dslreports logo
 
    All Forums Hot Topics Gallery
spc
Search similar:


uniqs
9392

NormanS
I gave her time to steal my mind away
MVM
join:2001-02-14
San Jose, CA

NormanS to Anonymous_

MVM

to Anonymous_

Re: If U-Verse stinks to much, why do people keep it?

Ah! YouTube is IPTV!!! I've been using it for a long time!!!!
Expand your moderator at work
dcjoedog
join:2008-08-20
Marietta, GA

dcjoedog to gene32

Member

to gene32

Re: If U-Verse stinks to much, why do people keep it?

I've had U-verse over a year now, and at first I had problems with drop outs, freezing picture and all that jazz, but when I complained about it AT&T basically sent a guy to my house to rewire the house with new coax thru the house. Even since then it's been absolutely rock solid. I have not had a single complaint since then.

BTW, they fixed this right after I got the service, and my old provider, Charter, didn't care I was having problems so I dropped them for U-verse as soon as it was available, and boy am i glad I did.

Great service, great product, great everything. I recommend them to everyone I can.

Metatron2008
You're it
Premium Member
join:2008-09-02
united state

Metatron2008

Premium Member

I wouldn't expect too many uverse techs to agree to that. Alot of houses have old coax phone cables, and rewiring homes like this would cost the same in techs as, I dunno, wiring them for fiber?

... On second thought, it is At&t...

Alakar
Facts do not cease to exist when ignored
join:2001-03-23
Milwaukee, WI

Alakar to gene32

Member

to gene32
There are 261 Uverse reviews on the site. 186 of those are positive reviews while 22 are negative.

»User reviews - AT&T U-Verse

Seems most people are satisfied with it.
MyDogHsFleas
Premium Member
join:2007-08-15
Austin, TX

MyDogHsFleas to Metatron2008

Premium Member

to Metatron2008
said by Metatron2008:

I wouldn't expect too many uverse techs to agree to that. Alot of houses have old coax phone cables, and rewiring homes like this would cost the same in techs as, I dunno, wiring them for fiber?
Those are two completely different things. Fiber would be outside, not inside the house. Even if you have FTTH, you still have copper from the network box on the side of your house on in.
rick92
Premium Member
join:2006-01-12
Eaton Rapids, MI

rick92 to Alakar

Premium Member

to Alakar
I have had uverse for about 3 wks now and I like it so far,as good as any of the other services I've had,comcast,charter, dish,dtv and the features are better.
Learux
join:2001-10-23
Valencia, CA

Learux to gene32

Member

to gene32
In over 2 years never had an outage, pixalation or any problems.

I have no idea what you are talking about.
neiltif
join:2006-12-11
Independence, MO

neiltif to gene32

Member

to gene32
Because it stinks less than Comcast. Comcast was never able to fix our freezes or any other problems and the tech did not care. The Comcast picture was worse. It would be out for hours every month. The Comcast tech would say your signal is marginal, the office would say it looks ok to us.

At least the ATT techs seem to care and want it to work. You just have to find the right tech.
DSLHeadaches
join:2001-01-03
Palm Springs, CA

DSLHeadaches to gene32

Member

to gene32
Three weeks since install and I'm quite happy with the conversion from cable, no outages and no issues. There are plusses/minuses to every vendors product. I agree with another poster, there are many more positive reviews than negative reviews of U-Verse. I'm happy when I flip channels, I don't have to count to 3-5 before having an HD picture, like I did with cable. My internet speed seems to remain relatively stable and doesn't drop off exponentially in prime time. I love the DVR with website capability to schedule and the ability to watch recordings on other TVs, and record 4 programs at once.

emjayef
join:2007-11-25
Pleasant Hill, CA
Ubiquiti EdgeRouter X
TP-Link Archer C9
Obihai OBi200

emjayef to Metatron2008

Member

to Metatron2008
said by Metatron2008:

Alot of houses have old coax phone cables, and rewiring homes like this would cost the same in techs as, I dunno, wiring them for fiber?

... On second thought, it is At&t...
I don't think I've seen coax phone cables - are they used inside or outside the house?

By the way, I wouldn't bet against AT&T. They've probably learned a few things along the way about the technology.
ShadezeRO
join:2006-04-24
Fort Lauderdale, FL

ShadezeRO to gene32

Member

to gene32
Its the only option for me at the moment.

Comcast is coming in with DOCSIS 3 soon. Hopefully I have that soon ^_^

Doctor Four
My other vehicle is a TARDIS
Premium Member
join:2000-09-05
Dallas, TX

Doctor Four to gene32

Premium Member

to gene32
While I have experienced TV freezes, my internet connection has been stable and fast.

And though the TV freezing problem can get annoying, the alternative to U-Verse (Time Warner Cable) is worse, IMO. Fewer channels, more expensive service, and an unreliable internet connection is what I experienced with Time Warner.

nishiko
@pacbell.net

nishiko to gene32

Anon

to gene32
Had Uverse for about a month now, and while there are sometimes a few small glitches with the DVR, I have no complaints and am overall thrilled with the overall value and features offered. One thing I especially appreciate over Comcast is that my Internet connection is so far SUPER stable. You really know when you use a VPN a lot from home. It has not gone out even for a second once since I had it installed. The gateway hasn't even been rebooted since installed. It's great!

So, HUGE KUDOS to AT&T on the technical side of this product, but they do have some work to do on educating their people better. Often times, the CS reps don't seem to have even the most basic information (ie, like being aware of the free Starz promotion for the month of July when I called to inquire about it on July 1).
wase
join:2004-01-29
Willowbrook, IL

wase to gene32

Member

to gene32
Well, I have had Uverse for a year now, and I am going back to Comcast this weekend for a variety of reasons:
-Frequent, pixelation/breakups/freezing, with several equipment replacements, serivce calls, and re-cabling
-service was fine iniitially, but has been getting worse with time
-2 HD stream litmitation is annoying
-max 18 internet,(18/1.5 up) is lame compared to comcast offers
-Price is very high once deals are gone
-EVERY TV must have a box(7 bucks per month) to work

I have had good luck with their phone support, their service techs, and, all the people I have dealt with, but, after 5 service calls, and endless phone calls, the service just doesn't cut it for me anymore.

I am anxious to try the Comcast Extreme(50/10) internet service, and, since all my TV's have built in tuners, I will save 35 bucks a month in "box" charges..Even though the SD picture on ATT is without doubt, the best out there, their HD picture just doesn't cut it for me, especially with the pixelation and macroblocking.
Your experience may differ, but for me, for now, ATT is NOT ready for prime time...
cronojay
join:2009-07-27
Vero Beach, FL

cronojay to gene32

Member

to gene32
Its unfortunate that you want to switch. I'm sure there is growing pains, but I would not give up on them.
cellmaniac
join:2001-02-15
San Mateo, CA

cellmaniac

Member

With Comcast you will only get a few HD channels without a separate HD box too. I think their cost for individual HD boxes are even higher. Comcast's current HD channel availability in my area was limited; however, they did say they were expanding the number of HD channels in a few months.

I switched to Uverse over a week ago and I am extremely pleased with the total home DVR feature. I have 5 tv's (4 of them HD) and yes sometimes having only two HD streams does require some coordination; however, I'm hoping the 3HD/1SD profile will be coming soon.

emjayef
join:2007-11-25
Pleasant Hill, CA
Ubiquiti EdgeRouter X
TP-Link Archer C9
Obihai OBi200

emjayef to gene32

Member

to gene32
Well, I got U-verse a few days ago, and I'm fairly happy. I got the 6mb/s DSL for $35 to replace my Sonic/SBC DSL 6mb/s which was $70 (static IP, which I rarely used), and Comcast HD cable.

The DSL is faster both down and up than previously, even though I'm the same distance (I'm on a nearby RT, and the U-verse VRAD was put in next to it). The router is much improved over my old Linksys, which is now being used as a switch. I like being able to assign fixed IP addresses to computers on my network, and the interface is nicer.

The TV is OK. I had problems with my HDMI switch, and had to revert to component cables switched by my receiver instead. Otherwise, I get intermittant HDCP errors.

Also, my nice universal remote won't work with the Motorola box. It worked with every other device I've ever used.

The DVR is much nicer than Comcast's. Comcast has better on-demand programming, but that never worked for me anyway, and they were never able to fix it. It just gave an error. After a few years of screwing with them, I gave up. It wasn't worth it. If I really cared, I'd get a Netflix Roku box.

I love the fact that I now the internet connection next to the TV system. They ran a wire from the output of the router to where I used to have the DSL modem.

The phone works perfectly, and I like how I can play or download messages from a computer.

I'll write a review after a month or so.
vinnie97
Premium Member
join:2003-12-05
US

1 edit

vinnie97 to Doctor Four

Premium Member

to Doctor Four
said by Doctor Four:

While I have experienced TV freezes, my internet connection has been stable and fast.

And though the TV freezing problem can get annoying, the alternative to U-Verse (Time Warner Cable) is worse, IMO. Fewer channels, more expensive service, and an unreliable internet connection is what I experienced with Time Warner.
Frankly, I don't need a ridiculous amount of channels and my TWC connection is fairly stable. I have no desire to partake in AT&T's half-measured experiment, especially when all their ridiculous compression algorithms to make it run over copper go a long way in killing video quality and with a Pioneer Kuro, you want the best PQ you can afford. I only wish I was in a FIOS area, I would have switched long ago.
texasguy37
Premium Member
join:2009-05-18
Grand Prairie, TX

texasguy37

Premium Member

said by vinnie97:

Frankly, I don't need a ridiculous amount of channels and my TWC connection is fairly stable. I have no desire to partake in AT&T's half-measured experiment, especially when all their ridiculous compression algorithms to make it run over copper go a long way in killing video quality and with a Pioneer Kuro, you want the best PQ you can afford. I only wish I was in a FIOS area, I would have switched long ago.
I take it that you are not an At&T U-verse customer. If that is correct, I am wondering how you are so knowledgeable about the quality of the service?
vinnie97
Premium Member
join:2003-12-05
US

vinnie97

Premium Member

It's a known fact that AT&T uses the most compression on their video (they have also set up various demos in stores across the area) in order to transmit the signal across copper, so logic would only dictate that their video quality would have to be the worst or one of the worst, and from nearly every report I've seen about the service, that's the consensus.

ILpt4U
Premium Member
join:2006-11-12
Saint Louis, MO
ARRIS TM822
Asus RT-N66

ILpt4U

Premium Member

said by vinnie97:

It's a known fact that AT&T uses the most compression on their video (they have also set up various demos in stores across the area) in order to transmit the signal across copper, so logic would only dictate that their video quality would have to be the worst or one of the worst, and from nearly every report I've seen about the service, that's the consensus.
There is a missing element from your logic. U-Verse is compressed, yes. But it is also encoded as MPEG-4, which can display a decent to good picture at a much lower bitrate than MPEG-2 (which is what most cable companies are using).

Metatron2008
You're it
Premium Member
join:2008-09-02
united state

Metatron2008

Premium Member

said by ILpt4U:

said by vinnie97:

It's a known fact that AT&T uses the most compression on their video (they have also set up various demos in stores across the area) in order to transmit the signal across copper, so logic would only dictate that their video quality would have to be the worst or one of the worst, and from nearly every report I've seen about the service, that's the consensus.
There is a missing element from your logic. U-Verse is compressed, yes. But it is also encoded as MPEG-4, which can display a decent to good picture at a much lower bitrate than MPEG-2 (which is what most cable companies are using).
Directv also uses Mpeg 4 for their HD, and Directv looks far better then Uverse.
vinnie97
Premium Member
join:2003-12-05
US

vinnie97

Premium Member

Correct, MPEG4 is more efficient than MPEG2. That might explain the occasional review that favors U-Verse PQ over TWC or Comcast. They generally still provide more efficient bandwidth for their streams than the telco, however.

Alakar
Facts do not cease to exist when ignored
join:2001-03-23
Milwaukee, WI

Alakar

Member

said by vinnie97:

They generally still provide more efficient bandwidth for their streams than the telco, however.
How do you figure that? Cable streams all channels at all times, whether you are watching them or not. This is why when cable adds an HD channel, they either have to remove other channels to free up room or increase compression (as TW did last fall in this area). That doesn't sound like providing "more efficient bandwidth for their streams". Uverse only streams the channels that are being watched.

Metatron2008
You're it
Premium Member
join:2008-09-02
united state

1 edit

Metatron2008 to vinnie97

Premium Member

to vinnie97
said by vinnie97:

Correct, MPEG4 is more efficient than MPEG2. That might explain the occasional review that favors U-Verse PQ over TWC or Comcast. They generally still provide more efficient bandwidth for their streams than the telco, however.
Well... yes and no. Mpeg 4 uses more compression. Low quality Mpeg 4 loses alot more coloring and such then Mpeg 2.

In some ways, higher quality MPEG 2 is better if you can use a large amount of bandwidth, which is why Fios uses MPEG 2.

Mpeg 4 is alot better for lower bandwidth, as Mpeg 4 compresses better then Mpeg 2.

The main reason anybody would say Uverse is better at PQ then Comcast or TWC is because Comcast and TWC use Mpeg 2 at very low bandwidth due to alot of channels. Mpeg 2 is horrible at low bandwidth, and the cable companies should be using mpeg 4 if they are gonna do that.
texasguy37
Premium Member
join:2009-05-18
Grand Prairie, TX

texasguy37 to vinnie97

Premium Member

to vinnie97
said by vinnie97:

It's a known fact that AT&T uses the most compression on their video (they have also set up various demos in stores across the area) in order to transmit the signal across copper, so logic would only dictate that their video quality would have to be the worst or one of the worst, and from nearly every report I've seen about the service, that's the consensus.
Thanks for the information. I have one more question for you. If you are not a U-verse customer, and you don't like the U-verse service, why are you hanging out on a U-verse forum?
vinnie97
Premium Member
join:2003-12-05
US

4 edits

vinnie97

Premium Member

Because it's one of 2 crappy broadband/TV services with which I am stuck. Any other inquisition-like questions? I didn't know those were the 2 prerequisites for posting here, so perhaps you can link me to this rule unless it's unspoken/unofficial or perhaps made up by yourself?

And Meta, I realize MPEG4 is better at lower bandwidths, hence its greater efficiency. What I am less familiar with is how low the likes of TWC are going with their MPEG2 streams. MPEG4 when given enough bandwidth is no slouch (see some of the reference quality Blu-rays and HD DVDs that utilize AVC).

Alakar, I guess the big question is, how many Mbps is AT&T devoting to individual HD channels? The consensus seems to suggest it's not enough. With the increasing # of HD channels, it is certainly possible that some cable networks have compressed MPEG2 too much...but is it comparatively worse than how bit-starved AT&T's MPEG4 streams are? FIOS trumps every last one of them in PQ regardless of not being a switched-based technology like IPTV. That is happening behind the scenes and, to the customer (with decent vision and a HQ display), the differences in PQ are what will be the most obvious.

skuds
Remember 9-11
join:2000-12-21
Houston, TX

skuds to gene32

Member

to gene32
Cause it doesn't stink... Mine works fine... Far fewer outages than satellite... Far better customer service than Comcast/TWC... Sure, I'd prefer less compression on the HD... But I've seen a steady progression of improvements over the two years we've used Uverse. One tip is to condition the power to all the boxes... That significantly improves the overall stability of the system.

Alakar
Facts do not cease to exist when ignored
join:2001-03-23
Milwaukee, WI

Alakar to Metatron2008

Member

to Metatron2008
said by Metatron2008:

Well... yes and no. Mpeg 4 uses more compression. Low quality Mpeg 4 loses alot more coloring and such then Mpeg 2.

In some ways, higher quality MPEG 2 is better if you can use a large amount of bandwidth, which is why Fios uses MPEG 2.

Mpeg 4 is alot better for lower bandwidth, as Mpeg 4 compresses better then Mpeg 2.
This isn't accurate. Mpeg4 is superior Mpeg2 across the board. At an equal compression level, the Mpeg4 picture will be better then the Mpeg2 picture. In other words, if a video is compressed to 100MB with Mpeg2 and the same video is compressed to 100MB with Mpeg4, the Mpeg4 will have superior picture quality. This is why Comcast, TW and FIOS are all moving to Mpeg4.
said by Metatron2008:

The main reason anybody would say Uverse is better at PQ then Comcast or TWC is because Comcast and TWC use Mpeg 2 at very low bandwidth due to alot of channels. Mpeg 2 is horrible at low bandwidth, and the cable companies should be using mpeg 4 if they are gonna do that.
Uverse has much better picture quality on SD then any of the other services. HD picture quality on Uverse is better in my area then Time Warners, but I know alot of people have said the cable quality is better in their area.