1 edit | reply to Simba7
Re: I'm not surprised.. said by Simba7:Fiber *IS* the future after all. Verizon actually did something right for a change (I still don't like their wireless division). Now.. If the other companies would actually upgrade to a better technology, then maybe we wouldn't have the constant "limitations" we have. Sure, DSL was great.. 10 YEARS AGO.. How old is the traditional copper pair? Companies are too used to purposely trickling out products because they are afraid of one day running out of products to offer.
Some one at AT&T probably said if we moved to fiber optic now, we will pay more now and won't get the returns for years. So they decided to upgrade to adsl2 which can barely offer internet and tv and use that first. Then they will move to fiber. At which time the costs will be cheaper. But odds are it will cost them more in the long run since they had to invest in two technologies and not just one. And in the interim, they are going to lose customers in any market with competition. Since cable companies can offer faster speeds and customers don't have to put up with line issues and distance limits which can make dsl crappy. |
|
|
|
| AT&T and TWC are like 2 peas in a pod...resistant to upgrading their networks and ready to nickle and dime the customer in order to "eventually" fund such upgrades, so areas serviced by this duopoly are in for a long slow haul. |
|
| reply to insomniac84
AT&T's Uverse isn't adsl2...it's VDSL. The two technologies are different. |
|
| reply to insomniac84
said by insomniac84:Some one at AT&T probably said if we moved to fiber optic now, we will pay more now and won't get the returns for years. So they decided to upgrade to adsl2 which can barely offer internet and tv and use that first. Then they will move to fiber. At which time the costs will be cheaper. But odds are it will cost them more in the long run since they had to invest in two technologies and not just one. And in the interim, they are going to lose customers in any market with competition. Since cable companies can offer faster speeds and customers don't have to put up with line issues and distance limits which can make dsl crappy. Of course, but they were expecting to see huge drops in price by letting others move to fiber then they would switch down the road. Well the price is dropping but not as fast as they expected (because they didn't jump in too). So now they are supporting old DSL in most markets, VDSL in some new markets, fiber in select new housing builds, and I think some of their customers are asking for more speed than the 6mb/s they have offered for years. Unfortunately the only thing they can do with VDSL is bonded pair which is still in the lab! Not to mention it would pretty much mean running 2 lines to most customers meaning twice the copper, and probably even thicker lines on the polls.
To me, it seems that not switching to fiber was a big mistake in the long run (and possibly in the short run).
--
- "Techie" Jim |
|
1 edit | reply to twill1989
said by twill1989:AT&T's Uverse isn't adsl2...it's VDSL. The two technologies are different. Whatever it is called, it is still barely fast enough for what they try to cram on it and cable companies can easily beat it. Then if you have a line issue creep up, you may lose service forever if they can't or won't fix it. And many people can't get the benefits of faster dsl because of distance limitations.
Fiber solves all the distance and bandwidth issues. |
|
| reply to insomniac84
I hope the big brains at AT&T that came up with U-Verse to make their stock holders happy get booted out with no parachute when they find out they need to do FTTP anyway and wasted all that money on U-Verse hardware. |
|
