dslreports logo
site
 
    All Forums Hot Topics Gallery
spc

spacer




how-to block ads


Search Topic:
uniqs
63
share rss forum feed
« not fixed
This is a sub-selection from Just shows...

Tobester

join:2000-11-14
San Francisco, CA
Reviews:
·SONIC.NET
reply to ChampMom

Re: Just shows...

said by ChampMom:

DSL and U-verse are NOT the same thing, not even close. So I can assure you that your "business-class DSL" clients were NOT effected by the U-verse outage

Here in San Francisco, AT&T has simply re-branded their old ADSL as the new and improved "U-verse internet."

True U-verse, with fiber to remote terminals, is only available in a very small section of the City, due to complaints over the refrigerator size cabinet placement on neighborhood sidewalks.


trparky
Apple... YUM
Premium,MVM
join:2000-05-24
Cleveland, OH
kudos:2

I thought that they are getting rid of their old ADSL network (ATM-based) and moving people over to the new ADSL+ network that's branded as uVerse (IP-based).



David
I start new work on
Premium,VIP
join:2002-05-30
Granite City, IL
kudos:101

They are... it hit Granite City, IL earlier last year.


Tobester

join:2000-11-14
San Francisco, CA
Reviews:
·SONIC.NET
reply to trparky

said by trparky:

I thought that they are getting rid of their old ADSL network (ATM-based) and moving people over to the new ADSL+ network that's branded as uVerse (IP-based).

That initially was the stated plan, however, the AT&T CEO is on record as saying U-verse expansion is dead.

My point was to expose AT&T's attempt to razzle-dazzle some current ADSL customers into thinking they have U-verse when it simply is a re-branded name change of the old product. (Of course, those would be the unknowledgeable masses who don't read DSLreports.com )

Since San Francisco is one of the larger remaining cities without significant U-verse, it remains to be seen if they actually perform the installations, even though they have won the right, through the Courts, to install the neighborhood remote terminals.

Much of the City has underground utilities, which will be expensive to install fiber, so they might choose instead to focus on improving wireless for a better return on investment.

Of course, that leaves San Francisco ripe for picking by our little Bay area ISP gem, Sonic.net


npln
Us Army

join:2000-07-17
Antioch, CA

Actually you are somewhat right, ATT didn't rebrand the "old". What AT&T has done is installed New DSLAMS in the C.O. That are running on the UVerse network. Thus getting away with calling it UVerse, when in reality its nothing! I wouldn't even call it DSL 2.0. It still all copper from source to destination, distance issues do apply. Only thing it has done is to lighten the ATM network traffic. We call it "fake" UVerse, since true UVerse its supposed to be FTTN or FTTP. Both do exist in SF just very scarcely. Oh and FTTP will more than likely only been seen deploy in the south of Market area.

By the way last i checked ATT got the green light from SF city hall to install 700 VRADS, yup the frige is going up.