AT&T Updates TOS, Clarifies 'New' Speed Tiers

6.1 Mbps to 10.0 Mbps
So, you sign for 10mbps and only get 6.2 that's good enough?

According to the terms coming soon, yes. Unfortunately. I guess those lawyers got tired of working to get paid.

I have to agree with AT&T this one. Due to the nature of DSL, they must advertise speed ranges. If you are in the range, they have delivered fairly.

The alternative is require you to take a lower package. I'd hate to be forced to get 3.1MB-6MB because my 9MB wasn't 10MB.

But remember just a few years back when the cable company had a "shared" line? DSL is supposed to have that DEDICATED constant connection that was so much better than cable. I even have the commercial.

Yup - I used to have that for ADSL contract.
1500-3000kbps down and 384-512kbps up.
That was the 'sync' rate though, and does not guarantee much.

Think of it this way...
You are GUARANTEED 6.1Mbps. Now if your constantly getting slower than that you have a right to call in and have them fix it. If they say its 'up to', call their B.S. cuz they say at least 6.1Mbps.

Sort of like Comcast promising 16 megabits and delivering...nothing.

DSL seems so slow and old now. VDSL wouldn't have been bad if we could get a 25/5 tier but they have to stuff lousy tv service down our throats.

U-verse is bloody expensive to, I'd rather get satellite TV which has some pretty cheap deals.

and more HD as well. U-verse does not have comcast sports net Chicago HD and comcast sports net Chicago + HD

Also you have the 2 HD max per house on U-verse.

Let's say with U-verse, you get 6 Mbps connection. Does the UVerse IPTV service impact that connection? (If you're watching the IPTV service, do you have less remaining bandwidth available?)

The bandwidth for TV and Internet are separated and reserved for each task. I'm pretty sure that the modem actually can sync as high as 100mbps but it's capped at 10mbps for internet and 25mbps for TV.

XBL2007, it's time to drop the AOL symbol as your "avatar". AOL can barely crawl let alone walk.

I can answer that question...

No, because it's on a seperate channel on the RG.

No 6Mbps is for the internet use only and is not impacted by any tv use. That is the exact package that I have.

guarantee they are making

When they were SBC here they used to have ranges in their advertising.

Regardless of whether the equipment used to access your Service (modem, gateway, etc.) is owned by you or AT&T, AT&T reserves the right to manage such equipment for the duration of your Service, and retains exclusive rights to data generated by the equipment. Neither you nor a third party may change, interfere with, or block access to equipment data or settings.

This is kinda funny to manage My equipment they would have to activly out right hack it.

Oh and this

Tampering with the U-verse Equipment, or attempting to connect the equipment to other hardware, will be treated as damage due to your intentional acts or negligence. You agree that you will use the equipment only for its intended residential use, and not for any other purpose (such as on another AT&T network, or on another provider’s (non-AT&T) network).

Does this include other routers ???

(b) ensure that you exit from your account at the end of each session; and (c) periodically change your password. There is a risk that other users may attempt to access your computer through the Internet or connected networks. You acknowledge this risk as inherent to the shared nature of the Service and you agree to take full responsibility for taking adequate security precautions and safeguarding your data from loss

How can one keep there network secure with the above right to manage your netowork even if you own your own hardware.

It says "tampering". Connecting a router isn't "tampering". I'm pretty sure that particular clause is in reference to people opening up U-verse DVRs and replacing the hard drives in them with larger capacities.

Well a more descritive description Should be added.

On the markating side if that is the case they could offer to upgrade trhe hardrive in them to larger capacitys including transfering the already stored Data to the new drives. Or add 1394 plug on the units like Charter has on their boxes.

Imagine going to the gas station and the proprietor tells you a Gallon of Gas can be anywhere from 64 Ounces to 128 Ounces. The proprietor of the gas station would go to jail and the station would be closed.

I had a friend, that was paying for a 3Mbps DSL Connection, when I checked, was getting a download speed of 500Kbps to 600Kbps through BellSouth DSL. After BellSouth Technicians changed out a poor quality cable pair, replaced the modem and added a dedicated splitter. Download speed increased to about 750Kbps. BellSouth's excuse was that my friend was too many cable feet from the Central Office. The only other choice my friend was given was that for about $20.00 per month, he would get a 256Kbps download speed. It is time that the ISP's provide more price levels so that customers do not wind up paying for a 3Mbps connection and only getting a download speed of 750Kbps. The telephone company management is not smart enough to realize that is the reason that so many customers are moving from DSL to Cable.

That's just not a fair comparison. A better comparison would be if the gas station ran a hose to your house and charged you based on the number of gallons per minute pumped.

Pump speed, eleveation change, hose type, diameter, curves would all effect how many gallons per minute pumped.

I think you get the rest, I'm too tired to type it.

Let me fix your comparison.

Imagine going to the gas station and the proprietor tells you a Gallon of Gas can take any where from 64 to 128 seconds to pump.

You still get your gallon but the amount of time it takes to pump that gallon will vary.

But, when you buy gas, you're not paying a higher rate for the pump to go faster...

You do realize that on a 3mb DSL connection you will generally download at about 280kbps don't you?

Never will you download at 3000kbps unless you have a 30meg connection and there is no 30mb DSL service out there that I know of.

I'm assuming you mean on a 3mb DSL connecting you'll download at 280KBps (kiloByte). Even that is wrong. I got an effecive downstream throughput of just over 2600kbps on my AT&T 3 meg connection. That works out to about 320 kilobytes a second, and I frequently got that much throughput, both on speed tests and real world downloads. (And yes, it took virtually forever to download the real world.)

At least in former Bellsouthland, there already were minimum speeds for each tier. They were not, however, made public. But the BOSS article telling you how to deal with customers with slow speeds defined how low they could go before you officially acknowledge that there was a speed problem.
From there it was the usual steps.

Bellsouth costumer already had this rule. and there not going to lower your speed I have 1.5mbps and i get always 2mbps sow there going to try to give you the max if not they will come out losing. Look at cable I paid for 6mps but at night i get max 1mps in my area and at day it will be 4 and 5mbps i think i got one 6mps but that was at 6am. I rather have att than comcrap.

Why not a total speed prorate on the max sync with the tiers to just cap what max speed you want for price? Example if I want the 6M and that's what I can down load I pay full 6M price. If I have the 6M but because of line and distance I only get 4.5M down then I pay the price that's between 3.0 and 6.0? Surely their billing and computing systems could handle that.

ah, but that makes too much sense. plus, they would make less money.

Your idea is creative, and it's even better than what's been going on -- but it still has a "bait and switch" quality to it. Customers ought to have the right idea up front, before they've made the decision.

Years ago, I signed up with Verizon DSL because their online tester said I qualified for 1.5 Mbps service, modem shipped, run-around and put filters on and replaced the wall phone jack with a filtered one. Swapped in the DSL modem. Fought with the 2-3 issues that Verizon always manages to leave out of their install steps, and I was online 4-5 hours after their long-delayed startup date . . . at 768 Kbps. They had "no idea" why I thought 1.5 Mbps was available there. I was irate!

I had to undo all that and ship it all back. It didn't meet my needs but, even more important to me, it just wasn't what I asked for or expected. At that point, it was the principle of the thing. (Now I've watched Verizon long enough to suspect that it was likely ineptitude over cleverness -- their automated systems for broadband availability have just never failed to fail for me.)

At the recent FCC hearing in Pittsburgh, this was reported by Reuters:That's really what those tiers are about, I think, and that's really a good thing overall. What worries me is the vagueness about the new terms about reducing the traffic. Are they talking about reducing it to a point below those tiers? If so, then what's the point?

Very occasional performance dips below a tier due to momentary surges of congestion are one thing -- surprises happen. Declaring a floor and then regularly throttling usage beneath it to support the video side during prime time is another thing entirely!

I'm still not sure what this means, anyone?

"...their aging copper, thousands of miles from the CO..."

Damn, now everyone in the US will have broadband!!!

It is a "Best Effort" which means little or no guarantees in temrs of availability or performace. Caveat Emptor...

All ISP suck, some just suck a little more...

I pay for 6.0M service and lucky for me I can hit the DSLAM with a rock from my apartment. My modem tells me it syncs at a rate I cannot purchase but I am happy anyway. I gots sat for TV and no landline just DSL and they don't punish me for not having dialtone. Unlike if I went with Comcrap where I get penalized for not haveing crappy overpriced cable with no real HD. So those Myspace or YouTube videos take a little longer to load no big deal that why you can download at night and enjoy what you downloaded the next day.

LOL.. thousands of miles from the CO.. guess they finally broke those 5,000-8,000 foot limits..

Was struck by your reference to AT&T as a "baby Bell." It's true that AT&T was acquired by SBC, a true baby Bell, but what was left of AT&T at the time were the remnants of Ma Bell. AT&T is now a strange combination of mother and child, so perhaps a more appropriate designation would be Baby Mama.

That they still aren't talking about their lousy upstream speeds. When will they get it that customers want more upstream for posting their media on web sites.

Actually, on this one I have to agree with AT&T. Distance limitations with DSL mean that they cannot guarantee 6mpbs or 3mpbs etc on every line. Every phone line is different and its not fair to expect AT&T to be able to provide 6mpbs when you are 18,000 feet out the end of a 24 gauge wire that has been up for over 30+ years and has cracked insulators and water in the line now and then and lightning storms nearby, etc from time to time. Offering ranges of speeds for a certain amount of money is more realistic given the nature of DSL. Even with VDSL/2 this will still be a problem because if you are next to the CO you might get 100mpbs but 1/2 mile away that may drop to 20-30mpbs.

Eventually, Fiber into the home will solve all these problems but with the expense of building fiber out it is more cost effective and faster in the coming years to build a fiber to the node strategy first. They can offer higher speeds to more people at lower cost than trying to jump all the way to Fiber to the home right away. With Fiber to the node they will have fiber deep into their network and then later they can start another upgrade phase that expands the Fiber to the home. All of this takes time.

My only objection with AT&T right now is that they are considering bandwidth metering and things of that nature and maybe caps I don't know. I don't support that and if its very strict or has too many little gotcha points in their bandwidth policy I will jump ship and find another ISP which I actually have 2 other choices outside of AT&T where I live.