dslreports logo
site
spacer

spacer
 
    All Forums Hot Topics Gallery
spc

spacer




how-to block ads


view:
topics flat nest 
Comments on news posted 2013-07-24 10:49:17: Technicians have been confirming to me for months that AT&T is currently testing a speed bump for their U-Verse service that should push the service's top speed to 45 Mbps. ..

page: 1 · 2 · 3 · 4 · next


elios

join:2005-11-15
Springfield, MO

Upload

if they can offer 45 down and say 10 up for less then we pay for Mediacom as much as i hate AT&T i would jump ship



mob
On the next level..
Premium
join:2000-10-07

It's ATT, so it will be 45 down, and 768k up...maybe even as high as 1Mbit.



elios

join:2005-11-15
Springfield, MO

1Mbps up would choke on the ack packets of even a 20Mbps down connection


gene32

join:2004-05-03
Reynoldsburg, OH

1 recommendation

Latency resolved?

I hear lots of people complaining about higher ping times with uverse. Will whatever technology they're using to achieve 45 Mbps lower ping times?



UBustatt

@hey.net

U-Verse is 45Mbps is DOA

Fios = 500Mbps
LTE = 50 Mbps
Cable = 300 Mbps

U-Verse is 45Mbps is DOA

-G



88615298
Premium
join:2004-07-28
West Tenness

45 Mbps? How about they try getting something higher than 12 Mbps?



mob
On the next level..
Premium
join:2000-10-07
Reviews:
·SureWest Internet
reply to elios

Re: Upload

said by elios:

1Mbps up would choke on the ack packets of even a 20Mbps down connection

OK, so they will go ahead and throttle it down to 512k... It's Ma Hell bro, they care very little about customer satisfaction.


elios

join:2005-11-15
Springfield, MO
reply to UBustatt

Re: U-Verse is 45Mbps is DOA

you forgot Google with 1Gbps
yea FTTN was DoA when they first came out with it


Joe12345678

join:2003-07-22
Des Plaines, IL

1 recommendation

reply to UBustatt

LTE = 50 Mbps
Cable = 300 Mbps

are both shared pre node / tower

also LTE caps make it a joke to compare it with cable or dsl


biochemistry

join:2003-05-09
92361
reply to UBustatt

I got LTE when it first went live in my area and the only LTE phone was a Thunderbolt. Never did I hit 50 Mbps. And even if I could I would prefer 45 Mbps on a wired connection.



RazrElite

@caribsurf.com

One of the reasons I moved... was to get away from Uverse

Seriously AT&T. 45Mbps? In 2013. Thats laughable at best. I struggled on AT&T top 24mbps tier for 2 years while watching all the cable ISPs up their speeds well beyond what Uverse was capable of. Verizon announces a 500mbps plan and AT&T announce a 45mbps plan coming soon which is more than TEN times SLOWER. Who are they even competing with? I guess these speeds look great compared to DSL maybe, except DSL is generally much more widely available and is about two decades old.

As though the speeds aren't bad enough, the service suffers from higher ping than most other internet connections. Just a horrible service all around.


elefante72

join:2010-12-03
East Amherst, NY

1 recommendation

reply to UBustatt

Re: U-Verse is 45Mbps is DOA

"With our plant technology advancements, 90 percent of our U-verse customer locations will have the capability to receive what we project to be 75 Mbps.

If you read this carefully, look at the wording. It doesn't say customers it says customer "locations". So if 1 customer can get that speed in a DSLAM, than it counts. There is only so much you can do with untwisted, unshielded wire that can be 50 years old. C'mon go shoot the horse in the back of the barn.

We all know DSL is no walk in the park, and it's total bs that AT&T is going to go around running another 2-3 pairs to a person's house to get adequate signal. I was reading about some loop technology (the person's DSL modem becomes a repeater), well that may work but now you have a big loop. How is latency going to be then?

I was reading about G.fast however this really needs FTTC and refrigerators all over the place and really only works less than 200m and less than 5 nodes. At that point why the f**k even bother. Just run the fibre already.



GlennAllen
Sunny with highs in the 80s
Premium
join:2002-11-17
Richmond, VA
reply to UBustatt

Yeah, if only I could find something that I needed or wanted Internet access for that I could do at 10mbps or less... oh, wait--that would be just about everything!



elios

join:2005-11-15
Springfield, MO

1 recommendation

in 2001 maybe
10Mbps is be the bottom speed for any ISP and thats 10Mbps up AND down
not this shitty 10/1 crap
copper is the new dial up



GlennAllen
Sunny with highs in the 80s
Premium
join:2002-11-17
Richmond, VA
Reviews:
·Comcast
·Verizon FiOS

You need as much as 7mbps for streaming [what they call] HD from Netflix and Amazon. The huge majority of Internet users don't need anything more than that since streaming is about the most bandwidth intensive thing they do. So sad... 90% of the super high-speed access you're buying just "sits on the shelf". Welcome to reality... in 2013.



elios

join:2005-11-15
Springfield, MO

1 edit

1 recommendation

check back in 6months when the PS4 and XB1 launch
they will make DSL look like dial up in there hunger for bits and bandwidth
people will blow there caps like never be for and upload rates will be strained to breaking
and i use every bit of the speed i am paying for almost daily

go look up Twitch TV i stream games on there and it use ever last bit of upload i have
what i need is more upload
as for download we have 3 people the house that stream video at 7 to 10 Mbps each thats 30Mbps right there with no over head for any thing else
so a 50/10 connection would get used to max daily for us
and this will be the norm in 6-12 months for 90% of people and that will double over the next 2 years
in the next 10 years if the bulk of the US isnt on 1Gbps connection we might as well be the next 3rd world country



djrobx
Premium
join:2000-05-31
Valencia, CA
kudos:2
Reviews:
·Time Warner Cable
·VOIPO

1 recommendation

reply to RazrElite

Re: One of the reasons I moved... was to get away from Uverse

said by RazrElite :

Seriously AT&T. 45Mbps? In 2013. Thats laughable at best. I struggled on AT&T top 24mbps tier for 2 years while watching all the cable ISPs up their speeds well beyond what Uverse was capable of. Verizon announces a 500mbps plan and AT&T announce a 45mbps plan coming soon which is more than TEN times SLOWER. Who are they even competing with? I guess these speeds look great compared to DSL maybe, except DSL is generally much more widely available and is about two decades old.

As though the speeds aren't bad enough, the service suffers from higher ping than most other internet connections. Just a horrible service all around.

There's no point in comparing it to Verizon. AT&T U-verse and Verizon FiOS don't compete.

You can, however, compare it to Time Warner. Their top speed is 50/5. At least this would put them in the ballpark.

If it's priced well, it can even be competitively relevant. TWC charges me over $100/month for 50/5 service. TWC might have to lower their price if AT&T gets aggressive with their 45mbps service.
--
AT&T U-Hearse - RIP Unlimited Internet 1995-2011
Rethink Billable.


bbeesley
VIP
join:2003-08-07
Richardson, TX
kudos:5
reply to Joe12345678

Re: U-Verse is 45Mbps is DOA

said by Joe12345678:

LTE = 50 Mbps
Cable = 300 Mbps

are both shared pre node / tower

also LTE caps make it a joke to compare it with cable or dsl

So is FIOS. GPON is 2.488Gbps down and 1.244GBps shared among 32 customers.

Assuming 8 downstreams and 4 upstreams, Cable is 343Mbps down and 122Mbps up shared among ~80-120 customers depending on number of homes passed and customer penetration.

Admittedly a 300Mbps cable modem would place a much heavier burden on a serving group much faster than a 500Mbps GPON ONT does but it is unfair to negatively classify other technologies as "shared" and not admit the same of PON.


trparky
Apple... YUM
Premium,MVM
join:2000-05-24
Cleveland, OH
kudos:2

1 edit

1 recommendation

Seriously overkill...

So existing 24 Mbps Tier customers will get an upgrade to 30 Mbps. That's cool. Although I'd like more like 45 Mbps but that depends upon price.

That would put AT&T on par with Time Warner in my area.

IMHO, all of this talk about Internet speeds of 100 Mbps or more and with Verizon talking about 500 Mbps and Comcast talking about 300 Mbps is a bunch of nonsense. For the vast majority of people (95%), that's seriously overkill. There's really no need for anything above 100 Mbps. Most commercial software download sites can't fill that even a 24 Mbps pipe without multi-threaded downloading in which you make multiple connections to the same download site.

For instance, I was downloading PowerDVD from the Cyberlink product web site and I was barely downloading at 600 KB/s but when I kicked in the multi-threaded downloading I shot up to 2.4 MB/s. What does this mean? It means that most server admins are artificially limiting you to a specific amount of speed per connection. Yes, you can initilize a second or more connection to get more download speed in the form of multi-threaded downloading but soon server admins are going to catch onto that and start limiting the amount of connections from a single IP and some of them have already done that.

The last mile is finally catching up with what people actually need. Internal Internet bandwidth is something else. There are multiple choke points across the US in which there's just not enough Internet backbone bandwidth to handle the high demands we are putting on it.

Granted, I know that Steam can fill that pipe up easily with how many servers they around the nation but how much Steam stuff can you download?
--
Tom
Tom's Tech Blog


silbaco
Premium
join:2009-08-03
USA

1 recommendation

reply to elios

Re: Upload

A lot of companies offer 20/1 or 24/1 and they do not choke.



elios

join:2005-11-15
Springfield, MO

yes they do it nearly fill the upstream to pull 20Mbps down



JigglyWiggly

join:2009-07-12
Pleasanton, CA
reply to trparky

Re: Seriously overkill...

Why would you want this? You don't even get the benefit of lower pings on uverse's dsl setup like ADSL2+ vs cable.

This is just plain worse than cable in everyway.


ISurfTooMuch

join:2007-04-23
Tuscaloosa, AL

They ought to do something better right now

A month or so ago, I was having some connectivity issues with U-verse, so the tech ripped out all my coax and replaced it with Cat5. Once he did that, my total capacity went from 32Mbs with lots of errors to 48Mbs with no errors. He mentioned that he's seen folks very close to the VRAD do even better, although I can't recall the numbers he quoted. His thought was that AT&T could ramp up the speed somewhat right now, without using a second line, if they wanted to, but, for whatever reason, they haven't. Now, I know that, even with 32 Mbs, you're only getting 24 because you have to leave room for TV, but, with 48, you'd have a little more wiggle room in terms of offering something better. Or you could offer more HD streams.

Or what about being able to allocate data dynamically between TV and Internet? Does AT&T's setup allow for higher data throughput if you aren't pulling TV data at the time? Of course, I'm sure they wouldn't want to do that, since it would confuse some people, plus it'd show them that the TV signal they get is all just a bunch of bits, so they might then start to think that they could get their TV service somewhere else...Aereo...cough, cough.



rolande
Certifiable
Premium,Mod
join:2002-05-24
Dallas, TX
kudos:4
Reviews:
·AT&T U-Verse
reply to mob

Re: Upload

Since they currently offer 24/3 service, why would they upgrade to 45/1 or 45/768? The profile being tested is 45/5 on a single pair. The higher tier service offerings will show up when they are ready to do pair bonding with the new NVG589 gateway later this year.
--
Scott, CCIE #14618 Routing & Switching
»rolande.wordpress.com/


karpodiem
Premium
join:2008-05-20
reply to trparky

Re: Seriously overkill...

4K IPTV, which is 7-9 years away. No way in hell copper has the capacity to handle 4K.

4K is what will finally kill copper.

Yes, yes - I'm well aware certain providers barely even offer a decent bitrate when transmitting 720p/1080i. They'll skip 1080p and go right to 4K. Just give it a decade.


brianiscool

join:2000-08-16
Tampa, FL
kudos:1

lol

They will probably charge $75 for 45Mbps.


LTE4LIFE

join:2013-02-28

1 recommendation

reply to 88615298

Re: U-Verse is 45Mbps is DOA

try going faster than 768Kbps on their basic U-Verse packages for rural areas.

I had to argue with one of their CSRs about it being DSL repackaged and she kept telling me that U-Verse is an all fiber connection.



trparky
Apple... YUM
Premium,MVM
join:2000-05-24
Cleveland, OH
kudos:2

1 recommendation

reply to JigglyWiggly

Re: Seriously overkill...

I have the 24 Mbps package from uVerse right now and latency doesn't bother me. So there's a 25 ms ping to my first hop but who cares? I was on cable but switched to uVerse because of price and I had 15 ms to my first hop on cable. Oooh, 10 ms more! What a tragedy.
--
Tom
Tom's Tech Blog



swintec
Premium,VIP
join:2003-12-19
Alfred, ME
kudos:5
reply to elios

Re: Upload

not even close.


UverseTech

join:2012-08-04
Reviews:
·Charter

2 recommendations

Pair Bond?

The techs cannot get iNIDs installed without great difficulty in most cases, and I mean most. This is just a giant smokescreen, they will never get even a small majority of the current subscribers on this so called upgrade. Only the good, stable plant will qualify, read stable. Whats in all major cities currently is old, the new stuff is in the burbs, and not to mention all of the old MDUs.

Like I said in the past, cable will be at docsis 4 and google will be in most big cities well before this copper nonsense is completed.