AT&T CEO Calls DSL 'Obsolete' → AT&T U-verse obsolete already

Well that didn't last long. AT&Trash's half-assed band-aid to their ancient copper network is already ineffective. With Time Warner Cable now fully on board the DOCSIS 3.0 bandwagon, is there any cable ISP left out there competing with AT&T that doesn't stomp all over AT&T U-verse's top speeds of 24/3 Mbps? They don't even have the unlimited usage going for them anymore as the sole competitive edge over legendary capped provider Comcast (better known as "Comcap"). They're more just as or even more expensive than cable whilst providing slower speeds with bandwidth limits and atrocious HDTV picture quality. I don't know why anyone still subscribes to this crappy provider.

'cuz people like U-Verse IPTV better than crappy cableco STBs? Or maybe 'cuz AT&T's lower-end DSL over U-Verse packages are enough for the average Joe and are less expensive than low-end cable packages?

Otherwise, no reason.

CableCARD tuners are way better than U-verse's set-top box.

AT&T's lower-end packages are not cheaper than the cable company's low-end packages either.

I live in a AT&T and TimeWarner area. We get U-Verse in this area, but not DOCSIS 3.0. So the speeds we can get from each service are about the same. I did check the pricing once to see what U-Verse would cost (before AT&T implemented a cap), and for the same level of service as we're getting with TimeWarner it was a little cheaper. But I stayed with TimeWarner because when I had last been on AT&T the DSL was always going up and down and they could never fix it. Now with the cap, I'll definitely never switch. Unless they were to run fiber down my street right to my house and TimeWarner implemented the same size cap.

It looks cheaper... at first. This is due to a few promos AT&T likes to trick you into like $25 off TV service for the first 6 months.

After those 6 months are up though... AT&T costs more. Bill shot up to $160 a month for just the 24/3 Mbps Internet package and U-200 TV package together after all taxes and fees were added in.

Meanwhile, Time Warner's comparable TV offerings combined with 30/5 Mbps Internet (faster AND currently uncapped!) result in a cost of $137 per month (and that's with no $25 off 6 months gimmick) for the service and one DVR. And if you kill off that one DVR and get a CableCARD it drops down to $125 a month.

Comcast plans to deploy IPTV too. The Spectrum box and guide come out next year. What then for AT&T?

Then AT&T has to hope that TWC and SUddenlink, its other large competitors,won't follow.

Actually TWC has IPTV in the front burner... too bad.

SDV I believe. IPTV I'll believe when I see.

IPTV over coax isn't a huge deal anyway...digital cable does well at transmitting lots of data in one direction to a large number of subscribers, kinda like DBS TV. The issue is integrating TV content and other stuff (OTT, apps, whatever) into an attractive package froma UI perspective that "just works." IPTV vendors have started from scratch on their systems so that's why their stuff looks better than tired old CATV STB firmware, but it doesn't necessarily have to be that way.

By the time you'll see it it being deployed it will be too late for att... wait it is already too late for att. Just look at the advances that DOCSIS3.0 have made in the last 2-3 years. When that crappy uverse thing came out in 2006 DOCSIS3.0 was not even conceived and look where it is now.

Ignore cable at your own risk.

»hd.engadget.com/2011/05/ ··· streami/

»www.engadget.com/photos/ ··· #3763222