cwh
join:2006-05-14
San Antonio, TX
| reply to Enlightener
Re: I don't get it
The problem with you and markyd is that you think you should be at the front of the line for any new service offered. I doubt ATT is going to change its deployment schedule because of your whining about the inability to get a new service. You act like ATT is doing nothing, when it fact they are greenlighting a million or so new addresses every qtr for this new service. |
|
David
No,there is another.
Premium,VIP
join:2002-05-30
Granite City, IL
clubs:
 ·DIRECTV
 ·magicjack.com
 ·AT&T Midwest
| Plus what I don't get is how did we lose a customer if the service wasn't available for him anyway? Uverse wasn't available and he wanted something more than 6mbps/768kbps. I can respect that. Ironically I upgraded someone to elite speeds today, order completes in about a week. That chick is tickled pink. |
|
Enlightener
join:2006-01-28
Cedar Park, TX
 ·AT&T U-Verse
| reply to cwh
I left Virginia in 2003 just as FiOS became available to my old house. It's 4 1/2 years later and I have FTTP but my speed isn't any better then DSL. Also Austin was first rumored to get U-Verse last year right after San Antonio and then this past March. Then there is the fact that when an area goes green for U-Verse it's the copper people only, not the FTTP people.
Don't even begin to preach to me about wanting to be at the front of the line. |
|
Enlightener
join:2006-01-28
Cedar Park, TX | reply to David
That's right, you didn't lose a customer... you lost two revenue generating units ( data and voice ) and very soon you'll be losing two more. |
|
apeface
join:2000-09-16
Mckinney, TX
1 edit | reply to Enlightener
That isnt exactly true, there are fttp lines with uverse all over the place. |
|
Enlightener
join:2006-01-28
Cedar Park, TX
·AT&T U-Verse
| I said `when an area goes green`. Are you asserting that FTTN and FTTP U-Verse goes green at the same time.
Ya, that's right... I didn't think you were trying to claim that. Otherwise MarkyD wouldn't have been having the problem that he was having. |
|
apeface
join:2000-09-16
Mckinney, TX
·AT&T U-Verse
2 edits | Yeah, I am saying that.
There are some cities that uverse only recently took control of the fttp nodes, OKC would be one of those cities. Obviously those would not be live the same time the fttn went live. \
However, there were/will be cities that fttn and fttp went/will go live at the same time. |
|
perplexed
@qwest.net
| reply to cwh
I live in Westerville, Ohio (suburb of Columbus). The thing that confuses me is why in the world would AT&T sink so much money into a service offering that's barely better than what they already offer and comes nowhere near beating the competition? If the rumors hold true, AT&T plans on offering Uverse 6/1 internet and 1 HD stream (I've seen the fridge-size boxes around town but the service hasn't arrived yet). Well, AT&T Yahoo DSL already offers a 6/768 Extreme package on the internet side; RR and WOW offer at least that. On the TV side, 1 HD stream doesn't come anywhere close to competing with the available cable or satellite offerings. If this is what AT&T is going to offer, I can't help but wonder: Why put yourself in a position where you aren't at least competitive with the other local ISP's/cableco's? Despite their "new" services, I can find better offerings from their competitors from launch day. This is a colossal waste of company time, money and resources. Why save a few bucks by going the FTTN/VDSL route when they should have bitten the bullet and gone all FTTP. Verizon did it with FIOS and, despite initial skepticism from shareholders, they seem to be getting very favorable press and customer reviews. AT&T could have easily generated the same kind of buzz by coming to market with a true next gen internet/TV offering at a competitive price. Instead we get... mediocrity? If I were a shareholder, I'd pull a Vader over at the Deathstar and choke some sense into these idiots. |
|
