For a company whose U-Verse fiber to the node broadband service has consistently under-performed in the battle against cable, AT&T executives were very confident in future U-Verse speed claims while speaking at their developer conference this week at CES. AT&T recently announced that they'd be expanding their U-Verse footprint from 24.5 million homes to 33 million, though the company used some fuzzy math to make the expansion seem much larger than it was.
The company has also suggested some existing U-Verse customers would be getting speeds "up to 75 Mbps" this year. Speaking at CES, Senior Executive Vice President of AT&T Technology and Network Operations (and former CTO) John Donovan offered some more detail on the speed upgrades.
"With our plant technology advancements, 90 percent of our U-verse customer locations will have the capability to receive what we project to be 75 Mbps -- and 75 percent will have the capability to receive up to 100 Mbps,' insisted Donovan. "Almost 80 percent of the IP DSLAM customer locations will have the capability to receive 45 Mbps, with about half of those having the capability to receive up to 75 Mbps."
Donovan's predictions seem optimistic. To obtain anywhere close to these kinds of speeds users will need to have quality copper lines, be in a position to use bonded lines, and enjoy shorter loop lengths (around 2,000 feet or less from the VRAD). Suggesting that 80-90% of U-Verse customers will meet that criteria seems like a Yoga-grade stretch. Also note Donovan fails to even mention upstream speeds.
It's still unclear specifically which markets will see the upgrades, or what kind of upstream speeds users can expect. Despite the CES fireworks, AT&T (like Verizon) is by and large hanging up on wired networks, and is willing to allow tens-of-millions of un-upgraded DSL customers to flee to cable. While AT&T and Verizon work to gut the regulations governing their landline networks, the lion's share of their attention remains fixed on higher-growth wireless services.
Most current U-Verse markets see top speeds of 24 Mbps downstream and 5 Mbps upstream if they're fortunate. Those speeds have failed to keep pace with cable DOCSIS 3.0 upgrades, which have pushed cable speeds in many areas well past the 100 Mbps mark. We've reached the point where Comcast is now using fiber to the home to deliver speeds of 305 Mbps. AT&T, who also imposes caps and overages on their fixed line broadband services, is dramatically falling behind and the company hopes nobody has noticed.
The parents in San Ant. has AT&T "landline" There was a ground loop hum say everytime it would rain. They on;y has one pair to the house, and they were paying like $30 for dial tone.
In any case T refused to fix it, I switched them over to voip.ms (roadrunner), and their monthly bill went from $36+ to $4 and it is crystal clear. The also got 2 PPC cells for $14 to boot, and still have $18/mo in their pocket.
So are they going to run brand new pairs to all these houses to get those speeds, and let the slower people waddle along on the old copper?
It seems crazy they just don't wire them fibre w/ optical transceivers so they can still use the same plant, but at least not have to worry about wireline maintenance for a very long time..
For that speed upgrade to work... they are likely going to have to deploy pair bonding. Which is not a problem for me.. I have about 13-14 pairs available to use at my house.. otherwise I have no problems with At&t running 100-600 feet of new wire from the V-Rad to my house. [Which incidently, is I why I can only get 6 Meg IP-DSL service and U-Voice.]
It's not fiber.. but I will gladly accept AT&T pushing me more bits down that VDSL2 line. [My Sync rate to the VRAD is around 64MB right now on a single pair]
quote:Most current U-Verse markets see top speeds of 24 Mbps downstream and 5 Mbps upstream if they're fortunate.
AT&T's maximum speed offering has an upload of just 3 Mbps - although technically the profile assigned to the U-verse modem is 32/5 Mbps, 8/2 Mbps of that is reserved for U-verse TV, regardless of whether or not the customer subscribes to that product or not.
So you can really only use 24/3 Mbps. AND - If you subscribe to U-verse TV, and watch more than one HDTV channel at a time, that speed drops to 20/3 Mbps; then 14/3 Mbps; and finally, when watching all four HDTV channels you are allowed to simultaneously on U-verse your connection speed drops to just 8 Mbps.
Each HDTV channel eats into 6 Mbps of your U-verse Internet bandwidth allotment. You should probably address this limitation in your post as well.
Usually all those numbers tend to confuse consumers. When they hear 32/5 Mbps people usually think they'll be getting that in internet speeds LOL. Nobody should be surprised by this considering that a lot of people that get uverse still think it is fiber-to-the-home.
There are two different profiles one is the gateway profile and the other is the internet. You correctly pointed how this 'thing' actually works and yes the max upstream for internet is only 3 Mbps.
But, hey! It is spin-time at CES and the floor is full of spin-meisters.
So you can really only use 24/3 Mbps. AND - If you subscribe to U-verse TV, and watch more than one HDTV channel at a time, that speed drops
Each HDTV channel eats into 6 Mbps of your U-verse Internet bandwidth allotment.
Doesn't this remind you of DSL Commercials advertising Cable INTERNET having trouble sharing? Guess the truth really came out TELCO is the one that has problems sharing with their own services.
Doesn't this remind you of DSL Commercials advertising Cable INTERNET having trouble sharing? Guess the truth really came out TELCO is the one that has problems sharing with their own services.
There's nothing wrong with getting "only" 25/5 (or thereabouts, presuming for now one actually does get that). The percentage of customers who can actually use anything faster and notice the difference is low. So it's not a problem for U-Verse that it hasn't "kept up" with cable as speeds go. Keeping up with cable prices, though, doesn't seem to bother them.
I don't think so - its part of the error correction scheme if I'm not mistaken. 'Fast path' vs. 'Interleaved'. I remember when I had DSL Extreme - they allowed me to have FastPath - and I had something like 8ms to the first hop on 3Mbps DSL. When I had it on AT&T it was somewhere around 15ms.
Interleaving adds latency but is a bit more tolerant to line conditions.
They stop treating FTTP customers as if they were copper DSL customers and limiting their speeds based on distance from the vrad. Seriously, I've got fiber to my house, what do you mean that I'm not eligble for that tier bandwidth based on distance? Dorks.
The people who develop reliable consistent nationwide marketing schemes win out over the actual capabilities of the technology.
I am left to wonder why AT&T DSL is limited to 6.0Mbps down and 0.5Mbps up when the ADSL2+ standard they use would allow for 24Mbps down and 3.5Mbps up depending on distance from the CO or DSLAM. Why is AT&T DSL saying I can only get 6.0Mbps down and Windstream is saying they can get me 12.0Mbps down? Yes, it might cost 20% more than the AT&T I get now, but they are at least trying to use more of the capability of standard ADSL2+ equipment. AT&T fails to tap into a potential increase in revenue by not offering a better service that is already built into the network they have. All to support a simplistic nationwide advertising campaign.
I really wish you guys would stop helping ATT (a marketing co. not a tech co.) with the spreading these silly lies. They live off this stuff. To cause ATT to really feel the pain cut off their ability to spew out BS. Who writes this crap at ATT? »goo.gl/maps/2Jhc9
I have had it with Uverse and moving to the other bandit; time warner. only game in town from what I can see
When I had U-verse, I had the capability to receive 622Mbps downstream, and 155Mbps upstream, shared with only at most 32 other user. I had fibre right in my bedroom closet.
What did they give me instead? 18Mbps downstream, and 1.5Mbps upsteam. Pathetic. And no way to buy higher speeds. Not even 24Mbps that is offered to those who only had the capability to receive much less than what I did!
100% of U-verse customers are capable of receiving higher speeds than what AT&T is selling! That's the big conclusion here!
Network-wide there are most likely less than 225,000 FTTP [RESIDENTIAL] customers on fiber.. out of how many MILLIONS of copper lines they've bought up in the last 1/2 dozen years.. Compare to a Verizon, or even Google Fiber which will surpass them quite handily this year, if they haven't already...
Try geting fiber into communities which have been begging for it first.. then compete with the cable companies.. which will force them to spend money on upgrades..
As of late, the to major telcos, AT&T and Verizon were locked in a battle for wireless customers.. spending just about every cent they have on upgrading, promoting and price gouging for LTE services.. and not interested in promoting landline networks and investing in them...
Pehaps the right ear was bent to make some changes in certain districts.. afterall, congress has not much else to do except whine and complain about things.. what better to complain about then a telecom's not serving the public interest!!
I was one of the 5–10% of U-verse customers that was on FTTU, with an Alcatel HONT-C in my closet. In case you don't know, AT&T is too lazy to change their provisioning for such customers, and have never started offering any tiers above 18Mbps — the 24Mbps tier is exclusively offered on single-pair VDSL2 circuits.
Slow speeds, high prices, overage fees as soon as they can figure out how to meter it...they are the AOL of the major providers. They're holding their own now but it won't last.
Repair tech that was out over the weekend told me that they are replacing the older F-cards with K-cards, which would increase the max distance from a VRAD to 6,000 feet...from the current 3,000. He said the new cards would also allow for the higher speed tiers, which are supposed to be available March 15.
. Some of u-verse is ftth,or fttb, or fttc. AT&T said they will be using small form modules from the VRADs to extend the reach and speed of tv and HSI. Covering 57 million customer locations with high speed ip broadband will make AT&T WIRELESS difficult to compete with, in its 22 STATE footprint.
AT&T - the leader in capping our internet services is announcing faster speeds, but what good are those speeds if those who would be interested and have a need for these speeds would be those who download heavily and stream lots of video? If the connection itself is capped, it defeats the purpose
Come on Karl! You are going soft, I thought you'd mention AT&Ts new vision for the u-verse mobile app to let you stream on demand movies to it... if you purchase the new service at an extra $5 a month.
No mention that the price of their current tiers if extrapolated to the those speed would way too much.
Not saying you have been wrong to (over) critisize them.
lolverse. Brand new subdivision, totally capable of supporting uverse with a simple change of cards in the boxes (according to the service tech that hooked up my phone/DSL 2 years ago). Why no uverse? $$$ cherry picking of course.
I'll take anything faster than DSL at this point for my data-hungry household.
Just curious question. If AT&T unleashed its ADSL2+ equipment, that is used to provide DSL, and could give you 21Mbps down and 3Mbps up, would you consider that enough of an improvement?
I ask, because I do not understand why AT&T will not take advantage of the capabilities already existing in the equipment it has deployed. In many places they could have higher revenue per subscriber without the expense of deploying Uverse.