 BabyBearKeep wise ...with Nite-Owl
join:2007-01-11
1 edit | Suddenily it all makes sense! Hah! That's funny. This story reminds me of a few weeks ago when a door to door salesman from AT&T trying to pawn U-verse on me showed up. Saying that I could switch over to U-verse now for free, but if I didn't AT&T was cutting and pulling ALL copper in this area in a year then such a switch would cost $200.   There was quite a bit more BS spouted too. Maybe AT&T just wants to sell off all their copper to a scrap dealer while the prices are still high. 
Edit: spelling. |
|
AVonGaussPremium
join:2007-11-01
Boynton Beach, FL
1 edit | Except the irony with AT&T stating this is that U-verse still requires much of the PSTN infrastructure - including that "last mile" copper. I'm pretty sure this is more about getting out of regulations than anything else. Verizon in FIOS areas has a pretty good case, they're maintaining two separate network build-outs. |
|
Reviews:
 ·Comcast
| Re: Suddenily it all makes sense!
Except the irony with AT&T stating this is that U-verse still requires much of the PSTN network - including that "last mile" copper. I'm pretty sure this is more about getting out of regulations than anything else. Verizon in FIOS areas has a pretty good case, they're maintaining two separate network build-outs.
Avon, you couldn't be further from the facts if you wanted to.
AT&T is running two networks on the same last mile copper. If you have a pots line, and have a dslam rt in the field you have 2 simultaneus networks running at the same time. The pots is circuit switched, and the dsl is packet switched. Check your facts before you spout off. |
|
|
|
AVonGaussPremium
join:2007-11-01
Boynton Beach, FL
1 edit | said by jtorre69:Avon, you couldn't be further from the facts if you wanted to. Sure I could... 
said by jtorre69:AT&T is running two networks on the same last mile copper. If you have a pots line, and have a dslam rt in the field you have 2 simultaneus networks running at the same time. Okay, let's look at it this way; you "turn off POTS" in favor of VOIP in an area served by DSL or U-verse. What exactly do you get to turn off or remove? Remember, if DSL or U-verse is not available in an area, the whole broadband VOIP argument falls apart.
One advantage you would have if you didn't have "POTS" running on the subscriber line is you could use more advanced signaling to provide greater bandwidth to the subscriber, but AT&T could do that today with U-verse, there is nothing stopping them from doing so.
What this is really about, which is what I was alluding to in my original post, is the PSTN portion of the equation and how the country is linked together. |
|
