site Search:


 
   
story category
AT&T Settles Lawsuit Over Slow DSL Speeds
Lawyer gets $11 million, most of you get two bucks...
by Karl Bode Wednesday 05-May-2010 tags: dsl · business · bandwidth · AT&T Southeast · AT&T Midwest · AT&T Southwest
AT&T has agreed to settle a lawsuit over the company's DSL speeds -- or more specifically the DSL speeds many users didn't get. The class action in question was filed last year, and accuses AT&T of "breaching its contracts with and defrauding some of its customers" by imposing speed limits on their DSL tiers well below the advertised speed. As part of the settlement (pdf) AT&T agrees to no wrong doing, and will pay a maximum of $100 million -- depending on the total number of class action participants. According to the Milwaukee Journal Sentinel, the attorney unsurprisingly gets the biggest reward:

Under the pending settlement, some customers may get $2.90 for each month the speed of their DSL service was capped below the maximum rate for the plan purchased. For a longtime customer, that could be several hundred dollars. Some people may get a one-time payment of only $2 if they were dissatisfied with their DSL speeds but don't meet other terms of the settlement, such as the capping criteria. Individual payments will be based on AT&T account records. The Ohio plaintiff who started the lawsuit is getting a $10,000 "incentive award." Perotti's law firm will get up to $11 million plus $3.75 million for charities.

Any AT&T DSL customer who signed up for service after March 31, 1994 is qualified to apply for cash rewards, though again -- only customers who had their DSL line capped at a speed lower than their advertised price will see any significant reward (perhaps a few hundred bucks). Many AT&T DSL customers can get $2 just for being unhappy with their speed for apparently any reason.

Many users sign up for a faster speed and AT&T caps users at a slower speed -- should they find that the user's copper loop length is too great or there's a problem with the quality of the line itself. Since that's hard to predict, most operators use the murky "up to" qualifier in ads as a loophole for potentially slower service. Should a user sign up for a faster tier and wind up on a slower one -- they should be informed of this and obviously should pay the lower price.

As part of the settlement, AT&T has agreed to monitor its customers for 12 months "to ensure they are consistently receiving the Internet speeds they are paying for." Of course beyond the physical speed limitations of the hardware and line this isn't always under AT&T's control, making this kind of a false promise. There's some odd bits at the end of the Journal Sentinel story, where the author confuses speed caps with monthly consumption caps, and an analyst from Parks Associates informs the paper that he's "not really convinced it matters that much" if users see their advertised speeds.

view: topics flat text 
Post a:
page: 1 · 2

Harddrive
Proud American and Infidel since 1968.
Premium
join:2000-09-20
Phone Room
kudos:2

1 edit

nice check.... for the law firm.

if 'they' go all the way back to Jan 2000, i'm set to get just over $400.
how many lawyers are gonna divy up the $11,000,000?
--
I've come here to chew bubblegum and kick ass and i'm all outta bubblegum.

Oleg
Bellsouth Fastaccess
Premium
join:2003-12-08
Birmingham, AL

About lower speeds

If i get lower up speeds does it account for it?
Airwolf7
Premium
join:2004-12-12
Franklin, KY
kudos:1
Reviews:
·Comcast
·AT&T Southeast

Re: About lower speeds

said by Oleg:

If i get lower up speeds does it account for it?
Probably not. Are you going to account for the extra downstream throughput speed that AT&T Southeast gives you?

You have FastAccess DSL Xtreme 6.0 service that is advertised at a modem sync rate of 6000kbps downstream and 512 kbps upstream.
FastAccess DSL Xtreme 6.0 service is MaxSync provisioned at speeds up to 8128kbps downstream and 512kbps upstream.

Below is the results of one of your speed tests.


Simba7
I Void Warranties

join:2003-03-24
Billings, MT

Wow.. Another case of "Customer Screwing"..

Yep.. It's always the Lawyers that get most of the money. The customers that started it just get the crumbs.

..and what is at&t learning from this?
viperlmw
Premium
join:2005-01-25

Re: Wow.. Another case of "Customer Screwing"..

said by Simba7:

Yep.. It's always the Lawyers that get most of the money. The customers that started it just get the crumbs.

..and what is at&t learning from this?
Hopefully, $100 Million will teach them not to engage in deceptive business practices. Even at&t has to notice $100 million. As is the case in most class actions, the real purpose is to punish the offender, not necessarily to fully compensate the victims. If a victim believes a class action doesn't provide adequate compensation, they are free to not join the class, and file their own lawsuit.
Kearnstd
Elf Wizard
Premium
join:2002-01-22
Mullica Hill, NJ
class action scale suits always extremely benefit the lawyers.
--
[65 Arcanist]Filan(High Elf) Zone: Broadband Reports
fiberguy
My views are my own.
Premium
join:2005-05-20
kudos:3
said by Simba7:

Yep.. It's always the Lawyers that get most of the money. The customers that started it just get the crumbs.

..and what is at&t learning from this?
And it's always the lawyer that takes the risk and invests the time and money into the cases to begin with.

The consumer has a choice - pony up the money, hire an attorney, and risk losing against AT&T. Would that make it better for you?

People need to get off the "class action attorneys are crooks and the customers get screwed" (so to say) kick...

The main class plaintiff got $10,000 which to be honest is far more than he'd get on his own. What are his "actual damaged" that he deserved $10,000 anyway? It was filing the class that got him that amount. As for the rest, a monthly bill credit to off-set their monthly payment, to be honest, is fair as well. What do you expect? ... a $10,000 check to every customer? IF your speeds were capped a few hundred kbps lower than you were supposed to get, what was the consumer out? (Not saying they weren't out anything either) But, the customer deserves to be made whole.

Not paying 'Full price" for a service you didn't receive and paying a lesser amount for that service IS being made whole.

While SOME of these law suits are way out of whack, this one really isn't that bad. Residential customers were not damaged more than over paying for a service and deserve a refund. The attorney put the risk forward in the case and gets paid. AT&T doesn't get to keep the ill-gotten gains.

Just about EVERY class member would have gotten NOTHING if it wasn't for the lead plaintiff and the attorney in the first place.

The lead plaintiff didn't get "crumbs", as you say, in this case. He/She got plenty for their efforts.

This isn't "school".. AT&T learned that when you screw customers, beware that you may vet sued and have to pay it back. The BIGGER question is what has regulators learned from this? Nothing.

asdfdfdfdfdf

@Level3.net

approval from:
Bubba Rock See Profile

Re: Wow.. Another case of "Customer Screwing"..

I largely agree.

If the lawyers are walking away with 11-15 million on a possible 100 million settlement it isn't accurate to say the lawyers walked away with everything. 85+% is going to the victims.

As you say most of them didn't do much of anything to participate and without class action most of these people would have just swallowed the bad result and the company would have suffered no penalty at all, so it's better than nothing.

DataRiker
Premium
join:2002-05-19
00000
Reviews:
·RoadRunner Cable

3 edits
This post is disgusting. A lawyer getting 11 million while victims get 2-3 dollars is absolutely criminal. Major reform in the legal environment is needed, but don't expect that anytime soon as almost every politician is also a lawyer ( naturally) and we know how great our politicians are...

rpeAMP

join:2000-12-02
San Antonio, TX

Re: Wow.. Another case of "Customer Screwing"..

said by DataRiker:

This post is disgusting. A lawyer getting 11 million while victims get 2-3 dollars is absolutely criminal. Major reform in the legal environment is needed, but don't expect that anytime soon as almost every politician is also a lawyer ( naturally) and we know how great our politicians are...
Victims?! The "victims" have every right to represent themselves in these matters if they wish and are able to follow the rules of evidence and procedures during the proceedings.

Attorneys fees are atrocious--I agree--but they are the ones doing all of the work and, as the previous post mentioned, assuming all the risk during the duration of the proceedings.

Lawsuits are expensive, but in this specific case no one was truly "victimized" thus the small settlement per plaintiff.

war_by_proxy

join:2004-06-15
Houston, TX
Well any business, no matter how large, takes a $100 million charge seriously. That doesn't look really good on the balance sheet as an abnormal liability.

And lawyers have to invest a lot of time and money in a class-action; if a lawyer can earn $250/hr and takes on this sort of case, from his/her point of view it costs them that much for every hour they spend on it. It's called a risk premium. It has to be a high enough percent of the total payout that it's worth the time of people with the expertise to actually fight this sort of thing. I mean, they had to take this suit on, rather than defend Verizon from AT&T or whatever. Your average ambulance chaser couldn't take on a suit like this.
patcat88

join:2002-04-05
Jamaica, NY
kudos:1

Re: Wow.. Another case of "Customer Screwing"..

said by war_by_proxy:

Well any business, no matter how large, takes a $100 million charge seriously. That doesn't look really good on the balance sheet as an abnormal liability.
Just put that $100m liability next to the $5 billion liability of socialist expropriation/regulatory changes in the 10-K and both are meaningless.
Kearnstd
Elf Wizard
Premium
join:2002-01-22
Mullica Hill, NJ

Re: Wow.. Another case of "Customer Screwing"..

said by patcat88:

said by war_by_proxy:

Well any business, no matter how large, takes a $100 million charge seriously. That doesn't look really good on the balance sheet as an abnormal liability.
Just put that $100m liability next to the $5 billion liability of socialist expropriation/regulatory changes in the 10-K and both are meaningless.
dont forget with some fancy pen work, AT&T can likely write this 100m off in their taxes as well.

i mean a lawsuit is an expense isnt it?
--
[65 Arcanist]Filan(High Elf) Zone: Broadband Reports

anonsrule

@cox.net
said by Simba7:

Yep.. It's always the Lawyers that get most of the money. The customers that started it just get the crumbs.

..and what is at&t learning from this?
dont get caught

Killa200
Premium
join:2005-12-02
Southeast TN

Hmm...

This is nice, considering it also included Bellsouth former customers according to the terms. Ive never gotten my correct speeds since I had dsl at the new house we moved into over 5 years ago.... This aught grab me a chunk of change!

atuarre
Here come the drums
Premium
join:2004-02-14
College Station, TX

RE

Yep. The only people who won here were the lawyers and the guy who got the $10,000.
fiberguy
My views are my own.
Premium
join:2005-05-20
kudos:3

Re: RE

said by atuarre:

Yep. The only people who won here were the lawyers and the guy who got the $10,000.
And everyone else had a right to opt-out of the case, pony up their OWN money, and fight at&t on their own and try to get that $10,000.00, which you would likely NOT get on your own.

Think about it.

atuarre
Here come the drums
Premium
join:2004-02-14
College Station, TX

Re: RE

said by fiberguy:

said by atuarre:

Yep. The only people who won here were the lawyers and the guy who got the $10,000.
And everyone else had a right to opt-out of the case, pony up their OWN money, and fight at&t on their own and try to get that $10,000.00, which you would likely NOT get on your own.

Think about it.
Then the simple solution is not to waste your time fighting at all. Problem solved.
viperlmw
Premium
join:2005-01-25

Re: RE

said by atuarre:

said by fiberguy:

said by atuarre:

Yep. The only people who won here were the lawyers and the guy who got the $10,000.
And everyone else had a right to opt-out of the case, pony up their OWN money, and fight at&t on their own and try to get that $10,000.00, which you would likely NOT get on your own.

Think about it.
Then the simple solution is not to waste your time fighting at all. Problem solved.
And just let them get away with it? That would be criminal!

atuarre
Here come the drums
Premium
join:2004-02-14
College Station, TX

1 edit

Re: RE

said by viperlmw:

And just let them get away with it? That would be criminal!
What will change from the lawsuit? All that has happened is lawyers are much richer.

What has this accomplished with the exception of a rate hike or fee in some form or another to recoup the cost of the settlement plus lawyers, etc?
viperlmw
Premium
join:2005-01-25

Re: RE

said by atuarre:

~snip~ What has this accomplished with the exception of a rate hike or fee in some form or another to recoup the cost of the settlement plus lawyers, etc?
By that logic, BP shouldn't be fined for the oil they are dumping into the Gulf. After all, they are just going to pass along the costs to customers, right?

atuarre
Here come the drums
Premium
join:2004-02-14
College Station, TX

Re: RE

said by viperlmw:

said by atuarre:

~snip~ What has this accomplished with the exception of a rate hike or fee in some form or another to recoup the cost of the settlement plus lawyers, etc?
By that logic, BP shouldn't be fined for the oil they are dumping into the Gulf. After all, they are just going to pass along the costs to customers, right?
The oil being dumped in the Gulf is a danger to the environment and will affect the local economy. They should be fined. Nice try though.
viperlmw
Premium
join:2005-01-25

Re: RE

I don't understand the difference. Are you saying fines/judgements imposed as a result of environmental damage is treated differently by a corporation than fines/judgements imposed as a result of corporate malfeasance?

Btw, there's no reason to employ snark.

joako
Premium
join:2000-09-07
/dev/null
kudos:5
Reviews:
·Comcast
said by atuarre:

said by viperlmw:

said by atuarre:

~snip~ What has this accomplished with the exception of a rate hike or fee in some form or another to recoup the cost of the settlement plus lawyers, etc?
By that logic, BP shouldn't be fined for the oil they are dumping into the Gulf. After all, they are just going to pass along the costs to customers, right?
The oil being dumped in the Gulf is a danger to the environment and will affect the local economy. They should be fined. Nice try though.
But then BP will pass the costs on to the customers in form of higher gas prices which will only further hurt the local economy. Their best best is to just forgett his happened and forgive BP. Hell, give them bailout money.
--
PRescott7-2097

atuarre
Here come the drums
Premium
join:2004-02-14
College Station, TX

Re: RE

said by joako:

But then BP will pass the costs on to the customers in form of higher gas prices which will only further hurt the local economy. Their best best is to just forgett his happened and forgive BP. Hell, give them bailout money.
Fuck forgiving them. Are you going to bailout the shrimping and fishing industry here in Louisiana? Are you gonna pay for people to come out and get the oil off the beaches and out of the water? Are you gonna pay for the countless people who are going to still eat the contaminated shrimp and fish when they get sick? Better to just let BP deal with it, and if they want to pass the costs on to the consumer, then so be it. Maybe if the shit was coming up around Florida and turning those pretty blue-green waters a nasty gray color, more people would be upset, but no, its just podunk Louisiana.

notepad

@charter.com
said by fiberguy:

said by atuarre:

Yep. The only people who won here were the lawyers and the guy who got the $10,000.
And everyone else had a right to opt-out of the case, pony up their OWN money, and fight at&t on their own and try to get that $10,000.00, which you would likely NOT get on your own.

Think about it.
Spoken like an attorney...

camaro92
Question everything
Premium
join:2008-04-05
Westfield, MA
Reviews:
·Comcast

That's it

I am giving up IT and going back to school to become a lawyer,this has got to be one of the few jobs where you can sit in a room and argue all day and have nothing constructive come of it and make six to seven figures a year,only other job that come's close is a politician.

Harddrive
Proud American and Infidel since 1968.
Premium
join:2000-09-20
Phone Room
kudos:2
Reviews:
·Comcast

Re: That's it

become a lawyer because most politicians are former lawyers anyway. you can get the best of both worlds. then when you stop being a politician, you can go to work as a lobbyist.
--
I've come here to chew bubblegum and kick ass and i'm all outta bubblegum.

Goober
Premium
join:2000-12-17
Naperville, IL
kudos:4
LOL. Sure, go for it.

I work 11.5 hours a day (7:30 to 7:00) 5 days a week on average and that's working for a corporation. When I was an associate working at a large law firm I was working 12+ hours a day 6-7 days a week.

So the lawyers get less than 10% of the total damages awards and you people complain? Heck, personal injury attorneys, whom I consider mostly crooks, get 30% of the damages. At least these attorneys are helping more people out by teaching wrong-doing corporations a lesson.

And, the law firms aren't always successful in these cases. Contingency cases don't always pan out. At that point, law firms/attorneys eat a lot of costs and don't get revenue for their hours worked.

Why is it that the clueless always complain the loudest?

camaro92
Question everything
Premium
join:2008-04-05
Westfield, MA

Re: That's it

Dood i was being funny,i love doing IT i was not trying to attack you personally just trying to lighten the conversation in here.

Goober
Premium
join:2000-12-17
Naperville, IL
kudos:4

Re: That's it

It's cool.

Lawyer attacks are so prevalent on these boards because of DSLR's yellow journalism when it comes to lawyers that after reading a bunch of them, it gets on a person's nerves.

camaro92
Question everything
Premium
join:2008-04-05
Westfield, MA

Re: That's it

understandable

DataRiker
Premium
join:2002-05-19
00000

4 edits
A lawyers definition of "work" is a bit different than others.
Lets see, "work" 1 hour and bill for 3. But to be fair they don't all do that, maybe just 99.99%. Lawyers sleazy reputations are well earned.

See 15 replies to this post

KrK
Heavy Artillery For The Little Guy
Premium
join:2000-01-17
Tulsa, OK
Reviews:
·AT&T DSL Service

AT&T Caps

Although I know I had a DSL line that was capped below rated speeds (It was fixed here on the AT&T Direct Forum) at my old address, (and it happened several times)

AT&T sent me a card saying their records show I never had a problem but am "eligible" for $2.00 if I file a claim.

I'm not interested in the $2.00 frankly but I do understand the people who paid for higher speed packages and got lower caps because their lines or distance didn't support the package they were charged for being upset.

Rather then get these small pittance payments I really wish companies would be required to be more open and responsive about their service and what you're actually getting; IE, fix the problem under penalty of law or face harsh sanctions. If you can't get a speed you shouldn't be paying for that speed. Trying to avoid it by saying "We don't promise, we just say you may get UP to your rated speed" and then charging max rate really doesn't cut it IMHO. Just charge them less or repair the line. I wonder how corporations would like it if consumers said "We don't guarantee our bill payments, we just may pay UP to the amount promised, but it may be less..."

Yeah, right.
--
"Fascism should more properly be called corporatism because it is the merger of state and corporate power." -- Benito Mussolini

dvd536
as Mr. Pink as they come
Premium
join:2001-04-27
Phoenix, AZ
kudos:4

Re: AT&T Caps

said by KrK:

Although I know I had a DSL line that was capped below rated speeds (It was fixed here on the AT&T Direct Forum) at my old address, (and it happened several times)

AT&T sent me a card saying their records show I never had a problem but am "eligible" for $2.00 if I file a claim.

I'm not interested in the $2.00 frankly but I do understand the people who paid for higher speed packages and got lower caps because their lines or distance didn't support the package they were charged for being upset.

Rather then get these small pittance payments I really wish companies would be required to be more open and responsive about their service and what you're actually getting; IE, fix the problem under penalty of law or face harsh sanctions. If you can't get a speed you shouldn't be paying for that speed. Trying to avoid it by saying "We don't promise, we just say you may get UP to your rated speed" and then charging max rate really doesn't cut it IMHO. Just charge them less or repair the line. I wonder how corporations would like it if consumers said "We don't guarantee our bill payments, we just may pay UP to the amount promised, but it may be less..."

Yeah, right.
better file your claim because I can guarantee you that $2 and more will find its way onto your bill via new or inflated existing unfee!
--
The shortest distance between 2 points adds 1.5 stars to T. want $25? solve »coord.info/GC20A37 for me

pnh102
Reptiles Are Cuddly And Pretty
Premium
join:2002-05-02
Mount Airy, MD

Perfect Justice

In an ideal world, the bills of the members of this class would be raised to cover the costs of this settlement. The rest of the customers shouldn't have to pay for this.

If people want guaranteed speeds, and not a "best of" effort then those people should purchase business class service.
--
"Net Neutrality" zealots - the people you can thank for your capped Internet service.

See 13 replies to this post

nycdave
Premium,MVM
join:1999-11-16
Melville, NY
kudos:7

Karl, is your date accurate?

'Any AT&T DSL customer who signed up for service after March 31, 1994 is qualified to apply for cash rewards,'

There was no consumer-grade ADSL back in 1994....

KrK
Heavy Artillery For The Little Guy
Premium
join:2000-01-17
Tulsa, OK
Reviews:
·AT&T DSL Service

Re: Karl, is your date accurate?

That is the date on the AT&T notice.

I guess they may have set it really early to apply to everyone.

DSL first became available here in limited areas in late 1998 if I remember right. I was an early adopter and have been through everything possible, methinks
--
"Fascism should more properly be called corporatism because it is the merger of state and corporate power." -- Benito Mussolini

nycdave
Premium,MVM
join:1999-11-16
Melville, NY
kudos:7

Re: Karl, is your date accurate?

True, and now I see that date is in the settlement notice. I'm curious where they got that date from, since no one was providing today's version of ADSL back in 1994. The first CAP ADSL was in early 1997, and DMT ADSL wasn't introduced until later in 1998....
etaadmin

join:2002-01-17
Dallas, TX
kudos:1

How'bout uverse profiles?

Will this lawsuit pave the road for uverse users paying the same for all gateway profiles?

I'd hate to be on the 19 mbps profile and pay the same as people on the 32 mbps profile or getting 1 HD stream while others get 3.

I say pay according to the gateway profile you have.

Boredness
The Lurker
Premium
join:2005-07-07
In Limbo
Reviews:
·Comcast

DSL sucks, long live cable and fiber HSI!

Any flavor of DSL (ADSL-VDSL2) sucks ass because it is a distance limited pile of crap. When I had at&t DSL I could barely hold sync at 1538kbps. It was very unstable on fastfath but ok on the interleaved profile. I'm over a mile from the CO on a super thin 26 AWG copper pair. The thickness of that wire is as thin as angel hair pasta so no wonder it didn't work well.
--
End the war on drugs and freedom today!
fiberguy
My views are my own.
Premium
join:2005-05-20
kudos:3

1 edit

Re: DSL sucks, long live cable and fiber HSI!

said by Boredness:

Any flavor of DSL (ADSL-VDSL2) sucks ass because it is a distance limited pile of crap. When I had at&t DSL I could barely hold sync at 1538kbps. It was very unstable on fastfath but ok on the interleaved profile. I'm over a mile from the CO on a super thin 26 AWG copper pair. The thickness of that wire is as thin as angel hair pasta so no wonder it didn't work well.
Thanks for posting the obvious, but what does a fanboy post have to do with the news article at hand? So far, that thin pair of twisted wire seems to carry service to many customers.. sure, it's old and largely getting outdated, but for many millions of customers, it still seems to be working.

If you're getting 1.5, and that's what was sold, then you have no gripe.
McRat

join:2009-09-09
Corona, CA

AT&T DSL is not just slow.

Speed isn't the whole story.

Today our AT&T DSL best available speed is 900/300k, somedays it's 256/40.

But today, it took 3 efforts to get either Speedtest or DSLReportsJava to load without locking up.

Their speed might come close to advertised speeds, but it is very unstable.

It's not so much that they still use tin cans and string as their backbone, it's that the string has been cut and they aren't concerned about it...

When you can send and receive emails with your Cellphone faster than your DSL service, you know there is a problem.
dorksaber

join:2009-02-16
Lexington, MI

How much do I get??

So how much is it worth when your neighbors on both sides have stable 3meg lines but they claim your slow speeds (>=1meg) are because the loop is just too long. Yeah, cant possibly be a fault in the line. That would take actual work to resolve.
elray

join:2000-12-16
Santa Monica, CA
Reviews:
·SONIC.NET
·RoadRunner Cable

Speed? What's that?

Most of the AT&T circuits I yanked in the last year (no, I wasn't responsible for ordering them in the first place, some people have to learn the hard way...), were performing at between 80kbps and 150kbps, while they were rated for 1.5M or higher. No amount of escalation or site improvements (new discrete inside wire, splitter, new drops and protectors) made a difference.

Considering Whitacre was already long gone, I don't know what they're up to, but no one anywhere in the corporate hierarchy had any interest at all in correcting the situation.
patcat88

join:2002-04-05
Jamaica, NY
kudos:1

Re: Speed? What's that?

Its a secret conspiracy for you to buy a T1 line.

monkie

@rr.com

What exactly was the issue they where sued for?

Was this suit over the fact the ATT provisions a 1.5 Mbps line at 1536 kbps, and that with the ATM and PPPoE overhead you could never actually get the 1.5Mbps speed via IP?

At best you could get 90% of the provisioned speed, 1.35 Mbps.
speeddream
Premium
join:2008-05-21
Irving, TX
Reviews:
·AT&T DSL Service
·AT&T Yahoo

At&t dsl bandwidth caps

Hello, I kind of a dummy when it comes to determining how bad I am getting screwed by AT&T. For some reason, after 8 years of having their service, my connection just gets slower and slower. I was reading some old post where it was stated that for the Elite plan that you are capped off at 80g per month. What exactly does that mean cuz maybe I have hit my quota and that is why it is dive bombing. When I ran the speedtest here tonight it said that speed may be inaccurate due to upload compression. What is up with that? Yesterday they blammed it on my dsl modem that I have had for 8yrs. So I go to Fryes last night and get a new AT&T modem and a sheilded data cable. It took forever to get it to work. When I use Firefox, I lose connection after it crawls hesistantly around for awhile. I started using the Safari again and that is how I was able to connect to this site. Anyone have any suggestions. I cannot find a tweak test for Mac OSX10.5.8. I like the one they had on this site back when I had a pc.

brandon
Some truth included in this post.
Premium
join:2003-03-31
Hurley, MS

What about former bellsouth region?

When Fastaccess DSL hit the scene, it was advertised as 1.5mbps, but was actually capped at 1472. That was EVERYONE, not just a few people.
NormanS
Premium,MVM
join:2001-02-14
San Jose, CA
kudos:4
Reviews:
·SONIC.NET
·Pacific Bell - SBC

Re: What about former bellsouth region?

said by brandon:

When Fastaccess DSL hit the scene, it was advertised as 1.5mbps, but was actually capped at 1472. That was EVERYONE, not just a few people.
That was also just Bellsouth, not SBC.
--
Norman
~Oh Lord, why have you come
~To Konnyu, with the Lion and the Drum

PapaMidnight

join:2009-01-13
Baltimore, MD

Did I choose the right line of work?

I'm going into Information Technology and already started my career, but I think I may have chosen the wrong line of work because compared to the affected consumers, these attorney's just got paid.
Bubba Rock

join:2010-04-21

1 edit

Re: Did I choose the right line of work?

I hate to say this, but yes probably you did get into the wrong line of work.

You may be competing with out sourced and off shored labor rates (in third world and developing countries). Even just domestically, the IT industry has been thoroughly flooded for over a decade now, and is full of grand master bullshitters.

I don't think there is a field more full of bullshitters than IT.

IW

@comcast.net

Inside wire

besides the obvious issue of distance......people are not aware that %90 of speed issues are caused by the house wiring, which AT&T does not own thus not responsible to fix. DEREGULATION. Yesterday I had a customer that was getting an inconsistant 2 Megs at the modem, yet 6 Megs at the NID, Not only did he need a splitter due to his alarm but also the IW was so bad that a new wire run was needed. 2 hrs later, his modem was at 6 megs!

Funny thing is %100 of the time I hear "its on your end" or "its AT&T problem", "my phone works, thus my wiring its good" problem with the last statement is that dialtone and DSL are 2 very different frequencies. DT is only 4 kHz, DSL starts at 128 kHz. Making DSL the more sensitive of the two
m3ksh33p

join:2008-04-30
Mount Vernon, IN

1 edit

What I learned

...

Monday, 04-Jun 21:23:57 Terms of Use & Privacy | feedback | contact | Hosting by nac.net - DSL,Hosting & Co-lo
over 12.5 years online © 1999-2012 dslreports.com.