dslreports logo
site
spacer

spacer
 
    All Forums Hot Topics Gallery
spc

spacer




how-to block ads


view:
topics flat nest 
Comments on news posted 2012-02-15 14:39:55: "Data consumption right now is growing 40% a year," John Stankey of AT&T recently told investors, numbers confirmed by CEO Randall Stephenson on a recent investor call. ..

prev page · 1 · 2


Simba7
I Void Warranties

join:2003-03-24
Billings, MT

at&t destroys whatever they acquire

We've seen it here in Montana. Alltel was decent and reasonable. Their data rates were pretty good and coverage was awesome.

Here comes at&t. They buy the remaining Alltel areas from Verizon and completely screw it up. I had a comparison of Alltel's speeds and at&t's speeds here and I had a massive "WTF?!!?" moment.

More dropped calls than Alltel (I only had a couple dropped on Alltel in two years), worse data speeds I've ever soon (this is 3G???), and rather sh*tty customer service.

How, exactly, do you take a perfectly running service and completely screw it up? I wonder if they purposely did it. Why? Hell if I know.
--
Bresnan 30M/5M | CenturyLink 5M/896K
MyWS[PnmIIX3@3.3G,8G RAM,500G+1.5T+2T HDDs,Win7]
WifeWS[A64@2G,2G RAM,120G HDD,Win7]
Router[2xP3@1G,1G RAM,18G HDD,Allied Telesyn AT2560FX,2xDigital QP DE504,Compaq DP NC3131,2xSun QP GigaSwift, SMC 8432BTA, Gentoo]

BiggA

join:2005-11-23
EARTH
reply to mocycler

Re: Karl is at it again

I'll give him credit for bringing up issues that no one else does, but the insane editorializing just seems to get worse and worse.

@nothing00: There's only so many places to put towers. Maybe that's AT&T's issue in NYC, since there are many places there, and they don't use towers, they use rooftop sites, but in general, there are a certain amount of towers to get on, and from there you need spectrum. The T-Mobile merger would have given them better spectrum synergy, and better site synergy, which would have added multiplicatively, but no, the FCC didn't want that logical and simple solution.

WhatNow
Premium
join:2009-05-06
Charlotte, NC
reply to Simba7

Re: Att/tmobile deal would have create & saved jobs, jobs, jobs

You layoff X number of people and then hire 1/2X different people at lower wages and say you created that many jobs but fail to ever mention you cut that same number of high paying jobs.

WernerSchutz

join:2009-08-04
Sugar Land, TX
reply to mocycler

Re: Karl is at it again

said by mocycler:

It's the same old shit day after day: All big companies are bad and everything they do has an ulterior motive. It's boring and tiresome.

But it is true. Funny how truth is boring to some.

WernerSchutz

join:2009-08-04
Sugar Land, TX
reply to Simba7

Re: Att/tmobile deal would have create & saved jobs, jobs, jobs

said by Simba7:

said by silentlooker:

Everyone need to understand that if att/tmobile deal was approved it would have created jobs, jobs, jobs.

Heh.. Ya, right. I'd like to hear their definition of creating more jobs.

Simple. More jobs (in India) to deal w/ pissed off American customers enjoying "the experience".


nycnetwork

join:2000-11-12
Brooklyn, NY
reply to Alex J

Re: thats att for you

Wait, so AT&T is claiming that increased smartphone sales trigger huge growth in wireless data... wait... didn't they sell those phones, collected money, and are also getting monthly at least $70+ per pop ?
WTF?! Where did that money go? Did they use any of that for network upgrades or those corporate pigs are pocketing it alowng with our $36 upgrade fees? Why not predicting issues, upgrading it accordingly and in advance or if they can't accept more subscribers, STOP OFFERING SUBSCRIPTIONS!!!!
If they can't provide me with the service I signed up for, and I kept using my phone the same way as two years ago, then I want my money back, and no ETF.
WTF?! GREED MUCH?!


Paladin
Sage of the light

join:2001-08-17
Chester, IL
reply to sonicmerlin

Re: Wireless Growth Claims

Where is Karl's?


Paladin
Sage of the light

join:2001-08-17
Chester, IL
reply to BiggA

Re: Karl is at it again

Read Kevin Fritchard's article on the Spectrum Crunch.

»gigaom.com/broadband/is-the-spec···-a-myth/

Stakey (AT&T's COO) also said data growth on cellular networks was 40% a year, a far cry from the crazy figure thrown out by Donovan that included anything and everything AT&T could throw in.


Paladin
Sage of the light

join:2001-08-17
Chester, IL

1 edit
reply to BiggA
Read Kevin Fritchard's article on the Spectrum Crunch.

»gigaom.com/broadband/is-the-spec···-a-myth/

Stakey (AT&T's COO) also said data growth on cellular networks was 40% a year, a far cry from the crazy figure thrown out by Donovan that included anything and everything AT&T could throw in.


bbeesley
VIP
join:2003-08-07
Richardson, TX
kudos:5
reply to Simba7
said by Simba7:

3. Actually upgrade your towers to OC3 instead of adding a T1 here and there.

the majority of carrier activity is bypassing TDM and going to Ethernet handoffs

at any rate, they have already for some time now been actively implementing much larger bandwidth adds than you suggest...an OC3 would only get them a bit less than 150Mbs max....from what I have seen from all the carriers, they are running more like 600-700Mbs per tower and trending has the industry expecting demand for 1G connections being the norm within the next 18months

I have spoken with numerous service providers who are looking for upgrade paths to take their current 1G service rings and spurs to 10G to facilitate this growing demand from cell providers at their towers.


fuziwuzi
Not born yesterday
Premium
join:2005-07-01
Atlanta, GA
reply to firedrakes

Re: thats att for you

How can you tell when AT&T is lying? They exist. Today's AT&T was built on lies and deception, it is their lifeblood, their SOP.
--
Teabaggers: Destroying America is Priority #1

BiggA

join:2005-11-23
EARTH
reply to bbeesley

Re: Karl is at it again

Quite true. As I understand it, a lot of AT&T and Verizon towers are using 1gbps IP-RAN backhaul. Of course some rural towers are still using T1's, but when you have EDGE on the air interface, it would be kind of pointless to have more than a T1, if that, for data. I wish they would push the enhanced back-haul farther out, like Verizon is with their LTE upgrades, although they would have to push HSPA+ farther out first.

@WernerShutz: It's not always true. Like the T-Mobile merger, or trying to get more spectrum. And the unethical and dishonest practices that AT&T has, while true, like overage charges that are higher than the plan rate, international roaming fees that are in the stratosphere, no discount for BYOD (excepting some T-Mobile plans), are held by all four major carriers in the industry.

BiggA

join:2005-11-23
EARTH
reply to Paladin
That article has another ridiculous quote by Karl in it.

The issue is not that there isn't enough spectrum- there is. The issue is that it is horribly divided, cut up into a ton of tiny chunks that are whackily distributed through a long history of M&A, instead of being leased by the government in the first place.

If you accept the status quo of ownership, then T-Mobile should have actual ownership of their spectrum, and with that ownership, the right to sell it to whoever they want.

AT&T is the shortest on spectrum relative to number of customers of any carrier. Verizon managed to nab plenty of spectrum through the 700mhz auctions, as well as from SpectrumCo, and likely they will buy SpectrumCo's 700mhz at some point as well. The T-Mobile spectrum, while not as clean as Verizon's purchase of greenfield low-band, would have at least helped them immensely, partly through the spectrum synergy, but also by acquiring more cell sites, which would have provided more density and more efficient use of the current spectrum. But no, the FCC doesn't like efficient use of spectrum apparently.


unforgiven

@myvzw.com
reply to Metatron2008

Re: thats att for you

Sorry, but doublespeak is lying. But I do agree, they lie in order to fool the ignorant and the stupid alike.

Skippy25

join:2000-09-13
Hazelwood, MO
reply to BiggA

Re: Karl is at it again

said by BiggA:

They are using all their CLR and PCS, and the SMH and AWS is for LTE. Do you think they would just purposefully not use spectrum when their network has capacity problems in some markets?

Yes, it helps with their claim of a congested network which helps to justify their prices and "data management" practices.

The numbers are out there, do a little research and see how much they have and how much they actually use.

BiggA

join:2005-11-23
EARTH
Tell me what exactly they are squatting on? You make these claims with nothing to back them up. For example, in the NYC market, AT&T is listed with three PCS blocks, one CLR block, and two SMH blocks. The SMH blocks are in use for LTE (maybe one is, and one will be, not sure), the PCS and CLR is in use for UMTS and GSM.

In my neck of the woods, they have 1 CLR, four PCS (which they use for most HSPA+ traffic), and two SMH. The SMH will eventually be LTE. And what are they squatting on again?