new speeds Sounds exciting, I like ATT as Comcast is my only other option. Any word on exact speeds for these new packages?
reply to money69
My own concern is WHEN we'll see these speed offerings. My guess is several months out to NEVER depending on your distance from the VRAD.
In my case I'm guessing it would be NEVER, unless we did pair bonding and that would be a big process to go through (like it always is, gotta pull the right strings)
That is why we're switching to cable, they just upgraded there speed offerings and the latency is nice and low.
Everyone on the current 32 and 25 Meg profile will be able to get the 45/6 speeds. 75% of IPDSL customers will get it as well. As I said before, we will be using a variety of technologies to increase your speeds. Some field tests are showing speeds beyond 100mbps at 1300ft from the node via pair bonding. As to when the speeds will show up, it could be from 3 weeks to 3 years depending on where you live. Hiring and training takes a while to roll out. Also engineering is still finalizing how each area will be upgraded.
Coming your way at $100 a month.
Most people (like myself) think that is an outrageous price to pay for said service. Not when EPB is offering symmetrical 100mbps for $70 a month.
If they ofered it to us for $65-75 a month most people (including myself) would get it.
I'm already currently paying about $62 a month (with the BS fees) for IP-DSL 18/1 service.
reply to fakarooz
I have a question, Im currently on a 25/2 profile and according to ATT when I called them 1975ft from the VRAD or whatever it's called. Anyway, I called to see if I could get on the 24/3 internet plan and they said it wasn't available to me. So, I have 3 questions.....
1. Should I be able to get the 24/3 plan at that distance?
2. If the new speed is going to be available to any 32/5 or 25/2 profile like you said then wouldn't it be feasible to get the 24/3 by pair bonding or???
3. Any idea on pricing for this new tier? Im in Houston so im thinking it's going to be the same as Dallas.
Too bad I couldn't take the attenuator off my line. I bet I would qualify for 100 Mbps at 35 feet :P, that is, if my modem didn't fry itself.
reply to money69
Up to 3 years?
Google is rolling out 1,000 mbit/s and Time Warner is rolling out 100 mbit/s as we speak here in KC.
Plus, this will be available to what, 25% of customers?
reply to fakarooz
at&t new speeds are slower than old speeds of competitors What a joke! This is only 1Mbps faster than the slowest tier on FiOS, which has 5Mbps upstream!
More than 4× slower than the next tier on FiOS, 50/25.
More than 10× slower than 150/65, which is not even the fastest tier on FiOS!
AT&T will have to do so much investment with this, and all will be for nothing! AT&T U-verse will hardly match the low-to-mid tiers of the competition after this huge and expensive upgrade!
I now maintain a list of providers that AT&T doesn't want you to know about at »bmap.su (it's also on github, so feel free to fork). Those offers are quite amazing indeed: an actual 100/100 in Utah will run you $45/month (50/50 @ $35, 25/25 @ $30), without being an introductory price, and without requiring any bundles, so it's competitive not just on the speed, but on the price, too. And recently, »Paxio.net dropped the price on their 1000/1000 tier from 245 to 138, which doesn't match the Google Fibre trial, but is very impressive for a non-trial offer, and proves, once again, that such speeds are possible and don't cost a fortune.
Nice notes, I wish Houston where I am located had some additional options. The options here are Comcast and ATT and thats it, surely a city this size should have additional options.
With that being said, my ATT DSL reliability is rock solid and I am very happy with it, I think Id have a greater issue if I needed more upstream bandwidth. I think in Sept when my contract is up I am going to push for the 24/3 which I think SHOULD be available given my distance from what I have read. And at the same time I can negotiate my next 1 year contract with them.
reply to wizkid6
Re: new speeds EPB is also paying for their network with taxes and fees/prices from their power company. Which the only people they have to pay are the employees. If the project fails for any reason- especially if TV rates go up, only the people are on the hook.
Which the law pending in DC prevents and creates a level playing ground.
reply to ConstantineM
Re: at&t new speeds are slower than old speeds of competitors 45/6 is only a starting point. Faster speeds will be available later but there is a catch. Those close to the vrad don't need pair bonding which is basically crap. With a single pair and profile 17a or 30a they can get 75 maybe 100 Mbps. Higher bitloads and higher frequencies mean more instability but if they are at or under 500 ft their lines can handle the thing.
Problem are those farther down the line as they'll need pair bonding. Whats better than one average line? Two average lines Those with pair bonding will be able to get the faster speeds but that will add instability to their maybe already unstable service.
Things to consider: #1 Price Is everyone around or under 500ft willing to pay for the upgrade (new equipment, tech visit and price)? I think most will think it twice before signing in as they can get better deals on the other side of the fence.
#2 I bet many beyond 500ft will want the new speeds but will all qualify? It depends on many factors as condition of copper and other things.
Your point is right all this for only 45/6? When the rest are offering 100, 150 Mbps 1Gbps.
reply to TBBroadband
Re: new speeds A large part of the inner Houston area isn't even covered by U-verse VDSL. A city this size should surely have better options than IP-DSL.
reply to dmtguy
Re: at&t new speeds are slower than old speeds of competitors I don't buy this "close to VRAD is better" argument anymore. Those who are close to a VRAD are few, but they nonetheless could have been getting 50/50 for ages prior to this upgrade, yet AT&T still only sold them 18/1.5 or 24/3. And now, offer 50/50 when 1000/1000 can be offered for the same price? Yet they still don't do even that, 45/6, in terms of speed, is not even close to 50/50, and do note that this report claims that 45/6 is only for pair-bonding, so "close to VRAD" concept fails, once again.
The issue here is that AT&T doesn't want to do any kind of reasonable segmentation of their product, and wants to have it unified (in extremely weird ways, I would say). And they can't have it both ways. So, they end up segmented anyways, but without the benefits and competitive advantage they could have had if they segmented at the same time, instead of waiting and doing a new thing.
And 45/6 is not the beginning, it's pretty much the end, just like 24/3 turned out to be the end for non-bonded pairs with AT&T. They don't want to push their network, they'll keep on wasting their money on these rudimentary upgrades, instead of doing it right.
Hey, even »fibe.bell.ca has now given up their VRAD thingy, and has started doing FTTU, in Canada, where there is even less competition than in the US. Yet AT&T is still below that. Below bell.ca!
said by ConstantineM:This has been the problem all along. ATT is a dinosaur obviously incapable of change.
The issue here is that AT&T doesn't want to do any kind of reasonable segmentation of their product, and wants to have it unified (in extremely weird ways, I would say).
But really it doesn't matter. ATT's core customer are those who just want the cheapest, and a lot of them believe they are getting "advanced fiber optics"
And for the record, I have only 2 installs in recent memory where the customer was under 500 ft. That is out of hundreds that I have done. 1300-3100 ft was most typical for my area.
Perhaps my area does not have a dense VRAD layout.