dlewis23
join:2005-04-18
Boca Raton, FL | It can go faster then 18 Mbps
U-verse could go faster with out line bonding, its all about if AT&T wants to allow a faster tier. |
|
burgerwars
join:2004-09-11
Northridge, CA | Should have done FTTH from the start.
FTTN instead of FTTH is the one reason I didn't sign-up with Uverse. It's never too late for AT&T to start laying fiber on the last mile. AT&T are you listening? |
|
BF69
join:2004-07-28
Camden, TN
| Verizon doesn't look so dumb does it?
Once at&t gets FTTN everywhere they'll have to go start putting FTTH like they should have in the first place just to compete. It'll be YERAS before I even get at&t's 18 Mpbs u-verse here and yet righht NOW I can get 20 Mbps from Charter. Hmmm who am I going with? By then Charter will be offering 60 Mbps. A day late and dollar short at&t. |
|
uverseh8r
@rr.com
| UVerse Line Bonding
I have been a UVerse customer for nearly three years, having initially been a UVerse internet trial customer. My home is between 3000-4000 feet from the DSLAM, and I have been told that I cannot get UVerse TV service as a result. I am only able to get UVerse Internet service. I was told that I may be able to add the TV service next year, when they will be ready to deploy pair bonding.
It's been way too long for AT&T to still be working out these issues. If they've been working on UVerse since 2003, all of the bugs should have been worked out by now. There's a huge revenue stream available to them when they resolve the issues, and any equipment suppliers would also be drooling at the thought of huge revenues after the issues are resolved, so I don't understand why there isn't a stronger drive to iron out all of the problems.
Oh, I forgot...this is AT&T...
Never mind... |
|
Traxless
Premium
join:2005-02-16
USA
 ·AT&T Southwest
 ·Cbeyond
| reply to burgerwars
Re: Should have done FTTH from the start.
said by burgerwars  :FTTN instead of FTTH is the one reason I didn't sign-up with Uverse. It's never too late for AT&T to start laying fiber on the last mile. AT&T are you listening? My many years of experience with AT&T is they only listen to themselves. And so it goes. |
|
Madness
Like a flea circus at a dog show.
join:2000-01-05
Quincy, MA | Hmmm....
Might it be appropriate to mention something about a blizzard in Hell? |
|
jandar
join:2006-01-16
Middleburg, FL | reply to Traxless
Re: Should have done FTTH from the start.
They went FTTN in some new neighborhoods around here that have fiber laid to the homes. Its just dark.
Instead of using the fiber to the residence, they decided to use the copper lines instead. |
|
nasadude
join:2001-10-05
Rockville, MD
 ·Comcast
| reply to dlewis23
Re: It can go faster then 18 Mbps
said by dlewis23 :U-verse could go faster with out line bonding, its all about if AT&T wants to allow a faster tier. yes, but it's also distance limited and the initial projections of what speeds could be available at greater distances from where the fiber is terminated haven't been meeting expectations. That's why they have to pair bond.
past 5000 ft. it gets harder and harder to deliver faster speeds. There is no way they can compete with docsis 3 or fiber when they start getting beyond that distance. |
|
funchords
Hello
Premium,MVM
join:2001-03-11
Washington, DC
·Verizon Online DSL
·Skype
| reply to jandar
Re: Should have done FTTH from the start.
said by jandar :They went FTTN in some new neighborhoods around here that have fiber laid to the homes. Its just dark. Instead of using the fiber to the residence, they decided to use the copper lines instead. This is a crime!
--
Robb Topolski -= funchords.com =- District of Columbia -- KJ7RL |
|
spewak
R.I.P Dadkins
Premium
join:2001-08-07
Elk Grove, CA
·SureWest Internet
·FrontierNet Intern..
| reply to jandar
said by jandar :They went FTTN in some new neighborhoods around here that have fiber laid to the homes. Its just dark. Instead of using the fiber to the residence, they decided to use the copper lines instead. That is what I am wondering.
Are they actually going to physically run a copper wire vs. Fiber to each home? Cost of running Fiber cannot be that much greater than digging up and running copper.
--
The weekend is here, grab a can of beer! |
|
patcat88
join:2002-04-05
Jamaica, NY | no excuse
There absolutely no excuse for not line bonding, a VPN software bonding solutions have existed for years. I could write my own VPN link bonding solution using TAP/TUN driver in linux in a few days if it didn't exist. |
|
TheGuvnor
@corning.com
| AT&T is doing it right.
Verizon deployments of FTTH were simple in trial and initial deployment areas because the majority of the installations are aerial. ATT's copper provisioning is underground, which is more expensive to deploy(equipment, manpower, permits, etc). The costs for ATT would have been astronomical. ATT's use of FTTN will allow them to build out with fiber in the next 5 to 10 years from the nodes while having their entire backhaul IP ready. The whole IP architecture puts ATT in top position regarding their backhaul. Furthermore, the whole services scenario still puts the majority of customers not needing 18 Mbps of internet downloads and doing fine with 1 HD and sometimes 2 HD and 3 SD Streams with 3 Mbps of internet. Also, compression is getting better so you will see your HD and SD streams shrink in download speeds.
If I was AT&T I would have done the same. They are the only company to succesfully deploy VDSL/VDSL2 to deliver video on a large scale! Many said this would have been impossible. |
|
kapil
The Kapil
join:2000-04-26
Chicago, IL
| Your World. Delivered.
I used to work with a bunch of former AT&T managers. If you knew these people, it would make perfect sense why AT&T doesn't have a next-gen plan that works.
Short-sighted, myopic oafs, they are. The whole lot of them.
At T, covering your ass is job #1. Nothing else matters. You attend meetings, schedule more needless meetings, talk in buzzwords strung together to look like coherent sentences, shit on the employee on a lower rung than you while you try your damnedest to deflect shit being hurled in your direction from the employee on a higher rung than you.
There is no time to think of customers or the good of the company when self preservation is at stake.
The ONLY reason this company is still in business is because of the shamefully lacking regulatory oversight and the lobbying they've been able to buy with their deep pockets. In a truly open, competitive, free market, AT&T would have died years ago. It almost did after the 1996 telecom act was passed.
The gang of former managers I used to work with? Well, they sucked dry the company where we worked together and have moved on to other companies.
They're a lot like the aliens from Independence Day...they are parasites who move from one host company to another, leaching all its life force and leaving only ruins behind them.
--
»www.Digium.com |
|
Mr Matt
join:2008-01-29
Eustis, FL
·Comcast
·Embarq
|  Great opportunity to push two line complete choice.
 The LEC's including AT&T might have missed the boat. Before I moved out of South Florida I subscribed to BellSouth's Two Line Complete Choice Plan for $10.00 more than the One Line Plan. That is if you exclude the additional hidden charges which came to about $8.00. The LEC's need to try something clever like lower prices for a bundle of two land lines with unlimited residential long distance and bonded broadband service. That way the customer can obtain higher broadband speeds and two voice lines at reasonable prices. |
|
kapil
The Kapil
join:2000-04-26
Chicago, IL
| Umm. Yeah.
Pair bonding is a myth. It doesn't work. a lot like BPL. It's a smokescreen used to cloak the utter incompetence of those running the big T as they scramble to find an alternative to their current 100-year old last mile plant.
They *almost* pulled it off. By buying up and consolidating RBOCs and the original AT&T. And the good fortune of owning the wireless business which happened almost by accident at a time when wireless was undergoing explosive growth. Almost.
AT&T is in deep trouble. It's almost a decade behind Verizon in replacing copper with Fiber to subscriber premises. Either it faces the reality of becoming a wireless and backhaul provider or it spends gobs of money trying to catch up. Neither one will make investors very happy.
--
»www.Digium.com |
|
jandar
join:2006-01-16
Middleburg, FL
| reply to spewak
Re: Should have done FTTH from the start.
A lot of the new neighborhoods around here (built in last 5-6 years) had both fiber buried under each driveway as well as copper lines run for both cable and phone.
Hell, I had dark fiber here before they even offered DSL. Then instead of working with the available fiber, Bellsouth decided to install a DSLAM to provide 1.5Mb speeds. (this was 4 years ago) |
|
S_engineer
join:2007-05-16
Chicago, IL
·Comcast
| reply to kapil
Re: Umm. Yeah.
said by kapil :AT&T is in deep trouble. It's almost a decade behind Verizon in replacing copper with Fiber to subscriber premises. Either it faces the reality of becoming a wireless and backhaul provider or it spends gobs of money trying to catch up. Neither one will make investors very happy. I don't know, just when you think they're gone, they come back....like the flu you can't get rid of. Remember, T does best when its killing the competition, not actually competing with it! |
|
patcat88
join:2002-04-05
Jamaica, NY | reply to kapil
Wrong, TW's "outright lie to the consumer" advertising and PR tactics have been working very well for TW, whats wrong with ATT using them? backbone fiber is equal to last mile fiber right? |
|
dr3yec
join:2002-12-19
00000 | I was going to switch to at&t uverse when it goes live next month here. But looking at there speed teirs. I think I will stay with cable. Really in my own opinion. Uverse is just like dsl but with tv. No improvemnts. |
|
DivineDark
join:2001-08-30
Oklahoma City, OK
clubs: | Should have read
AT&T creates Rube Goldberg machine for delivering internet. |
|
