| reply to djrobx
Re: why does HD on ATT UVerse seem so much better I totally disagree that Uverse HD is better than cable HD. They had just installed Uverse service in my house and I tell you that Comcast cable's HD picture quality is better than Uverse. At least, from what I have experienced so far. The HD picture looks pixalated; in fact, it is very noticeable on the Network's Logo. I am dissapointed because I expected an opposite outcome reading all the good reviews about Uverse. I have 2 HD boxes in my house plus Uverse internet 6.0 installed. By the way, I have a nice Samsung 52 inch TV, therefore, I will capture all defects.
The quality of HD in Comcast was crisp and clear. |
|
| Well, I can only state what is happening in my house. I switched from Dish Network to U-verse. The U-verse HD quality is good and compares favorably to the quality I received with Dish. |
|
 djrobx
join:2000-05-31
Valencia, CA
 ·RoadRunner Cable
 ·AT&T U-Verse
 ·VOIPo
·PHONE POWER
1 edit | reply to uversehmm
said by uversehmm :
I totally disagree that Uverse HD is better than cable HD.
I'm sure that's true in your area. When we had Comcast, the picture was far superior to U-verse and locals were bit-for-bit equivalent to OTA, but they didn't offer that many channels. When Time Warner took over, they started further compressing the channels to fit more in, and the result was absolutely disastrous to quality. U-verse is easily better than the crap we get from Time Warner now. Don't assume just because your cable is good that everyone else's is, it varies a lot by area!
Which isn't possible unless they either take bandwidth away from the internet side or go FTTP. Not true. AT&T is running VDSL at 25/2 (or 19/2 for far customers) now. They're testing a 32/5 profile with 3HD and higher quality streams. Pair bonding/VDSL2 has been on AT&T's radar for a long time which is supposed to extend the reach for customers further out.
--
AT&T U-Hearse
Your funeral. Delivered.
|
|
|
|
