Anyone Using an Asus DSL-AC68U

[Evil Shubunkin]

Frankly i do not think it is the fault of the Asus or any other third party device, it just happens that the Huawei or ECI modems perform better, which is no shock when you consider the firmware for them was specifically written for FTTC in this country and not a general worldwide audience.

I agree with this - if ASUS went through BT certification (SIN498) then that may iron out some of the issues that some people are experiencing.

For me, the MediaTek chipset is generating multiple times more errors than the Huawei does, and I assume the ECI is less since it's syncing with an ECI cabinet. Would be nice if there was a v2 using a Broadcom or Lantiq modem then maybe there would be a lot more compatibility with lines on fastpath at 6dB margin.

 

[Evil Shubunkin]

Mine's been up over 28 days now and as it seems to be stable I am keeping the 2155 firmware. Until that is the guys here say asus has brought out a version that fixed the stated issues...

Might be worth going to 2160 as that was a security fix that was rolled out to all affected ASUS routers. No modem changes so you shouldn't see any issues with that update.

 

[bitsNbobs]

But Asus could easily bring out a UK only firmware could they not and I am sure it wouldn't take much to do it either. Other companies can do it with other devices..

Ive not seen any VDSL modem/router devices with firmware specific for the UK, which companies/devices are doing that?

 

[bitsNbobs]

I agree with this - if ASUS went through BT certification (SIN498) then that may iron out some of the issues that some people are experiencing.

For me, the MediaTek chipset is generating multiple times more errors than the Huawei does, and I assume the ECI is less since it's syncing with an ECI cabinet. Would be nice if there was a v2 using a Broadcom or Lantiq modem then maybe there would be a lot more compatibility with lines on fastpath at 6dB margin.

I do not think its even that, The BT certification you mention mainly deals with what hardware capabilities the device should have, the asus meets and even exceeds everything in that spec. Its more software which is the issue.

This is NOT just an issue with the Asus ive yet to see a single third party device give lower error related figures CONSISTENTLY than the standalone Huawei and ECI boxes do, and that is due to software on them.

Its certainly not the hardware to blame as such, as for example the TP-Link W9980 has basically the exact same chipset as the ECI modems and Home Hub 5 (IE Lantiq), error related figures on it are still higher though, again due to differing software/firmware. Likewise (I think im right on this) the Billions and other makes have a broadcom chipset like the Huawei modem and again they for many still report higher errors etc, obviously not always the case and will vary but has happened with those devices also.

The Asus just seems to be worse for some people, could be because its an untested chipset but i think its clear just from this thread most issues are SOFTWARE not HARDWARE. Id even guess people which can not even get a full day worth of sync from the Asus would still have issues with other third part gear just maybe not as bad, which is irrelevant really as something is either stable or it isnt. No point IMO going to a device that loses sync say every 72 hours instead of 24. For people like that i guess for now the Huawei/ECI/HH5 is the only thing they should be using if they want top speeds in addition to reliability.

Submitting x companies device for BT certification would not help from what i can see as many would meet the hardware requirements that SIN spec lays out, many devices now exceed it. The issue is the software third party companies are loading onto the devices, third party software is design for a worldwide audience not just a couple of million UK FTTC users, unlike BTs boxes.

No doubt in time a gem of a third party device will appear but VDSL take up is still so slow even after the near 5 years its been out that many third parties are just not bothering too much. You have something like 5 Million FTTC users in the UK and something like 20 Million still on ADSL (those are rough approximations) if you were a business building modems who would you still go after? Id rather sell to potential tens of millions, than single digits Its the same for most of Europe ADSL still being the most used, gonna be a while before it isn't.

 

[cuke2u]

The Sky supplied modem/router obviously has a firmware that is setup for the UK DLM, otherwise surely it would have similar issues. I'm not necessarily referring to modems when I stated some hardware has a UK firmware though as I IT Techie I have come across some for other devices. It is possible for Asus to do this though, I can't see any reason why not.
I also know about the 2160 security updates but I am still going to wait until Asus actually fix the issues identified in this thread.

 

[andy66]

well posting my latest info`s 21 days uptime, no issues max 80/20 dsl sync speed
no issues...

I question to all arising from ViRuS2k's stats:

I'm confused that ViRuS2k's power values are so high (or mine so low) when compared to the Line Attenuation. Wondering if this could be a cause of ViRuS2k being so stable and my not being?
If this is a sensible thought, what power is anyone else (who's attenuation is roughly 7down/2up) running at?

ViRuS2k:
Line Attenuation Down 8.7 dB
Line Attenuation Up 2.5 dB
POWER Down 11.1 dbm
POWER Up 2.4 dbm

Me:
Line Attenuation Down 6.0 dB
Line Attenuation Up 1.8 dB
POWER Down -3.8 dbm
POWER Up -3.6 dbm

[Note I'm on a DSL-N66U, which is related, but not the same, and clearly on different f/w. So there may be too many other differences to draw any conclusions.]

 

[trisp]

I would love ViRuS2k's to post his settings cause to be up that long/stable is pretty darn good

It might encourage me to finally start using mine again (gave up a few firmware's ago)

 

[andy66]

I would love ViRuS2k's to post his settings cause to be up that long/stable is pretty darn good

It might encourage me to finally start using mine again (gave up a few firmware's ago)

See http://forums.overclockers.co.uk/showpost.php?p=27515390&postcount=1122

 

[Ixel]

I've also been wondering if the attenuation and power is linked more to those with stability, some instability, or a lot of instability. When I next plug it in I might try changing my kl0 to see what effect it has on fastpath. There's a possibility it will only effect the upstream though.

 

[andy66]

I've also been wondering if the attenuation and power is linked more to those with stability, some instability, or a lot of instability. When I next plug it in I might try changing my kl0 to see what effect it has on fastpath. There's a possibility it will only effect the upstream though.

I'd certainly imagine that if the cabinet was transmitting to me with 13mW (11.1 dbm) rather than 0.42mW (-3.8 dbm) that my connection would be more resistant to interruption from noise!

 

[IronRod]

ASUS DSL-68U POS

I do not think its even that, The BT certification you mention mainly deals with what hardware capabilities the device should have, the asus meets and even exceeds everything in that spec. Its more software which is the issue.

This is NOT just an issue with the Asus ive yet to see a single third party device give lower error related figures CONSISTENTLY than the standalone Huawei and ECI boxes do, and that is due to software on them.

Its certainly not the hardware to blame as such, as for example the TP-Link W9980 has basically the exact same chipset as the ECI modems and Home Hub 5 (IE Lantiq), error related figures on it are still higher though, again due to differing software/firmware. Likewise (I think im right on this) the Billions and other makes have a broadcom chipset like the Huawei modem and again they for many still report higher errors etc, obviously not always the case and will vary but has happened with those devices also.

The Asus just seems to be worse for some people, could be because its an untested chipset but i think its clear just from this thread most issues are SOFTWARE not HARDWARE. Id even guess people which can not even get a full day worth of sync from the Asus would still have issues with other third part gear just maybe not as bad, which is irrelevant really as something is either stable or it isnt. No point IMO going to a device that loses sync say every 72 hours instead of 24. For people like that i guess for now the Huawei/ECI/HH5 is the only thing they should be using if they want top speeds in addition to reliability.

Submitting x companies device for BT certification would not help from what i can see as many would meet the hardware requirements that SIN spec lays out, many devices now exceed it. The issue is the software third party companies are loading onto the devices, third party software is design for a worldwide audience not just a couple of million UK FTTC users, unlike BTs boxes.

No doubt in time a gem of a third party device will appear but VDSL take up is still so slow even after the near 5 years its been out that many third parties are just not bothering too much. You have something like 5 Million FTTC users in the UK and something like 20 Million still on ADSL (those are rough approximations) if you were a business building modems who would you still go after? Id rather sell to potential tens of millions, than single digits Its the same for most of Europe ADSL still being the most used, gonna be a while before it isn't.

I don't think it's possible for anyone other than ASUS or Mediatek to make a qualified statement that this is a software rather than a hardware issue. Given that we've been feeding back info to ASUS for months and they device still isn't fixed, I find it hard to believe that it is just a software problem....software can be easily fixed. Also when looking at hardware, problems can just as easily be caused by the integration of the chips into the platform as they can by the chips themselves. RF products are notoriously difficult to get right because a badly designed PCB or poorly selected components can easily cause unwanted signal coupling or noise.

I also don't think that line stability or error rate problems are linked to software...unless the router or modem is rebooting which is not indicated in the logs. While the modem will be configured via software, the physical and data layers that include the error correction, will be hardware based.

Now it could still be that ASUS and MediaTek haven't worked out the correct configuration for the modem in the UK and I think that's what everybody involved in this forum is hoping. But since ASUS hasn't actually given us any information or a timescale for a fix, we're all stuck in the dark reading this forum in the hope that someone smarter than ASUS's engineers can make it work.

I don't think there are any excuses for ASUS at this point. The product has been available since September 2014 and it still isn't working properly. The fact that the price has dropped so dramatically in this period is probably a good indicator of the faith that ASUS have in the product. You can actually pick up this router for less than the RT version without the modem?!

Personally I think ASUS has shafted us and has no intention of putting it right

 

[bitsNbobs]

The Sky supplied modem/router obviously has a firmware that is setup for the UK DLM, otherwise surely it would have similar issues. I'm not necessarily referring to modems when I stated some hardware has a UK firmware though as I IT Techie I have come across some for other devices. It is possible for Asus to do this though, I can't see any reason why not.
I also know about the 2160 security updates but I am still going to wait until Asus actually fix the issues identified in this thread.

Skys FTTC system uses a system called MER (Mac Encapsulated Routing) to authenticate, and while you can make other routers do that it is not the norm so their gear is custom made for their service not FTTC/VDSL as a whole in the UK. Again it is custom software not hardware. I think they Sky 102 device is a broadcom chipset, the same as Billions, Zyxels, and the Openreach Huawei ALL of which give different degrees of error reporting, all the same basic hardware at heart though but perform different (even if minor).

 

[bitsNbobs]

I don't think it's possible for anyone other than ASUS or Mediatek to make a qualified statement that this is a software rather than a hardware issue. Given that we've been feeding back info to ASUS for months and they device still isn't fixed, I find it hard to believe that it is just a software problem....

The problem is software, we can give them all the feedback they want but if to make things stable for those with poor lines in this country means altering something that will affect the rest of the customer base they are not going to do it. Also if you do not think it is software why bother giving them any feedback at all as any fix they would make (IE firmware) would be a SOFTWARE alteration not hardware.

...software can be easily fixed.

As someone that has a background in programming i find that rather insulting.

Also when looking at hardware, problems can just as easily be caused by the integration of the chips into the platform as they can by the chips themselves. RF products are notoriously difficult to get right because a badly designed PCB or poorly selected components can easily cause unwanted signal coupling or noise.

Its nothing to do with chipset design, before it went to market the device would have had to go through numerous tests from numerous independaent agencies to get certification.

The chipset in the Asus has passed certification...
http://www.prnewswire.co.uk/news-re...trac-broadband-test-laboratory-231716931.html

ANY other device would had gone through similar testing.

I also don't think that line stability or error rate problems are linked to software...unless the router or modem is rebooting which is not indicated in the logs. While the modem will be configured via software, the physical and data layers that include the error correction, will be hardware based.

Why is it 2 devices with the same hardware chipset from different manufacturers ill repeat my TPLINK W9980 and ECI B-Focus compare as examples have different levels of reliability when it comes to line errors then??? Its down to software nothing more.

Now it could still be that ASUS and MediaTek haven't worked out the correct configuration for the modem in the UK and I think that's what everybody involved in this forum is hoping. But since ASUS hasn't actually given us any information or a timescale for a fix, we're all stuck in the dark reading this forum in the hope that someone smarter than ASUS's engineers can make it work.

Again unfair and insulting to software developers, you can not quote a time frame to fix somehing if you are not 100% sure of the issue.

I don't think there are any excuses for ASUS at this point. The product has been available since September 2014 and it still isn't working properly.

3 months is nothing ive seen devices not just routers but other equipment get release and its taken a year before the software was stable. Sure its annoying but to even in any way suggest they have not done enough when there has been firmware after firmware is a bit unfair, you would had been lucky to even get that much from some companies.

The fact that the price has dropped so dramatically in this period is probably a good indicator of the faith that ASUS have in the product. You can actually pick up this router for less than the RT version without the modem?!

Meaningless again the TPLINK W9980 on its release was £90 you can now get one for near £50-60 if you look around.... Does that also make that device rubbish, oh and that from my memory only came out in November.

Personally I think ASUS has shafted us and has no intention of putting it right

No they just want feedback and have been churing out firmwares just out of bordom, obviously!

 

[bitsNbobs]

Sorry bad form 3 posts in a row (for some reason on here the multi quote feature for me sometimes does not work properly).

For those wanting a line as good as ViRuS2k you have 2 chances of that, slim and sweet (bleep ) all.

His line it is obvious is a quirk when it comes to phone lines in this country, his last mile of copper (thats a terminology not a literal he has a mile) cable from cabinet to house obviously for reasons unknown is NOT susceptible to outside interference. Id gather it is short also (id guess he is probably within eyesight of the cabinet probably 100M or less).

His line is also likely to have a high power rating (i bet voice down his phone is amazingly clear for analog and loud). He also probably only has a few people on VDSL at his cabinet.

I would not be shocked if he lives in a non-built up area or a street that is quite short (like 50-100 houses tops) Not necessarily rural but a location without a load of outside EMI and more than likely a newish (less that 30 years old) home. Probably a culdesac or housing development not built too long ago with nice fresh cabinets and wire.

Tweaking any device is not going to get you results like his, you can basically consider him either very lucky or a technological abnormality.

 

[andy66]

Sorry bad form 3 posts in a row (for some reason on here the multi quote feature for me sometimes does not work properly).

For those wanting a line as good as ViRuS2k you have 2 chances of that, slim and sweet (bleep ) all.

His line it is obvious is a quirk when it comes to phone lines in this country, his last mile of copper (thats a terminology not a literal he has a mile) cable from cabinet to house obviously for reasons unknown is NOT susceptible to outside interference. Id gather it is short also (id guess he is probably within eyesight of the cabinet probably 100M or less).

His line is also likely to have a high power rating (i bet voice down his phone is amazingly clear for analog and loud). He also probably only has a few people on VDSL at his cabinet.

I would not be shocked if he lives in a non-built up area or a street that is quite short (like 50-100 houses tops) Not necessarily rural but a location without a load of outside EMI and more than likely a newish (less that 30 years old) home. Probably a culdesac or housing development not built too long ago with nice fresh cabinets and wire.

Tweaking any device is not going to get you results like his, you can basically consider him either very lucky or a technological abnormality.

All nice points. However there is one I don't understand:

Could you explain what you mean by his line having a "high power rating"?

I accept he may have an exceptionally short and quiet line. (Though I have less reported attenuation on my short, not necessarily quiet, line).
The thing I don't understand is why, given his line is so good, both up and down power would be so high (relative to mine).

It couldn't be that the system knows there is no one for him to interfere with, and thus cranks up his power?

 

[IronRod]

The problem is software, we can give them all the feedback they want but if to make things stable for those with poor lines in this country means altering something that will affect the rest of the customer base they are not going to do it. Also if you do not think it is software why bother giving them any feedback at all as any fix they would make (IE firmware) would be a SOFTWARE alteration not hardware.



As someone that has a background in programming i find that rather insulting.



Its nothing to do with chipset design, before it went to market the device would have had to go through numerous tests from numerous independaent agencies to get certification.

The chipset in the Asus has passed certification...
http://www.prnewswire.co.uk/news-re...trac-broadband-test-laboratory-231716931.html

ANY other device would had gone through similar testing.



Why is it 2 devices with the same hardware chipset from different manufacturers ill repeat my TPLINK W9980 and ECI B-Focus compare as examples have different levels of reliability when it comes to line errors then??? Its down to software nothing more.



Again unfair and insulting to software developers, you can not quote a time frame to fix somehing if you are not 100% sure of the issue.



3 months is nothing ive seen devices not just routers but other equipment get release and its taken a year before the software was stable. Sure its annoying but to even in any way suggest they have not done enough when there has been firmware after firmware is a bit unfair, you would had been lucky to even get that much from some companies.



Meaningless again the TPLINK W9980 on its release was £90 you can now get one for near £50-60 if you look around.... Does that also make that device rubbish, oh and that from my memory only came out in November.



No they just want feedback and have been churing out firmwares just out of bordom, obviously!

OK, appear to have upset you which genuinely wasn't my intention. My irritation with this device and ASUS's lack of fix is directed at ASUS not anyone on this forum.

However, I stand by my assertion that there is no way for us to know if this is a software or hardware problem. Having the modem chip pass the necessary certification is not a guarantee that the chip will be integrated into the platform in a way that it will perform to the correct standard. As I said before RF products are tricky and one manufacturers implementation using a chip can easily perform differently to another manufacturers implementation using the same chip. Different PCB layouts, different power supply components, different router processors all mean it's really difficult to compare two products using the same modem directly. Obviously they have different software too, but we are not in a position to know what is actually at fault.

I apologise if I upset you, but I do not think ASUS is doing a good job with this device and I don't think we should be making excuses for them. The only communication we've had from ASUS is their support guy making occasional contact to ask for some log files or suggest some setting change that invariable slows down the connection. They have pushed out several new firmwares, which is a credit to them, but the modem part was pretty much unusable on release so they really had to do something to minimise returns. Given the pain that most of us have been suffering with the modem part of this router, do you really think that ASUS are doing enough?

 

[cuke2u]

Skys FTTC system uses a system called MER (Mac Encapsulated Routing) to authenticate, and while you can make other routers do that it is not the norm so their gear is custom made for their service not FTTC/VDSL as a whole in the UK. Again it is custom software not hardware. I think they Sky 102 device is a broadcom chipset, the same as Billions, Zyxels, and the Openreach Huawei ALL of which give different degrees of error reporting, all the same basic hardware at heart though but perform different (even if minor).

Yup, know all of that, however we are talking about a cheap Sky SR102-c Sagen modem that is given away by Sky can do the job better, and with different phone lines, than a £180 Asus product, it's not good is it?

 

[pdes]

I thought I would join the merry throng and maybe get some answers as well as provide some info that may be useful.

Since November, I have been working with Sky and Openreach to try to work out why my SNR behaves strangely.

I keep having sudden leaps in CRCs as well as an SNR that starts correctly after a reboot but some hours later starts to slowly drop away to as low as 2db . Sky have been running a 24 hour long line test and we will be talking later to see whether anything was apparent. This is after four visits from OpenReach where each engineer has said that there are no faults on the line.

In the meantime, I have continued to record the router stats and I have appended a snapshot from today at this link >>>.
http://1drv.ms/1A2KV4V
What's puzzling me is the fact that the target was set at 7db by Sky and as you will see it gradually drops to 6db. (I know that SNR is supposed to be set in multiples of 3 but the Sky guy said he had set it at 7 and when I reboot, that's where it starts!). The wiggly line shows (I think) that there is a minor fluctuation every twenty seconds. However, when the SNR gets down to 6db, there are absolutely no fluctuation at all. The trace is dead solid. There's the occasional blip but it can stay like this for hours. Then, for no apparent reason, it will slip below 6db and start the slow decline often to below two but often levels out at around 4, and once again there are adjustments every 20 seconds. But, there is never a dead straight trace after it has dropped below 6db. There seems to be no correlation between the errors and the change in SNR. I can go for hours with no errors then get hundreds in the space of a few minutes.

Now, here's the strange(er) bit. I am not getting drop-outs and speed is excellent for such a long line (51.7ATT). See below.

I have seen many posts elsewhere suggesting that this router is not suitable for long lines but surely the lack of drop-outs counters this view.

I would be interested to know whether anyone has a view as to whether the low SNR but stable line should be accepted, whether this could be an anomaly that could be due to the modem/router and I should wait for updates or whether I should continue to seek engineering support from Sky/OpenReach

Cheers

DSL Firmware Version 1.0.2.1
DSL Driver Version FwVer:5.5.1.126_A_A60901 HwVer:T14.F7_0.2
DSL Link Status up
DSL Uptime
0 days 19 hours 45 minutes 18 seconds
DSL modulation
ITU G.992.5(ADSL2PLUS)
Annex mode
ANNEX_A
SNR Down
3.2 dB
SNR Up
11.0 dB
Line Attenuation Down
51.7 dB
Line Attenuation Up
30.7 dB
Path Mode
Interleaved
Data Rate Down
6380 kbps
Data Rate Up
799 kbps
MAX Rate Down
7344
MAX Rate Up
872
POWER Down
19.3 dbm
POWER Up
12.3 dbm
CRC Down
2052
CRC Up
10

 

[bitsNbobs]

All nice points. However there is one I don't understand:

Could you explain what you mean by his line having a "high power rating"?

I accept he may have an exceptionally short and quiet line. (Though I have less reported attenuation on my short, not necessarily quiet, line).
The thing I don't understand is why, given his line is so good, both up and down power would be so high (relative to mine).

It couldn't be that the system knows there is no one for him to interfere with, and thus cranks up his power?

Phone lines have a small amount of voltage which runs along them, the amount varies depending on line. Some modems in their stats will report the voltage on the line (as an example when i was ADSL with a Netgear DG834GT with DGTeam firmware that did). The higher the voltage generally the more stable a line is. Not always the case, you can have too much but thats easy for an engineer to fix. A neighbour in my street (3 doors away) on ADSL could get almost 3Mb more than i ever could even trying various routers and it was all down to their line having something stupid like half a volt more power.

OK, appear to have upset you which genuinely wasn't my intention. My irritation with this device and ASUS's lack of fix is directed at ASUS not anyone on this forum.

However, I stand by my assertion that there is no way for us to know if this is a software or hardware problem. Having the modem chip pass the necessary certification is not a guarantee that the chip will be integrated into the platform in a way that it will perform to the correct standard. As I said before RF products are tricky and one manufacturers implementation using a chip can easily perform differently to another manufacturers implementation using the same chip. Different PCB layouts, different power supply components, different router processors all mean it's really difficult to compare two products using the same modem directly. Obviously they have different software too, but we are not in a position to know what is actually at fault.

I apologise if I upset you, but I do not think ASUS is doing a good job with this device and I don't think we should be making excuses for them. The only communication we've had from ASUS is their support guy making occasional contact to ask for some log files or suggest some setting change that invariable slows down the connection. They have pushed out several new firmwares, which is a credit to them, but the modem part was pretty much unusable on release so they really had to do something to minimise returns. Given the pain that most of us have been suffering with the modem part of this router, do you really think that ASUS are doing enough?

You did not upset me, i assure you its a software issue with the device the hardware has been tested independently to make sure it works. The software is based on opensource code, which do you think is more likely to need fixing, hardware which has undergone independent tests before it can be produced and sold, or opensource software which has been modified even further by Asus for the device?

Its not just the modem chip which would had been tested either, every component in that device would have to go for testing before it can be sold. The power supply, the wifi, everything right down to the screws have to be certified. The plastic case is even likely to have undergone test involving setting it on fire to make sure the plastic is not too oily and encourages it to burst into flames/flammibility. This is not some knockoff fleabay chinese shed made stuff its a mass commercial product.

It would have even had to be tested in its final design, Mediatek would highly unlikely allow them a license to use their chips in a chipset which did not meet their approval either.

Hardware nowadays for a worldwide market is subject to more testing than you can imagine.

The very fact the device becomes more stable for many just by disabling the spectrum monitor/stats pages in the SOFTWARE, even shows that there are software issues with the device. To blame the hardware with no evidence is a bit silly. The fact with some software releases its made the device either more or less stable for some people also points back to SOFTWARE.

Yup, know all of that, however we are talking about a cheap Sky SR102-c Sagen modem that is given away by Sky can do the job better, and with different phone lines, than a £180 Asus product, it's not good is it?

Which does not show anything, there have been users with problems with skys router (see their independent forum) which have gone away with another device. Also although you can argue it may or may not be more stable than the Asus still does not explain why for some that switch to say a Openreach Huawei modem instead of the Sky 102 find the Huawei more stable. The chipset is basically the same in both devices, one over the other should not perform significantly better. Yet they do.

Its no different (apart from how reliable you deem it to be) with the Asus situation. No doubt out there their is some other Mediatek device (probably bundled gear in the far east for some fibre service) and that gives no issues.

Im not defending Asus, the software is a bug ridden mess, FEC stats are obviously reported wrong, having to disable part of its software (IE spectrum) to make it more stable is daft and thats just issues we know about. The problem if any is Asus have gone for a chipset and then basically ported the software from another device of a differing chipset (IE the non DSL AC68u) and just encoded the modem driver in with that software..... It should had been tested more before they released it.

It could be so bad that it would be easier to start from scratch, without all the code at present i could not say, either way within a week or so i will hopefully know when i get one of them and dump all the software via TTL. From there ill probably laugh, rip a load of redundant cack out and fix it. Though no doubt then people will want certain things which make it buggy put back in.... Sometimes as a software dev you cant win or ever please people, more features in software ALWAYS EQUALS more problems.

 

[cuke2u]

Yes some have had issues, as with any modem, however you cannot the ignore the fact that nine times out of ten the number of users of this cheap, and nasty 'thowaway' modem are finding it more stable in the majority, and doesn't require the excellent combined knowledge of people like yourself finding 'tweaks' to make it more line stable out of the box either. There are no excuses for asus's inability to produce a fix and given the size of the company, compared to sagem, it is blatantly obvious that they don't seem to care. Where are they here, do you seen any posts from a UK representative in any forum in the uk assuring us that they are aware there are issues and that they are working on them. Not even in any replies to my service query emails are they suggesting anything other than the standard tweaks. It is pathetic really...