Search:  

 
theme to black backgroundlet page decide theme
HomeFind ServiceReviewsISP NewsFAQsForumsToolsDatabaseAbout 






how-to block ads



Member review of AT&T U-Verse


News tagged to this company
more information on the company
Full AT&T U-Verse Forum
Fiber Optic Forum

Reviews:
read 327 reviews (231 positive) (26 negative)
If you wish to review this company, email reviews@dslreports.com
login for new review notification feature
Award!

about
Six Month Rating

Pre Sales Information:
Install Co-ordination:
Connection reliability:
Tech Support:
Value for money:


$127 per month avg ($30 to $264)

3 year trend
Review by cowboyro See Profile
UPDATED: 156 days ago
member for 9.1 years, 634 visits, last login: a few hours ago


Shelton,Fairfield,CT
$136 per month
about 10 days
"Awesome picture, quick channel switching, whole house DVR, fast internet,"
"Some features are retarded"
"I'm definitely keeping it."
Pre Sales Information:
Install Co-ordination:
Connection reliability:
Tech Support:
Value for money:
(ratings match consensus)

    My Other Reviews·Comcast
    ·Optimum Voice
    I had my eyes on U-Verse for some time as my Comcast promotion ended. The visit of a AT&T sales rep brought some answers I was looking for.

    I wanted the appointment for a Saturday, apparently they don't do installs on Saturdays. Settled for Wednesday, I took a day off and.... they missed it. An angry call revealed the fact that they will do installs on Saturday if you threaten to cancel.

    The good:

    The tech who came seemed surprisingly knowledgeable. The installation went smooth, but I had my house pre-wired with CAT-6. The tech suggested replacing the wiring from the VRAD to my house and one day I found new wires... can't complain. The maximum sync he could get was 50M, absolutely enough to accommodate my 18M internet.

    Picture quality is awesome and channels switch really fast. The whole-house DVR is great. Internet works as expected.

    The bad:

    Channels lineup is a mess. Would have been great to have an option to re-map channel numbers (saving favorites is a work-around). You can't start/schedule a recording from a non-DVR box, though you can do it from a browser... absolutely retarded.

    The router can't map a port to a particular IP, just to machines that use DHCP or have a visible static IP. While it's good for the average Joe, if you have a more advanced network it just doesn't cut it.

    The packages are somewhat expensive, Comcast offers more for the same price although it is overall a crappier service in my area.

    Bottom line: I'm sticking with it. I'll run some more reliability tests for internet and make a decision whether I keep the internet or go with Comcast for internet-only (speeds are very comparable and there is talk about metered billing in the future). At least I have a fall-back option...

    Followup comments:
    view ALL 2 comments
    real_goose

    join:2001-04-13
    Grosse Pointe, MI
    ·Evoice
    ·VoicePulse for Bus..
    ·AT&T U-Verse
    ·Comcast
    ·callwithus

    U-verse static address port mapping

    Perhaps your device can not map ports to a static address, but it works for me. Several SIP ports are mapped to my Asterisk PBX which is on a static, not DHCP address. The router is a 3800HGV-B Gateway and the computer is 192.168.1.11. I just created the custom mapping and assigned it to the computer - no problems.
    permalink · 2009-06-16 16:12:30 · Reply to this

    cowboyro

    join:2000-10-11
    Shelton, CT
    ·AT&T U-Verse
    ·Comcast
    ·Optimum Voice

    Re: U-verse static address port mapping

    said by real_goose See Profile :

    Perhaps your device can not map ports to a static address, but it works for me. Several SIP ports are mapped to my Asterisk PBX which is on a static, not DHCP address. The router is a 3800HGV-B Gateway and the computer is 192.168.1.11. I just created the custom mapping and assigned it to the computer - no problems.
    I have the same RG, but the issue is that it cannot map ports to a (static) IP that *it cannot see* - if it's not in the list then you can't map - example a server that has 2 IP's in the same subnet (don't ask why, there is a long story behind it), only one of the IP's is visible in the selection list of the firewall. Sure this is fairly uncommon and the design is good for 99.5% of users... and I could probably get around it with some changes in my network.
    permalink · 2009-06-18 08:17:42 · Print · Reply to this
    Forums » comments on review of AT&T U-Verse

Sunday, 22-Nov 00:27:14 Terms of Use | Privacy Policy | Hosting by www.nac.net - DSL,Hosting & Co-lo | feedback | contact
over 10 years online! © 1999-2009 dslreports.com.