dslreports logo
 
    All Forums Hot Topics Gallery
spc
Search similar:


uniqs
1014
Rick5
Premium Member
join:2001-02-06

Rick5

Premium Member

So, if they're not planning on competing on price what will

they compete on?
Their 6Mb uverse speeds versus my 18 ~ 20Mb Comcast powerboost ones?

Or, how about their 3 day..20 hour Uverse attempt at installs here in Ct. and it's still not working right?

»[info] It's Here! U-Verse

Just curious.

~Rick
Enlightener
join:2006-01-28
Cedar Park, TX

1 edit

Enlightener

Member

I don't think they feel they need to compete at all. They probably have the `build it and they will come mentality` counting on disgruntled and/or uninformed customers to simply stumble into their service without comparing either the price or the features.

To me it's kind of like voting for the various local officials. Like the typical voter really knows who he's voting for when it comes to some obsecure race.
cwh
join:2006-05-14
San Antonio, TX

cwh

Member

said by Enlightener:

I don't think they feel they need to compete at all. They probably have the `build it and they will come mentality` counting on disgruntled and/or uninformed customers to simply stumble into their service without comparing either the price or the features.

To me it's kind of like voting for the various local officials. Like the typical voter really knows who he's voting for when it comes to some obsecure race.
Well price and feature wise it still blows away the time warner options in San Antonio. I am getting more and paying less. That is competition...
Enlightener
join:2006-01-28
Cedar Park, TX

Enlightener

Member

Features:

Funny, I have working HD DVR's in three rooms. How many do you have?

Price:

Sounds like you don't know how to negotiate. Time Warner in Austin charges $130 rack rate for what I get for $80.

You can defend your decision all you want but I know the grass is not nearly as green as the kool-aid that you are drinking.
cwh
join:2006-05-14
San Antonio, TX

cwh

Member

said by Enlightener:

Features:

Funny, I have working HD DVR's in three rooms. How many do you have?

Price:

Sounds like you don't know how to negotiate. Time Warner in Austin charges $130 rack rate for what I get for $80.

You can defend your decision all you want but I know the grass is not nearly as green as the kool-aid that you are drinking.
Well, they offered me a nice deal when I left TW, but considering they could not make road runner work reliably and added to the the occisiaon digital cable problems I was not interested in cheaper servicer, I was interested in working service.

I do have 3 HD STBs and 1 right now is DVR in my house, that alone would have cost me an additional $25/month. It would be nice if the network dvr function was available, but at this point i am satisified with the price and service.
Enlightener
join:2006-01-28
Cedar Park, TX

Enlightener

Member

You really cut your nose off to spite your face.

You have (1) HD-DVR. You have 2 other SD receivers that can do HD only if no one else is. You traded a digital cable system that in your words `occasionally` had problems for a IPTV system that according to uVerse Users has MANY problems. And you also turned down Time Warners offer of cheaper service.

Your only point that I agree with is Road Runner. I've had a dozen broadband providers over the last 10 years and I generally don't even attempt cable modem anymore. My Elite DSL service is very nice and I wouldn't trade it for the world.

Seriously, you've made a bad choice. In 6 months to a year it might turn into a good choice, but frankly it isn't yet.
cwh
join:2006-05-14
San Antonio, TX

cwh

Member

said by Enlightener:

You really cut your nose off to spite your face.

You have (1) HD-DVR. You have 2 other SD receivers that can do HD only if no one else is. You traded a digital cable system that in your words `occasionally` had problems for a IPTV system that according to uVerse Users has MANY problems. And you also turned down Time Warners offer of cheaper service.

Your only point that I agree with is Road Runner. I've had a dozen broadband providers over the last 10 years and I generally don't even attempt cable modem anymore. My Elite DSL service is very nice and I wouldn't trade it for the world.

Seriously, you've made a bad choice. In 6 months to a year it might turn into a good choice, but frankly it isn't yet.
No it was not a bad choice. They have problems(mostly minor) and there were a couple of long outages with video(2 outages that totaled about 48 hours). But guess what I was given credits for anytime there was a problem. ATT realizes it is a new system and will have some problems and they are being liberal with the credits.

As far as only having 1 HD stream, that is not a huge problem in this household. We only have 1 HDTV at this point, but I am sure by the time we get out next HDTV u-verse will be offering more than 1 HD stream. But at the same time u-verse is offering more HD content, so that makes for an interesting service trade off...
Enlightener
join:2006-01-28
Cedar Park, TX

Enlightener

Member

Some trade off. You go from `occasional problems` to `long outtages`, get less functionality ( which you admit ) and you pay more compared to TW's counteroffer ( which you admit ).

You are blinded by your AT&T fanboyness.
cwh
join:2006-05-14
San Antonio, TX

cwh

Member

said by Enlightener:

Some trade off. You go from `occasional problems` to `long outtages`,

Minus the 2 outages caused by the botched software upgrade, I would say at this point u-verse is just as reliable as cable. Both of those outages occured in november for which I only paid for the dsl portion of the bill. ATT more than made up for these two outages.
get less functionality ( which you admit )
U-verse is behind in being able to provide more than 1 HD stream, however I would have to say functionally wise they are ahead it about every other area.
and you pay more compared to TW's counteroffer ( which you admit ).
NO I said they offered a nice counteroffer, I never said it was better. It was not good enough for me accept it.
You are blinded by your AT&T fanboyness.
Maybe you are blinded by your AT&T hate?
Enlightener
join:2006-01-28
Cedar Park, TX

Enlightener

Member

You can't simply exclude two major outtages and then claim that u-Verse is as reliable as digital cable simply because you were given a service credit.

Nor can you say that U-Verse is comparable in all other areas. U-Verse not only lags in the HD area, but with the whole-house DVR disabled it clearly lags there. That is a deal breaker for my wife as she is not going to give up multiple DVR locations. She likes to retreat from the kids from time to time.

You also stated that TW offered a nice deal but that you `was not interested in cheaper servicer, I was interested in working service.'

I contend that you did infact state that TW was cheaper.

You are getting neither cheaper nor better service.
cwh
join:2006-05-14
San Antonio, TX

1 edit

cwh

Member

said by Enlightener:

You can't simply exclude two major outtages and then claim that u-Verse is as reliable as digital cable simply because you were given a service credit.
I was going to exclude as an anomaly as they were caused by an upgrade. I have had the service now for about 7 months now and the service continues to improve.
Nor can you say that U-Verse is comparable in all other areas. U-Verse not only lags in the HD area, but with the whole-house DVR disabled it clearly lags there. That is a deal breaker for my wife as she is not going to give up multiple DVR locations. She likes to retreat from the kids from time to time.
It is not a deal breaker here nor is lagging behind as no one is offering network dvr. It would be nice if that feature was available now, but i have little doubt it will be delivered in the future.
You also stated that TW offered a nice deal but that you `was not interested in cheaper servicer, I was interested in working service.'

I contend that you did infact state that TW was cheaper.

You are getting neither cheaper nor better service.
If had I had taken TW counter offer, I would still be paying more. I would also have pay another $15 for the extra 2 STBs that are included, $15 for an extra 2 premiums that are included, get less SD and HD channels and be giving business to a company that has only frustrated me in the past.

Yes I am getting more and paying less and getting better service. Not a fanboy, just the facts here.
hottboiinnc4
ME
join:2003-10-15
Cleveland, OH

hottboiinnc4

Member

CWH doesnt sound like a fanboy he sounds more of an employee.

To me the story has changed with service issues. But why not leave TWC for CHEAP almost free services from your employer?
dynodb
Premium Member
join:2004-04-21
Minneapolis, MN

dynodb to Enlightener

Premium Member

to Enlightener
said by Enlightener:

Features:

Funny, I have working HD DVR's in three rooms. How many do you have?

Price:

Sounds like you don't know how to negotiate. Time Warner in Austin charges $130 rack rate for what I get for $80.

You can defend your decision all you want but I know the grass is not nearly as green as the kool-aid that you are drinking.
Wow, you were born to be a BBR poster. Someone's getting a better service for a lower price than they were from their cable company, and they're a kool-aid drinking telco fanboy for saying so?

Did an AT&T truck run over your dog when you were a kid or something? Reading the posts on this thread, you'd think that the very idea that a telco is releasing a new product that competes with incumbent cable monopolies is somehow a bad thing.
cwh
join:2006-05-14
San Antonio, TX

cwh to hottboiinnc4

Member

to hottboiinnc4
said by hottboiinnc4:

CWH doesnt sound like a fanboy he sounds more of an employee.

To me the story has changed with service issues. But why not leave TWC for CHEAP almost free services from your employer?
No i dont work for ATT or any of their vendors, nor do I hold any ATT stock. My story has remained consistent.