how-to block ads
|
|
view: topics flat text |
|
Comments on news posted 2008-09-15 15:46:04: AT&T CTO John Donovan talks to Dow Jones about AT&T's efforts to respond to last quarter's dismal DSL subscriber additions. ..
|
1 edit | So let me get this straight... AT&T is losing Internet business-so their answer is to make their product a worse value?
I have no idea what kind of drugs their upper management is doing, but they're certainly better then what any of us have! | |
| | | | Re: So let me get this straight... i think its pretty damn funny myself,all y'all dsl and cable users free ride is just about over unless you want to pay out the ass for internet.all y'all like to brag about how much speed you have.i not going mean shit when they keep lowering your caps or charging per mb.then that high speed will be good for nothing but hitting your cap even faster,or paying more money for overages.
you know my sat connection is looking better everyday,and that's pretty damn bad.phone company's screwed up by not getting dsl to all of their customers over 50% of their voice customers can not get dsl.they could have almost everyone of them,but thought they could compete with cable just another bad decision by phone company's,and they are going to keep loosing people every day.i wonder how close the cost of lost customers is getting to the cost of adding dsl to all off their customers?you know fucking the rural customers looks like its going to bite them in the ass | |
| | |  wilbilt Pronto ResurrectedPremium
join:2004-01-11
Oroville, CA | Re: So let me get this straight... said by ROFFL :
i wonder how close the cost of lost customers is getting to the cost of adding dsl to all off their customers?you know fucking the rural customers looks like its going to bite them in the ass
That's a good point. If they made DSL available in areas where this no cable, they could have all the subs. They have started building out a bit here to semi-rural areas, but they are basically on the heels of Comcast deployment.
Why not deploy where this is no competition instead?
--
We were taking a vote when the ground came up and hit us. | |
| | | EPS
join:2008-02-13
Hingham, MA | Free ride? People are getting DSL internet for free? I had to pay for it monthly!
You may not know this, but DSL has some serious limitations on distances. This makes it very difficult to deploy in spread-out areas, unless you deploy remote terminals, which have their own issues and less capacity. Also, signal boosters used to extend the range of POTS are also incompatible with DSL, so there's even more issues. DSL is a kind of kludge technology. (DOCSIS is as well, but it's limitations are not nearly as bad as DSL) Though I still seriously doubt your 50%+ figure... | |
| | | | | | Re: So let me get this straight... said by EPS:Free ride? People are getting DSL internet for free? I had to pay for it monthly! You may not know this, but DSL has some serious limitations on distances. This makes it very difficult to deploy in spread-out areas, unless you deploy remote terminals, which have their own issues and less capacity. Also, signal boosters used to extend the range of POTS are also incompatible with DSL, so there's even more issues. DSL is a kind of kludge technology. (DOCSIS is as well, but it's limitations are not nearly as bad as DSL) Though I still seriously doubt your 50%+ figure... i mean free bandwidth ride.if they kept on raising prices and lowering caps they are just going to put themselves out of business
and i know all about dsl limitations if you are over 18,000 feet from a co you don't get dsl,and that's exactly what im talking about.phone company's are too worried about compeating with cable in speed they thought they were going to compete with cable,its hot ever going to happen with old copper lines,and customer availability.there are a lot of people that live over 18,000 feet from a co.phone company's would have been better off putting the money in servicing all of their customers first then trying to add more speed
also i didn't mean 50%,its about 50 million of their voice customers can not get dsl | |
|
| | | I am trying to figure how they think this can help them retain customers. I can tell you if they cap my Uverse connection and ComCast has a better deal I will jump back to Comcast. | |
| | | | | Re: So let me get this straight... said by Flip1105:I am trying to figure how they think this can help them retain customers. I can tell you if they cap my Uverse connection and ComCast has a better deal I will jump back to Comcast. its not going to help them at all.they are just slowly putting themselves out of business.phone company's screwed up by not getting all of their customers dsl because there is allot of the rural people that will never get cable so dsl would be their only choice beside sat. and wisp in which are not very good for a heavy user | |
|
 XBL2009------
join:2001-01-03
Chicago, IL | Faster Speed and lower Prices might help How about 10/2 for $25 and NO CAPS!!!! | |
| | | Caps I have said many times the caps are a way for the isps to censor your internet. Remember with our money we control them and we are larger then they are....
Not to worry an army is forming and how will they stop us all. 
Did you know the government did a study with a few hacker tools and were scared crapless what if one day all the people got together over the caps they would be gone for good I guarantee it.
--
Are you part of the cattle? | |
| | | that would be nice to the guy who said 10 cents per gb.. I would love that. I would be spending roughly only 2-4$ per month compared to 45  | |
| | | | HSI Competition We have mandatory HSI which is FTTH with our HOA, so it is very difficult for AT&T and the cable company to compete within our development of 3,000 homes. By going to a metered model and usage caps the providers are only shooting themselves in the foot. Theses are the HSI options I have available. Speeds are down/up.
Fiber via HOA (mandatory, billed as part of monthly dues)
$35.00 8MB/3MB
Cable ($10.00 more if not a video subscriber)
$14.95 256K/128K
$24.95 1.5MB/256K
$34.95 6MB/1MB
$44.95 10MB/1MB
$54.95 10MB/1.5MB
AT&T DSL
$19.95 768K/128K
$25.00 1.5MB/384K
$30.00 3MB/512K
$35.00 6MB/768K
AT&T U-Verse HSI
$25.00 1.5MB/1MB
$30.00 3MB/1MB
$35.00 6MB/1MB
$55.00 10MB/1.5MB | |
|
| | Bandwidth There are two problems here. First thing is that for instance I am an AT&T DSL customer so this applies directly to me. However, I am about 5000 feet from the central office and I am not sharing bandwidth between myself and the CO. Now, at the CO they have the ability to provide a massive amount of bandwidth using OC12, OC48 etc. I live in a town of 15,000 people and a university with 16,000 students on top of that so there are a ton of users here. AT&T has the ability to provide a massive amount of bandwidth at that CO relatively cheaply. I don't know their network traffic statistics but with the scenario I just described it should not be hard for them to provide massive bandwidth for all those users without network congestion and cheaply.
My guess is that there are a few users using a large proportion of the bandwidth that is available at most CO's. However, I doubt that the aggregate bandwidth of ALL users comes close to maxing out their central office bandwidth OR especially not their backbone network across the nation and around the world.
This B&*&S&%& of penalizing PAYING customers when their network is not likely to be overwhelmed is crap. I think AT&T just wants to make more money. I understand that they have obligations to their shareholders and the board of directors and CEO are afraid of a proxy vote and getting their A&* kicked out in a hurry if there is the slightest decline in earning or in stock prices. This is the paranoia of money making that says we should never lose money and there should always be a profit and always growth all the time which is completely UNsustainable. Every now and then things have to retract some for a while. Anyway, getting away from the obvious problems of public financing through issued stocks.
AT&T is expanding their UVerse and using this supposed bandwidth issue as an excuse to find ways to make more money to fund UVerse and other things I imagine. However, they need to watch out. If there become 100 minor small print details that are gotchas in their bandwidth policy they are going to lose a lot of customers including myself. I don't use that much bandwidth. I download files perhaps 3 or 4 times per week and some updates. Yes, I do use Youtube a good bit but with a 3mpbs DSL connection it is not going to swamp their precious ATM connections at the CO to their backbone network. Even if nearly all the AT&T users in this town were downloading from youtube I doubt it would be a serious problem.
AT&T, watch what you do or you will lose the $45/mo revenue stream that you have from me! I am not stupid and don't try to hoodwink me because a few users out there use 100X more than I do. | |
| Reviews:
 ·AT&T DSL Service
| I just don't get the long run advantage... Really, Cable intern capping the speeds at least makes since. Because of the setup, they could be preventing a lot of complaints with a cat at about a solid 2Mb/s down, and 1.5Mb up. That's extreme, but this is an example where everyone in the selected block of surface is using Cable Internet. Everyone would be able to do anything they wanted online, with no lagging. Obviously, dependent on the amount of customers they adjust the cap.
DSL goes from point to point, no sharing. (On the consumer end that is.) It's limit is distance, and the CO cap settings. I can get over 9mb/s down, but the speed cap is at 6mb/s. That's fine, as it's a consent speed link. But, there is NO reason to cap anything on DSL.
As for metering, that to me is nothing other then a way to rip off customer. People are going to get fed up, and most likely both cable and DSL will loose to optical Internet. If things go to caps and metering,as soon s I am able to I will get FIOS to keep from "over charges". | |
| Krellan
join:2001-06-06
Castro Valley, CA
1 edit | Wishlist for AT&T DSL still has plenty of potential, if only Ma Bell would do the following:
1) For those close to the CO, embrace the newest very fast DSL technology, like they have in Japan, for maximum speed.
2) For those far away from the CO, have the service steadily degrade, down to analog modem bandwidth if necessary, without dropping out completely. Even if a customer is too far away, or wires too poor, to get frequencies above the voice band, they could still enjoy the always-on convenience of DSL, even though they couldn't get the speed.
3) Put a limited form of DSL on every landline in the country, automatically, that wouldn't conflict with existing voice (G.Lite?). New customers would only need to buy a modem and plug it in. The DSL service would always be "waiting in the wings". The wait time for installation would then be zero!
4) Save the few remaining payphones. Activate DSL service on lines going to all remaining payphones. Install a wireless hotspot on each of them. Now, every payphone in the country is also a wireless hotspot.
5) Emphasize the two-way nature of DSL, versus the one-way nature of most cable systems. Emphasize that DSL gives you your own wires going back to the CO, and doesn't force you to share your cable bandwidth with the rest of the neighborhood. Advertise the fact that the AUP of DSL allows you to run servers and VPN connections, unlike cable. Advertise the fact that DSL is best for two-way communication such as video calls with Skype. Advertise the fact that a good DSL line will have a faster ping time than cable, which means better gameplay for online games.
6) Once the equipment is in place, adding DSL to an existing voice line should cost nearly nothing. Have a DSL starter plan that severely undercuts cable, such as maybe $5.00/month for a minimal 128/128 connection. Many casual users don't care about speed, and just appreciate the convenience of an always-on connection that doesn't require dialing. Cable would have a tough time matching that price. That will also help to bury the last few analog modem holdouts.
7) Voice phone should be secondary to DSL, not the other way around. Given that most people carry cellphones these days, there's really no reason to have a landline other than 911 and DSL. AT&T's corporate structure, and staff training, is still built around voice. AT&T needs to think of themselves more as an ISP and less as a phone company.
Think they'll do any of this? | |
| |
1 edit | Re: Wishlist for AT&T no prob not,but it make perfect sense to me.it wouldn't bother me if all i got was 300kbps to whatever as long as it was a always on connection.im on sat. now at 60.00 a month for 1mb connection and 200mb download threshold in 24 hrs,and go over that they reduce connection to about 50kbps for 24 hrs,and not to mention the peak time on sat. is awful too.it will start at about 1 pm and go till 12 am with speeds going down to about 200kbps.so yes i would love at least a 200 or 300kbps always on connection with dsl for a hell of a lot cheaper than im paying for this Hughes crap
here is one of my speed test for hughes sat at 60.00 a month this is all i ever get just from 12 am to 1 pm from there it goes downhill all the way to about 200kbps
:::.. Download Stats ..:::
Download Connection is:: 822 Kbps about 0.8 Mbps (tested with 1024 kB)
Download Speed is:: 100 kB/s
Tested From:: »testmy.net/ (Main)
Test Time:: 2008/09/17 - 7:48am
Bottom Line:: 14X faster than 56K 1MB Download in 10.24 sec
Tested from a 1024 kB file and took 10.203 seconds to complete
Download Diagnosis:: May need help : running at only 82.12 % of your hosts average (direcpc.com)
D-Validation Link:: »testmy.net/stats/id-DULIO3NPW
User Agent:: Mozilla/4.0 (compatible; MSIE 7.0; Windows NT 5.1; .NET CLR 1.0.3705; .NET CLR 1.1.4322; Media Center PC 4.0; .NET CLR 2.0.50727; .NET CLR 3.0.04506.30; .NET CLR 3.0.04506.648) [!] | |
|
| | Wake up They're loosing customers because their service is pitiful. Bandwidth has got progressively worse. The speed is so terrible I'm actually considering Comcast. | |
| u3912974
join:2007-07-31
San Francisco, CA | AT&T Again Hints At Bandwidth Cracked? is there a difference between someone hacing your bank account and someone hacking your internet account. you
'll say that you are for network neutrality and free atm access to your personal bank account for all i bet. | |
| Reviews:
 ·Knology
| die att AT&T is losing Internet business-so their answer is to make their product a worse value?
^So true.
at&t needs to step up to the game regarding Broadband services. The maximum speed at&t has is 6mbits while other broadband providers offer 8mbit, 12mbit, 18mbits. at&t hasn't upgrade their speed in years. I pay $29 for 3mbit. For $29 I can get 6mbits+ for the same price.
Also now.. at&t want us to pay phone service in advance now.
Goodbye at&t. I cant wait to ditch the death star. | |
| | | | Re: die att doh wrong thread. | |
|
1 edit | . deleted. wrong thread. | |
|
| |
|
