms TTL=237
Reply from 199.172.146.81: bytes=32 time=90ms TTL=237
Reply from 199.172.146.81: bytes=32 time=90ms TTL=237
Reply from 199.172.146.81: bytes=32 time=90ms TTL=237
Reply from 199.172.146.81: bytes=32 time=90ms TTL=237
Reply from 199.172.146.81: bytes=32 time=90ms TTL=237
Request timed out.
Request timed out.
Reply from 199.172.146.81: bytes=32 time=90ms TTL=237
Reply from 199.172.146.81: bytes=32 time=90ms TTL=237
Reply from 199.172.146.81: bytes=32 time=90ms TTL=237
Reply from 199.172.146.81: bytes=32 time=90ms TTL=237
Reply from 199.172.146.81: bytes=32 time=100ms TTL=237
Request timed out.
Reply from 199.172.146.81: bytes=32 time=90ms TTL=237
Reply from 199.172.146.81: bytes=32 time=90ms TTL=237
Reply from 199.172.146.81: bytes=32 time=90ms TTL=237
Reply from 199.172.146.81: bytes=32 time=90ms TTL=237
Reply from 199.172.146.81: bytes=32 time=80ms TTL=237
Reply from 199.172.146.81: bytes=32 time=91ms TTL=237
Reply from 199.172.146.81: bytes=32 time=90ms TTL=237
Request timed out.
Reply from 199.172.146.81: bytes=32 time=91ms TTL=237
Request timed out.
Reply from 199.172.146.81: bytes=32 time=110ms TTL=237
Reply from 199.172.146.81: bytes=32 time=90ms TTL=237
Reply from 199.172.146.81: bytes=32 time=90ms TTL=237
Reply from 199.172.146.81: bytes=32 time=100ms TTL=237
Reply from 199.172.146.81: bytes=32 time=100ms TTL=237
Reply from 199.172.146.81: bytes=32 time=90ms TTL=237
Reply from 199.172.146.81: bytes=32 time=90ms TTL=237
Reply from 199.172.146.81: bytes=32 time=90ms TTL=237
Reply from 199.172.146.81: bytes=32 time=90ms TTL=237
Reply from 199.172.146.81: bytes=32 time=100ms TTL=237
Reply from 199.172.146.81: bytes=32 time=90ms TTL=237
Reply from 199.172.146.81: bytes=32 time=100ms TTL=237
Request timed out.
Reply from 199.172.146.81: bytes=32 time=90ms TTL=237
Request timed out.
Reply from 199.172.146.81: bytes=32 time=100ms TTL=237
Reply from 199.172.146.81: bytes=32 time=90ms TTL=237
Request timed out.
Reply from 199.172.146.81: bytes=32 time=90ms TTL=237
Reply from 199.172.146.81: bytes=32 time=91ms TTL=237
Request timed out.
Reply from 199.172.146.81: bytes=32 time=100ms TTL=237
Reply from 199.172.146.81: bytes=32 time=100ms TTL=237
Reply from 199.172.146.81: bytes=32 time=90ms TTL=237
Request timed out.
Request timed out.
Reply from 199.172.146.81: bytes=32 time=100ms TTL=237
Reply from 199.172.146.81: bytes=32 time=100ms TTL=237
Request timed out.
Reply from 199.172.146.81: bytes=32 time=90ms TTL=237
Reply from 199.172.146.81: bytes=32 time=90ms TTL=237
Request timed out.
Reply from 199.172.146.81: bytes=32 time=90ms TTL=237
Reply from 199.172.146.81: bytes=32 time=90ms TTL=237
Request timed out.
Reply from 199.172.146.81: bytes=32 time=100ms TTL=237
Request timed out.
Reply from 199.172.146.81: bytes=32 time=90ms TTL=237
Reply from 199.172.146.81: bytes=32 time=90ms TTL=237
Reply from 199.172.146.81: bytes=32 time=90ms TTL=237
Reply from 199.172.146.81: bytes=32 time=90ms TTL=237
Reply from 199.172.146.81: bytes=32 time=90ms TTL=237
Reply from 199.172.146.81: bytes=32 time=90ms TTL=237
Request timed out.

Ping statistics for 199.172.146.81:
Packets: Sent = 100, Received = 80, Lost = 20 (20% loss),
Approximate round trip times in milli-seconds:
Minimum = 80ms, Maximum = 110ms, Average = 73ms

Brent · Post by **Brent** » Tue Feb 20, 2001 11:25 pm

guys calm down

everybody is welcome here at speedguide, ya'll don't have the option of choosing who stays and who goes

and I say everyone is welcome here at speedguide

just take it easy guys and play nice

Egg · Post by **Egg** » Wed Feb 21, 2001 8:38 am

Id like to know what the big deal is, both sides are acting like children. I also have @Home and i think they suck. If i were in your area i would be glad to know that im not the only one. The more people you have behind you the more a company like @home might listen. Somtimes its nessesary as we all have learned at some time or another. I do belive that if Lobo had nothing to add to the thread then he should have just moved on. If you think about it Lobo is the one speaking when he doesnt need to, very constructive i must say Lobo. I doubt any of you would like it if you had a problem and someone just told you to stop bitching. Actually i dont think you can be more useless. As far as im concerned ya all can #%$@ my #%!@ hehehe.

Lobo · Post by **Lobo** » Wed Feb 21, 2001 9:13 am

Maybe I was wrong, let all Mr. @homesux friends gather around to see how bad his service is, I would be trying to get it fixed instead of whinning about it, so if that is the only way Mr. @homesux can get his message out, his friends don't know how to do a ping test, then post the results, I'm sure there are better places to post this kind of information, but if this is where he wants to inform the world of his unhappiness, have at it, just tone down the lanuage alittle as this is a family site.

legalmind · Post by **legalmind** » Wed Feb 21, 2001 9:18 am

Go try AOL!Download AOL 6.0, download all the patches,install every patch you can find.Do not back up anything, just load those patches.
Then surf baby surf!
Pretty silly you say? Go back and read this thread.

Egg · Post by **Egg** » Wed Feb 21, 2001 9:22 am

oakfan52 · Post by **oakfan52** » Wed Feb 21, 2001 3:41 pm

I think this thread needs to end. This has gone on long enough. Last time I checked this was a fourm to post problems and solutions, not a place to make personal attacks on each other. We all have diffrent opinions and need to bare in mind that what we say might offend someone. @homesux....If you have a problem then ask for help.

dray_heinz · Post by **dray_heinz** » Thu Feb 22, 2001 12:36 am

Sorry to say this but RodRod is right. I was in Sacramento, CA and had slower than 56k speeds for about 4 months. We finally got our problem resolved the day we got our local NBC station to air a news story on how bad our service is and how they keep selling it to new people and not telling them that they are currently having some bandwidth issues. Its almost as if they would deny having these problems evertime I would call in. The speed was fine the same day the news story was aired, coincedence? Oh well. I think bitchin about your problems especially if they have been going on for awhile is good. And its also good because you find other people from the same area as yourself who are having the same problems. If anything, I at least felt better about the whole situation knowing that I was not the only one getting screwed and knowing that I could vent my feelings somewhere. I agree that Lobo is the one being a bitch. Go back to 56k.....lol.