dslreports logo
site
 
    All Forums Hot Topics Gallery
spc

spacer




how-to block ads


Search Topic:
uniqs
1489
share rss forum feed


Rshigj

@sbcglobal.net

AT&T propaganda

»youtu.be/Jq4QyhZ_bnk


Check out this video of AT&T trying to persuade everyone to drop POTS regulations.


Msradell
P.E.
Premium
join:2008-12-25
Louisville, KY
I certainly understand what they want to do and really don't have a problem with it if certain criteria is met. As long as new technology that provides the same or better service to a customer is available for the same or lower price, I don't have a problem with them, not maintaining current systems. If services are lost or become more expensive it shouldn't be done. Also, regulatory rules regarding pricing should not be eliminated across the board, especially in cases where no competition exists.


OSUGoose

join:2007-12-27
Columbus, OH
reply to Rshigj
I called them out on this, let see how fast the delete or remove the ability to comment on the video.

Frodo

join:2006-05-05
kudos:1

1 recommendation

reply to Rshigj
AT&T's position is something I agree with. POTS is 20 century technology. Everyone had a phone line, and internet was dial-up, which meant that internet ran over the phone line.

Now in the era of broadband, an internet connection is the basic connection and telephone (voip) runs over the internet.

POTS is going the way of the telegraph, the word processor, the typewriter, the stage coach, and the dinosaur. It can be replaced in most instances by a voip or wireless solution.

TBBroadband

join:2012-10-26
Fremont, OH
Reviews:
·AT&T U-Verse
·MegaPath
Very true. But and if AT&T was saying they'd deploy full FTTH in place, nobody would have a problem with it. It's the fact that people want to force them to keep the system and not move to U-Verse or wireless. When U-Verse or Wireless makes sense- then the company should be able to move to it. If they're not permitted they need to pull a Sprint and spin off those landline markets to a new company, aka Embarq, and just move on and come back with a wireless product like Verizon did.


mackey
Premium
join:2007-08-20
kudos:13
said by TBBroadband:

It's the fact that people want to force them to keep the system and not move to U-Verse or wireless. When U-Verse or Wireless makes sense- then the company should be able to move to it.

The thing is, it's those regulated lines which allow Uverse in the first place. If they have their way and eliminate those lines then the only option left is wireless. What makes sense to the company and what makes sense to the customers are completely different. Customers want access to a good service at a fair and reasonable (not necessarily cheap) price. The company wants significant increases in quarterly profit and ARPU EVERY quarter while not spending a dime to get it. That is all they care about, nothing else. The companies absolutely love wireless as it's considerably cheaper then running landlines while allowing them to charge a considerable amount for the "base" plan and even more for overages ($10/GB? Party time!).

said by TBBroadband:

If they're not permitted they need to pull a Sprint and spin off those landline markets to a new company, aka Embarq, and just move on and come back with a wireless product like Verizon did.

This is the best idea I've heard yet. AT&T doesn't really care if everyone drops landlines (POTS or Uverse) as wireless is their bread and butter. Once it's spun off into a separate company who's survival depends on remaining relevant, THEN we'll see money and effort put into the infrastructure. Until then they're just gonna let landlines rot.

/M


battleop

join:2005-09-28
00000
reply to Msradell
Careful there. That kind of thinking will get you labeled as a shill.....


battleop

join:2005-09-28
00000
reply to Frodo
"or wireless solution."

I think that's the part everyone has trouble with. They want for your to move to a more expensive wireless plan as a replacement for your land line service. They only way they could really get this through is if they can do it and you don't see a change in your service or bill.
--
I do not, have not, and will not work for AT&T/Comcast/Verizon/Charter or similar sized company.


ArgMeMatey

join:2001-08-09
Milwaukee, WI
kudos:2
Reviews:
·voip.ms
·AT&T Midwest
·Time Warner Cable
reply to Rshigj
AT&T needs to:
1. Get the reliability of new technology to the same level as obsolete technology. Whenever there is a disaster, I read comments that wireless service is over capacity and the batteries powering IP modems & routers go dead. POTS still works of course. AT&T needs to guarantee and attain a level of service at a approaching or exceeding POTS under various day-to-day as well as exceptional circumstances.

2. Provide essential service at a reasonable fixed or measured rate, and replacement services at a competitive rate. In other words, they need to offer a baseline product at a low, low, price. Or, they (and all comparable providers) need to provide such a service, whether wireless or IP-based, at a regulated rate.

3. Reinvest more of their profits as capital and less as dividends. Though they are no longer a monopoly, they still act like it. They do not spend enough money on customer service and where not subject to regulation, they raise prices at will.

Customers need to understand that:
1. AT&T is in business to make money, and they will do it by any practical legal means. If it's illegal but practical, they will figure out how much it will cost to do the lobbying and PR to get the laws changed. If all that number-crunching shows a reasonable return on investment, they will do it.
2. Unregulated companies in industries with high barriers to entry have carte blanche. They will do whatever makes them more money and keeps barriers high.
--
USNG:
16TDN2870
Find your USNG coordinates:
USNGWeb


OSUGoose

join:2007-12-27
Columbus, OH
AT&T should go private, completely overhaul their network to be state of the art as it once was, then re-emerge as a publicly traded company with the best network.

silbaco
Premium
join:2009-08-03
USA
reply to mackey
said by mackey:

said by TBBroadband:

If they're not permitted they need to pull a Sprint and spin off those landline markets to a new company, aka Embarq, and just move on and come back with a wireless product like Verizon did.

This is the best idea I've heard yet. AT&T doesn't really care if everyone drops landlines (POTS or Uverse) as wireless is their bread and butter. Once it's spun off into a separate company who's survival depends on remaining relevant, THEN we'll see money and effort put into the infrastructure. Until then they're just gonna let landlines rot.

/M

Even if they did spin it off on its own, the network would still rot. Just like Embarq/Centurylink is doing now. The problem is the debt. Even if they axed the dividends entirely and ignored investors or went private, Centurylink has too much debt to build out a massive network upgrade. All they can afford to do is give it a little prod here and there and advertise how wonderful it is. At&t's spinoff would be put in a similar situation. It would be loaded with debt and unable to afford network upgrades, no matter how needed they may be.

As it stands now, At&t's landline business would sink on its own. Staying part of the parent company at least gives it a lifeboat.


tigerpaw509

join:2011-01-19
reply to Rshigj
13 billion a year profit year in year out

scross

join:2002-09-13
Cordova, TN
reply to Rshigj
If, as they say, customers are leaving these old technologies in droves, then they really can't complain too much about having to maintain them, can they, since that particular customer base is constantly shrinking anyway? The real problem here is not so much that they want to "modernize" regulation, which I don't have a problem with, but rather they want to ELIMINATE regulation, which I DO have a problem with!

TBBroadband

join:2012-10-26
Fremont, OH
Reviews:
·AT&T U-Verse
·MegaPath
reply to mackey
Actually, U-Verse is not a regulated product. And many areas of U-Verse aren't even copper anymore. Even many areas where they pulled the ENTIRE copper network out and laid FTTH.

And you will never get a "fair" price on a network that is rotting and is beyond its life time. It's time to upgrade and move on. That's the fact of the network. MSOs updated their networks to handle data and phone, the phone companies need to as well and that's upgrading to something that is NOT regulated (something that cable is NOT) and wireless.

and a landline provider will always be around; The Gov't would never let one die thanks to those who cry they need one for 911 and alarm systems even though both can be done over cellular.


mackey
Premium
join:2007-08-20
kudos:13

1 recommendation

said by TBBroadband:

Actually, U-Verse is not a regulated product.

I never said it was. I said it runs over the regulated lines. Should they get the regulations dropped it will allow them to cut that copper off and, as a side effect, Uverse will no longer be available.

said by TBBroadband:

And many areas of U-Verse aren't even copper anymore. Even many areas where they pulled the ENTIRE copper network out and laid FTTH.

ROFLMAO! You're too funny! There are only a handful of FTTP deployments in greenfield areas. T will not do FTTP in "brownfield."

/M

nlwnola

join:2011-01-19
Metairie, LA
Reviews:
·AT&T U-Verse
reply to ArgMeMatey
1. Get the reliability of new technology to the same level as obsolete technology. Whenever there is a disaster, I read comments that wireless service is over capacity and the batteries powering IP modems & routers go dead. POTS still works of course. AT&T needs to guarantee and attain a level of service at a approaching or exceeding POTS under various day-to-day as well as exceptional circumstances.

The gulf coast was rebuilt with a backbone of fiber to the RT. of course this means no power, dead battery, dead RT, no pots. I have u-verse now and see I dont see any issues with it. My voice quality is better and my Internet is faster, tv kicks ass too.

My mother lives north of the lake here in suburbia and we put her on AT&T wireless home phone. That works awesome. The sound quality is better than her old pots line. The only thing she is lacking is caller ID with name.

I think pots should go. It's a dead technology and they're are so many other solutions


old_tech
Premium
join:2013-03-31
Springfield, IL
reply to Frodo
Frodo, actually POTS is 19th century technology.

Frodo

join:2006-05-05
kudos:1
said by old_tech:

Frodo, actually POTS is 19th century technology.

Well, if you throw in the hand crank and magneto, I suppose you're right. But with digital switching, current POTS is a 20th century technology. Even in the mid 1940s, there were people plugging cords into a switchboard to complete calls. Hate to have to admit it, but I remember the advent of direct dial for LD.

Current POTS is a 20th century technology. But the idea of having a single copper pair handling one line when it could handle 30 (or more) convince me that POTS is obsolete.

Of course, I'm not oblivious to other areas of IP technology, such as IP based messaging overtaking SMS messaging, since the SMS messaging is a revenue source for the wireless carriers. So, I wonder how selective AT&T's embracing of IP technology is going to be.

But what they have to say about POTS is fine, as far as it goes.


old_tech
Premium
join:2013-03-31
Springfield, IL
SMS is dying even after 12 years. It is amazing how fast technology changes. Even digital phone systems have been around since 1972, electronic for over 50 years Then there are those that still want us to hold on to old archaic technology, that they want us to stick with having one pair per household vs. one Copper line pair can carry depending on the system, anywhere from 20 to 50 callers all at the same time, back to a Fiber pair, which can carry 35 callers, along with data for Internet & tv.

On a 100 pair fiber line, that would mean that you could carry 3500 users all at once, vs. 100 users with the old POTS technology. Now of course, if you add in the mix phantom pairing, you could essentially carry 1 1/2 callers per pair, or three callers per two pairs of wire, making that 100 pair allowing 150 callers on POTS.

If it was not for the advent of a battery with key switch on your car, to turn over a starter, we would still have hand cranks on our cars to turn them over, every time we wanted to go somewhere.

TBBroadband

join:2012-10-26
Fremont, OH
Reviews:
·AT&T U-Verse
·MegaPath
reply to mackey
You have no clue what you are talking about with "brownfield" areas. Under Ed and SBC YES they have done this. Ameritech was the test bed for this and parts of Michigan and Wisconsin and some of Indiana were ALL rebuilt with FTTP. Look up Carlton, Michigan. AT&T/ameritech area. Charter Internet and U-Verse FTTP, TOTALLY REBUILT.