New Wifi system on Oceania

[forgap]

“P.S. I have posted pictures on Tapatalk on our last three cruises without incident and with the door closed (Mariner and Voyager).”

 

.....and I have not. I was in Indonesia and Australia.....your positive, closed door experience does not negate my experience. I think this discussion is for Regent to improve connectivity. Why argue?

[Travelcat2]

Jackie - just to clarify, the number of people online at any one time shouldn't affect connectivity - speed, yes. Connectivity, no. And honestly, it's 2018. There's WiFi everywhere - even in airplanes, buses, some taxis, everywhere. My last post explained why I need internet - my other choice is to not take a cruise. If Regent wants me (and others like me) to choose another vacation option just so I can check in with my office, well, so be it. But it seems short-sighted for them to do that.

 

On the other hand, I completely agree with you about someone printing off a huge stack of anything on board - what's the purpose of THAT? I'd be fine with them giving people X number of pages of printed output a day, say for excursion info, boarding passes, that kind of stuff...but 100+ pages? That's just nuts. Wonder it they could set their print drivers to limit the number of pages per print job or per user?

 

When you describe it, it seems to make more sense. I know that I use wrong terminology and appreciate your explanations. So, when there are 500+ passengers on at least one device and its difficult to online, it is a slowness rather than connectivity issue. Got it. It also gets very slow. Still, we haven’t had to open in the door in a long time and we have been all the way forward, all the way aft and are now mid-ship. In my opinion, it is better internet that we used to have. There are still black out spots in Alaska, Norway, etc., but that is a satellite issue (I think?)

[mikenbob]

If hundreds of airplanes with hundreds of passengers can offer simultaneous fairly high speed streaming while flying over 500 miles/hour 40,000 feet above any point on Earth, then a luxury ship line can surely do the same. It all comes down to the willingness to invest in the appropriate system. Anything else is simple a baseless excuse.

[flossie009]

Well I have cracked it :D

 

On Explorer now, it is 2:45am (i.e. the middle of the night).

Internet speed is just about OK, still not fast .......... and I don’t think there are too many obstructions to satellite comms in the middle of the Atlantic.

 

So all we need to do is go onto a night shift for all our cruises and leave our suite door open :rolleyes: :rolleyes:

 

Come on Regent; surely you can do better than this on the “world’s most luxurious ship”

[CruisetheCs]

As I read through this thread, it appears that Regent continues to provide an unreliable and mostly slow internet connection. This all occurs despite Regent's prior hype about fiber-optic speeds, etc, which now management apparently has given up on with no explanation. Still Regent apparently promises the ability to "stream" for a substantial fee. But what does Regent mean by "streaming"?

 

The sad part is that Regent hypes its internet service and doesn't bother to communicate the real onboard situation to passengers. What this new steaming charge is for is not clear if Regent isn't increasing the download speed.

 

The frequent posts on CC about too many people online at one time have a different implication than simply saying that Regent provides slow and unreliable internet service for guests. I don't understand why passengers should be blamed for Regent's failures. Nor do I understand why Regent can't or doesn't clearly and accurately communicate the real situation with its internet service. A major management failure in my opinion.

[Travelcat2]

Has anyone on this thread been sold a "bill of goods"? An item that was promised to do something that it never did? Well, we sure have. I have no doubt that Regent believed 100% in what the new system would do (and was advertised to do). I don't know (or really care) who was at fault. Was it the company that sold the upgrade to Regent that did not live up to expectations or was it Regent deciding to give included internet to everyone?

 

Sometimes you pay a lot of money for something that never does what it was expected to do. Could Regent have had everything that was installed on their ships ripped out and had the old system reinstalled? Only one of our guru's like Bill can answer that question. And, if that could have been done, where would Regent's WiFi be now? If I were the decision maker at Regent, I would want to be 1,000% certain that wherever they go from here works. The fact that Oceania has a very recent upgrade is not proof that it will work on Regent. Only studying the new system on Oceania for a reasonable length of time would give Regent the confidence to go forward.

 

The bottom line question that I have is how many of you have stopped sailing on Regent due to the internet? And, which luxury cruise line (Oceania doesn't count as luxury) did you go to where the WiFi was included for all guests and met your "vision" of what WiFi at sea should be? Was it Seabourn, Crystal or Silversea?

[flossie009]

Far be it for me to be cynical but could it be, now that Regent have reintroduced charges for some internet services, that the internet managers are purposefully “throttling” the free internet to allow more capacity for the paid for streaming services? :confused: :rolleyes:

[Travelcat2]

I do not believe in conspiracy theories nor do I believe that Regent would do anything intentional that would cause their customers to be as upset as some are about the internet.

[flossie009]

Interestingly, the internet for us this morning has improved (both speed and in-suite connectivity) after my rant on this thread in the middle of the night.

Coincidence ............. or does some one read these Boards.

 

Sorry, another conspiracy theory ;) :*

Edited March 30, 2018 by flossie009

[Travelcat2]

Definitely another conspiracy theory! It is more likely that the ship moved to an area where the signal is stronger. I notice this all the time on ships (Regent, Silversea, etc.). You can also notice this sometimes when the ship is anchored and turning around....... when it faces one way the signal is better than when it faces another.

[UUNetBill]

Bill, Last year we purchased a new Jaguar---and yes the car is a "HOT SPOT", so while driving a personal car you can connect with out a problem. So why not a ship?

Mostly because ships need to rely on satellite links in order to get you online - automotive hotspots connect directly with terrestrial cell towers. It's a much simpler implementation. My BMW also has a built-in hotspot that updates it's location and sends email to the dealer to remind me when service is due. Kinda freaks me out sometimes...

 

Ron, all that would be needed to be done would be to have someone build cell towers every 10 miles or so throughout all of the oceans and there could be hot spots for everyone. Seriously, with the ships constructed of lots of steel that has trouble with passing thru the wifi signal, cruise lines would need to put many more modems and repeaters throughout the ship for connectivity as well as bite the bullet to purchase the newest technology that can provide great internet download connections for all that will provide the service that they describe in their marketing but, don't actually provide.

 

It's not a matter of having the ability, it's buying and paying for the service.

Agreed - the technology exists (throughout most of the planet anyway) but it's not cheap. But Regent needs to weigh the cost of providing what they claim to provide vs. the negative impressions so many of us have.

 

If hundreds of airplanes with hundreds of passengers can offer simultaneous fairly high speed streaming while flying over 500 miles/hour 40,000 feet above any point on Earth, then a luxury ship line can surely do the same. It all comes down to the willingness to invest in the appropriate system. Anything else is simple a baseless excuse.

 

Yup - this is true. The technology is there - Regent just needs to get on board (no pun intended).

 

Interestingly, the internet for us this morning has improved (both speed and in-suite connectivity) after my rant on this thread in the middle of the night.

Coincidence ............. or does some one read these Boards.

 

Sorry, another conspiracy theory ;) :*

Maybe your signal strength improved after you removed your tinfoil hat before going to bed? ;p

 

 

The bottom line question that I have is how many of you have stopped sailing on Regent due to the internet? And, which luxury cruise line (Oceania doesn't count as luxury) did you go to where the WiFi was included for all guests and met your "vision" of what WiFi at sea should be? Was it Seabourn, Crystal or Silversea?

Jackie - I don't know anyone who has abandoned Regent because of poor internet - but if you bill yourself as a luxury product you need to strive for excellence in ALL areas, not just a few. Regent apparently feels that fast internet is part of the luxury experience or else they wouldn't have made such a big deal of it last year. It's a known issue and apparently bothers a few people as evidenced by the numerous threads and comments about it. Bottom line - they need to invest in a faster, more reliable system.

[BarbarianPaul]

Has anyone on this thread been sold a "bill of goods"? An item that was promised to do something that it never did? Well, we sure have. I have no doubt that Regent believed 100% in what the new system would do (and was advertised to do). I don't know (or really care) who was at fault. Was it the company that sold the upgrade to Regent that did not live up to expectations or was it Regent deciding to give included internet to everyone?

 

 

 

Sometimes you pay a lot of money for something that never does what it was expected to do. Could Regent have had everything that was installed on their ships ripped out and had the old system reinstalled? Only one of our guru's like Bill can answer that question. And, if that could have been done, where would Regent's WiFi be now? If I were the decision maker at Regent, I would want to be 1,000% certain that wherever they go from here works. The fact that Oceania has a very recent upgrade is not proof that it will work on Regent. Only studying the new system on Oceania for a reasonable length of time would give Regent the confidence to go forward.

 

 

 

The bottom line question that I have is how many of you have stopped sailing on Regent due to the internet? And, which luxury cruise line (Oceania doesn't count as luxury) did you go to where the WiFi was included for all guests and met your "vision" of what WiFi at sea should be? Was it Seabourn, Crystal or Silversea?

 

 

 

Jackie...

 

My wife and I are still in the phase where we’re trying out different cruise lines, ships, and itineraries. Like Bill, I need to stay in touch with my office, so internet is indeed a factor. In addition, of course, to fitting our schedule, it is one of the reasons we’re on Celebrity for an upcoming cruise through the Suez Canal. (We’ve also discovered that we quite enjoy the dining in the BLU dining room for the spa suites and cabins. It’s not quite Regent, but it’s better than Crystal, and for us the staff is friendlier and more accommodating than what we experienced in the Compass Rose.)

 

In any event, the internet on Celebrity actually works. No need for excuses regarding the number of people online, the different technologies involved, the ship’s position on the globe, etc. etc. These vacations are incredibly special for all of us, and to lose an hour every day sending and writing emails that should normally take five minutes can indeed negatively impact one’s time onboard.

 

Fyi, I couldn’t disagree with you more regarding Regent’s mind boggling upcharge for faster internet for streaming that, apparently, actually works. I believe Carnival also offers different internet pricing options for different speeds. Don’t you think, considering Regent’s pricing and status, that it’s a little unseemly?

 

 

Sent from my iPad using Forums

[MalbecWine]

The internet allows people who still work to cruise and stay in touch with their office or business. The internet is valuable to Regent as well as of course they get more bookings, but a unreliable internet is frustrating. Satellites are the conduit to ships and sometimes the ships will be without the satellites for a period of time.

 

Bill, you explained this perfectly.

[BarbarianPaul]

The internet allows people who still work to cruise and stay in touch with their office or business. The internet is valuable to Regent as well as of course they get more bookings, but a unreliable internet is frustrating. Satellites are the conduit to ships and sometimes the ships will be without the satellites for a period of time.

 

 

 

Bill did indeed explain it perfectly! But Malbec, Jackie is telling us how positive her experience is with the upcharge. I don’t think the ship’s position in regards to an available satellite is necessarily the issue. Not that I really know what it is! But it might not be just that.

 

 

Sent from my iPad using Forums

[CruisetheCs]

I wonder if someone onboard one of the Regent ships can get some clarification of the current state of the "free unlimited wifi" that Regent promises. Are some web sites blocked? (When I was on the Explorer several months ago, a number of web sites such as Apple's app store were blocked--and this was during the stage of promised fiber-optic internet speeds). How is the high-priced streaming option different from the free unlimited wifi (one poster reports being told that streaming is not faster than the regular wifi speed).

 

What does free "unlimited" wifi actually mean? What is unlimited, e.g., unlimited access to all websites? Unlimited time? Unlimited speed? If Regent is providing an internet product for an additional charge, then it seems that "unlimited" wifi, isn't unlimited.

 

I searched the RSSC website for info about internet and could find only the longstanding:

FREE Unlimited WiFi is included in the cruise fare and guests may access the internet throughout the entirety of all of our ships, including all suites, public rooms and outdoor decks. Guests may enjoy general web browsing, post photos to social media or check their email to stay seamlessly stay connected with friends and family.

It really is bizarre that Regent's management can't be bothered to address these issues either on this thread or somewhere on CC or somewhere on Regent's own website. Poor communication seems to be Regent's modus operandi in more ways than one!

[BarbarianPaul]

I wonder if someone onboard one of the Regent ships can get some clarification of the current state of the "free unlimited wifi" that Regent promises. Are some web sites blocked? (When I was on the Explorer several months ago, a number of web sites such as Apple's app store were blocked--and this was during the stage of promised fiber-optic internet speeds). How is the high-priced streaming option different from the free unlimited wifi (one poster reports being told that streaming is not faster than the regular wifi speed).

 

 

 

What does free "unlimited" wifi actually mean? What is unlimited, e.g., unlimited access to all websites? Unlimited time? Unlimited speed? If Regent is providing an internet product for an additional charge, then it seems that "unlimited" wifi, isn't unlimited.

 

 

 

I searched the RSSC website for info about internet and could find only the longstanding:

 

FREE Unlimited WiFi is included in the cruise fare and guests may access the internet throughout the entirety of all of our ships, including all suites, public rooms and outdoor decks. Guests may enjoy general web browsing, post photos to social media or check their email to stay seamlessly stay connected with friends and family.

 

 

It really is bizarre that Regent's management can't be bothered to address these issues either on this thread or somewhere on CC or somewhere on Regent's own website. Poor communication seems to be Regent's modus operandi in more ways than one!

 

 

CruisetheCs....

 

Regent’s definition of “general web browsing” does not include streaming video from sites like Netflix and YouTube, which require faster, better speeds. The issue is that the product included in Regent’s fare is at best unreliable, intermittent, and bad...putting some people in the position of having to pay $35 extra a day for what appears to be reliable internet, even if they have no interest in watching online video.

 

On Jackie’s 15 day cruise, that’s an extra $576 she’s happily giving Regent. I believe that’s exactly how it works on Carnival, which I just looked up, but their maximum price is $25.

 

Personally, I think this decision is an embarrassing diminishment of Regent’s brand.

 

 

 

Sent from my iPad using Forums

[Missymssy]

I'm sure the technology exists for faster, more reliable internet. I'm sure it's expensive. And I'm sure Regent doesn't want to pay for it - but if they're billing themselves as a 6-star experience, they're going to have no choice.

</RantOff>

 

This is exactly the point. If other ships (mainstream, premium, whatever) can provide it, then surely Regent can. As stated earlier, a "luxury experience" includes ALL aspects of your cruise. For some passengers, wi-fi is every bit as important to having an enjoyable vacation as as the quality of food and drink.

[pingpong1]

I'd gladly give up my portion of foie gras or caviar in exchange for a more reliable/consistent internet connection!

[wcsdkqh]

Perhaps if Regent charged everyone $20 or $30 per day as others do, then there would be far fewer users, and Regent Internet would be as good as others. No doubt that the majority of the complaints seen here are a result of hundreds of users all trying to squeeze thru the same small pipe. As someone mentioned previously, their experience early morning was good, probably due to many fewer users using the limited bandwidth a satellite connection provides.

[pingpong1]

I think posts #66 & #67 are relevant to the point. Are Regent customers not already paying "enough" to include the same internet connectivity that mainstream cruise lines are providing for service on their ships for 1/5 of the fare and with 3-4 times the numbers of passengers onboard?

[BarbarianPaul]

Perhaps if Regent charged everyone $20 or $30 per day as others do, then there would be far fewer users, and Regent Internet would be as good as others. No doubt that the majority of the complaints seen here are a result of hundreds of users all trying to squeeze thru the same small pipe. As someone mentioned previously, their experience early morning was good, probably due to many fewer users using the limited bandwidth a satellite connection provides.

 

 

 

I just don’t think that’s correct. The Celebrity ships on which I’ve travelled have more passengers and, again, quite effective internet. And, again, enough excuses! Just fix it!

 

I don’t think the solution is to pass the cost along to their passengers with an annoying upcharge, like the mass market cruise lines.

 

And I certainly wouldn’t applaud them for the policy.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Sent from my iPad using Forums

[CruisetheCs]

CruisetheCs....

Regent’s definition of “general web browsing” does not include streaming video from sites like Netflix and YouTube, which require faster, better speeds. The issue is that the product included in Regent’s fare is at best unreliable, intermittent, and bad...putting some people in the position of having to pay $35 extra a day for what appears to be reliable internet, even if they have no interest in watching online video.

On Jackie’s 15 day cruise, that’s an extra $576 she’s happily giving Regent. I believe that’s exactly how it works on Carnival, which I just looked up, but their maximum price is $25.

Personally, I think this decision is an embarrassing diminishment of Regent’s brand.

Sent from my iPad using Forums

It isn't clear to me what Regent's "free" internet access includes. What web sites or services are blocked? What additional access is gained by paying $35? Are all videos blocked on "free" internet, e.g., short video clips from the NYT or CNN web sites? What is Regent's definition of "streaming."

BBfromCA in post #38 says:

"I asked both Internet Directors "If I pay for the streaming internet service, and you open up those ports to allow the streaming, do you also increase the speed that I receive?" The answer on both ships was "NO". If you can barely download internet pages, I think it is foolish to pay for streaming that will just sit there and buffer."

 

So what does a guest get for $35? Access to what? At what speed? And the same questions can be asked about the "free" wifi.

 

The lack of candor and transparency from Regent is one of the reasons that these posts go on and on with speculations and questions (including mine) about the poor internet service. If Regent was truly concerned about communication and candor it would post clear and accurate descriptions of its services without all the hype and exaggeration that was embodied in the "fiber-optic" speed claim that Regent made for a very long time.

 

If Regent wants to claim that it is a first-rate company than its communications need to reflect that standard.

[JMARINER]

A couple of points to consider: Regent still advertising for SSS benefits "Free, Unlimited Internet" link. What does this really?

 

How can it be called unlimited if they are now charging for higher speeds for video?

 

Why can none of us, the poster of CC get a straight answer? I am on the Explorer right now and have asked the computer room manager? The answer was meaning less gobbilty gook. The GM couldn't answer, just referred to Corporate and says the know there are problems and are working on them.

 

I know that Regent Corporate monitors this CC group: Hay Jason, how about some answers for your most loyal customers?

 

J

[BarbarianPaul]

Wow. This is even more of a mess than I thought.

 

 

Sent from my iPad using Forums

[Travelcat2]

Paul (and others). If Regent could just spent money and make the problem go away, it would be great. But, IF people doing work from the ship slows down the connectivity, my first instinct would be to charge this group.

 

I know that this isn’t what working people want to hear but — just for a second, try looking at it another way. During most of my travels I kept in touch with work - usually via fax that I would find in local shops around the world. I kept receipts and got reimbursed. So, IF (making more assumptions), Regent was able to provide the level of internet service that posters seem to be looking for at a price (that is reimbursable for people using the system for their jobs) AND, as a result of the change, the rest of the passengers could receive decent speeds, wouldn’t that be fair?

 

I’m also still anxious to know if other luxury cruise lines (Seabourn, Silversea or Crystal) have he type of internet that everyone is looking for.

Edited March 31, 2018 by Travelcat2