Reviews:
 ·Google Voice
·Junction Networks
·Callcentric
 ·T-Mobile US
 ·AT&T U-Verse
| reply to Merlin
at&t is already deep at the bottom of tier 1 networks said by Merlin:I guess it doesn't resonate with you that a global network includes much more than just the Internet. AT&T is the largest telecommunications network in the world and has almost 1M route miles of fiber deployed around the globe. The new 40Gbps MPLS network in the US went online last month and is the first of it's kind domestically. Google, Amazon, Netflix and all of those other content providers purchase some or most of their network assets from carriers like AT&T. They are not tier 1 global networks.
What an utter bullshit. AT&T becomes more irrelevant in the international arena day after day.
»www.renesys.com/blog/2012/02/a-b···on.shtml
Continue offering your pathetic 18/1.5 when your competitors are pushing 75/35 in the same price range and over the same technologies for home users, and continue pushing consumer-grade non-business 2Wire crap for small businesses, and see how long it'll be until you are no longer included in any Tier 1 graphs whatsoever. AT&T is already positioned towards the bottom as is, and that study above with the graph is for 2011, and it's only going down. From the third cluster graph, you can notice that T was on par with VZ in 2011-01; not anymore at all in 2012-01; VZ went slightly up, T surely plummeted significantly down! T is no longer in top 10 as of 2012-01!
Yes, content providers purchase network assets from carriers like AT&T [used to be], that one I give you is correct. But not from AT&T, and that's a fact, look at the bloody graphs, AT&T becomes more and more irrelevant day after day. |
|
Zoder
join:2002-04-16
Miami, FL | reply to Merlin
Re: 45MB Internet on 55MB Bonded Profile? said by Merlin:The new 40Gbps MPLS network in the US went online last month and is the first of it's kind domestically. Google, Amazon, Netflix and all of those other content providers purchase some or most of their network assets from carriers like AT&T. They are not tier 1 global networks. I believe you but it's funny considering the corporate line that these companies don't pay at&t their fair share for bandwidth.
WhyMe420, certainly if you use that much a month you have to take the caps into account. FWIW we now have Charter announcing the following
"According to Charter, the standard 30 meg service will cost $50 a month, while their Ultra 100 will be an additional $60. The move does appear to be frustrating some of the users in our forums who were happy with slower speeds and slightly lower bills and say they don't need 30 Mbps."
Hopefully these actions by multiple competitors will start to have an effect on at&t's pricing. |
|
|
|
BiggA
join:2005-11-23
EARTH Reviews:
 ·Comcast
| reply to ConstantineM
Re: at&t is already deep at the bottom of tier 1 networks You're confusing two things. They are a MASSIVE global backbone provider.
They also suck at last-mile. With that kind of bandwidth on the backbone, they should be able to deliver 1gbps to every home and apartment in their service area. But they don't. |
|
Merlin
join:2012-06-08
Dallas, TX | reply to ConstantineM
I don't really care about an Internet traffic report. That just means that AT&T is providing more wholesale backbone assets to other providers. Just because AT&T doesn't provide it at layer 3 doesn't mean they are providing it as raw backbone to those carriers.
»money.cnn.com/magazines/fortune/···ies/157/
»money.cnn.com/magazines/fortune/···ll_list/
This is called scoreboard. If the 11th largest company in the US and 30th largest in the world (both TOPS in telecommunications) is irrelevant, then you need medical attention.
said by ConstantineM:Continue offering your pathetic 18/1.5 when your competitors are pushing 75/35 in the same price range and over the same technologies for home users, and continue pushing consumer-grade non-business 2Wire crap for small businesses, and see how long it'll be until you are no longer included in any Tier 1 graphs whatsoever. AT&T is already positioned towards the bottom as is, and that study above with the graph is for 2011, and it's only going down. From the third cluster graph, you can notice that T was on par with VZ in 2011-01; not anymore at all in 2012-01; VZ went slightly up, T surely plummeted significantly down! T is no longer in top 10 as of 2012-01! To not be in the top 10, it sure does look like AT&T is number one on the Fortune 500 lists I referenced above. They must be wrong because some Internet forum blowhard says it isn't so 
said by ConstantineM:Yes, content providers purchase network assets from carriers like AT&T [used to be], that one I give you is correct. But not from AT&T, and that's a fact, look at the bloody graphs, AT&T becomes more and more irrelevant day after day.
I'm pretty sure the content providers are purchasing network assets from AT&T today and will continue to do so as they operate the largest global network in the world.
This irrelevant word you keep using. I do not think you know what it means. |
|
| Merlin, do you happen to know what kind of equipment this new profile will require? I've heard that it will require an iNID outside and I've also heard that it will require a new indoor gateway that will handle the pair bonding. I'm curious which one of those is correct (if either). |
|
Reviews:
·Charter
| So basically Merlins argument is:
'We have the fastest network in the world just google it' (Which is funny because that only links to Merlins comment..), or
'We'll have faster speeds soon' then when pressed to give facts or shown facts:
'We have the most money neener neener!'
Why is anyone listening to this obtuse hyperbole from this at&t worker/fanboy/shareholder? He has been high on at&t praise and hasn't provided any real facts on pretty much anything. |
|
| reply to dbeatson
Re: 45MB Internet on 55MB Bonded Profile? Wow, only on page 3 and this thread is already a pissing match, which is ultimately what got the last "45Mb" thread closed. |
|
1 edit | reply to Anon
Re: 45MB Internet on 55MB Bonded Profile? The only reason AT&T is on those lists is because of their wireless division. A company can still make money in one sector while becoming irrelevant in a different sector. AT&T as a whole isn't going anywhere, but they are quickly becoming irrelevant as a last-mile wireline provider.
Want the absolute cheapest connection no matter how slow the speed? Go with AT&T, the budget provider.
Want the fastest connection offered at a reasonable price for said speed? Go with almost everyone else.
/M |
|
