dslreports logo
 story category
AT&T Struggling With Meter Accuracy
No Users Have Been Charged Since Caps Went Live

AT&T caps on DSL and U-Verse users were supposed to officially go live on May 1, with DSL users facing a 150GB monthly cap, and U-Verse users facing a 250GB monthly cap (both paying $10 per each additional 50GB consumed). At the time, AT&T confirmed that not all customers had access to the meters, though the company isn't clear on specifically when all users will see the option. Several months later and many users say they aren't seeing any meters, and many of those who do continue to insist that the meters don't accurately track usage.

One user in our forums claims that after asking about AT&T's caps, he was called by someone at the AT&T corporate office and told that AT&T is having problems accurately tracking U-Verse usage in particular:

quote:
AT&T has no problems with the DSL meters, but they are experiencing problems with the U-Verse meters. When I asked what the exact problems were, he said he didn't have the detailed technical information, but from what he knew, they had "some problems" measuring the U-verse data correctly. At this moment they had no date of when these problems were expected to be resolved. He did state that until they resolve the issues, no one would be charged for anything, and that users would be informed when they start metering.
We've fired off an e-mail to AT&T to see if they can confirm and perhaps provide additional technical detail on specifically what AT&T is struggling with. Meanwhile, threads like this one in our forums clearly highlight that many users either don't have meters, or face inaccurate usage measurements.

Update: AT&T responded to our inquiry and insists that despite the significant complaints in our forums, the company isn't struggling with accuracy. AT&T also claims the reason consumers aren't being billed is because AT&T is "providing time for customers to understand and learn about their usage":

quote:
It’s not a matter of accuracy. It’s simply what we’ve discussed with you before – In some locations, our measurement tool is under construction and will be available at a later date. That includes U-verse Internet customers and some DSL customers. Customers will hear from us directly and numerous times if or when they approach their monthly usage. Unless and until then, there’s no impact.

Our new Terms of Service and broadband tiered pricing became effective on May 2, but we’re still providing time for customers to understand and learn about their usage. We began sending the first letters to customers who exceed the monthly usage in late June. We haven’t yet billed anyone for additional data because customers receive multiple communications before they ever face any charges – data charges are waived the first two times they exceed their plan.
view:
topics flat nest 
page: 1 · 2 · next

houkouonchi
join:2002-07-22
Ontario, CA

houkouonchi

Member

Doesn't work for any uverse customers.

Uh.. No only DSL caps went live. Usage stats don't work for *ANYONE* on uverse and caps are not being implemented at all on uverse as currently the metering doesn't work at all. I have not seen one uverse customer who can see their stats.

I am using 5TB/month until they fix their shit:

»I will use 5TB/month until their usage meter works

FFH5
Premium Member
join:2002-03-03
Tavistock NJ

FFH5

Premium Member

Re: Doesn't work for any uverse customers.

said by houkouonchi:

I am using 5TB/month until they fix their shit:

»I will use 5TB/month until their usage meter works

And when they do fix it? Will you pay for overages or stop using 5TB/mo?

houkouonchi
join:2002-07-22
Ontario, CA

houkouonchi

Member

Re: Doesn't work for any uverse customers.

said by FFH5:

said by houkouonchi:

I am using 5TB/month until they fix their shit:

»I will use 5TB/month until their usage meter works

And when they do fix it? Will you pay for overages or stop using 5TB/mo?

More than likeliy I will be canceling them. If they ever announce they stop the caps I will stop using the bandwidth and keep the connection.

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

dvd536

Premium Member

Re: Doesn't work for any uverse customers.

said by houkouonchi:

said by FFH5:

said by houkouonchi:

I am using 5TB/month until they fix their shit:

»I will use 5TB/month until their usage meter works

And when they do fix it? Will you pay for overages or stop using 5TB/mo?

More than likeliy I will be canceling them. If they ever announce they stop the caps I will stop using the bandwidth and keep the connection.

A T & T will not do that! they got investers to keep happy!!

Oh_No
Trogglus normalus
join:2011-05-21
Chicago, IL

Oh_No

Member

Re: Doesn't work for any uverse customers.

said by dvd536:

A T & T will not do that! they got investers to keep happy!!

At the expense of customers.

att_stckhldr
@scansafe.net

att_stckhldr

Anon

Re: Doesn't work for any uverse customers.

said by Oh_No:

said by dvd536:

A T & T will not do that! they got investers to keep happy!!

At the expense of customers.

Cry me a river
Skippy25
join:2000-09-13
Hazelwood, MO

Skippy25

Member

Re: Doesn't work for any uverse customers.

LOL. Without the customer your holding is worth nothing.

KrK
Heavy Artillery For The Little Guy
Premium Member
join:2000-01-17
Tulsa, OK

KrK to att_stckhldr

Premium Member

to att_stckhldr
^^^^ Fascism Enabler.

Oh_No
Trogglus normalus
join:2011-05-21
Chicago, IL

Oh_No to att_stckhldr

Member

to att_stckhldr
said by att_stckhldr :

said by Oh_No:

said by dvd536:

A T & T will not do that! they got investers to keep happy!!

At the expense of customers.

Cry me a river

Who a real company answers to:
1. Customers
2. Employees
3. Investors

Sorry, but ATT will loose more money than they make with trying to charge per byte. By the time they spend billions to upgrade all the their equipment to have fast enough processors to count all the good packets of data accurately competition will exist or we will have laws that will force them back to unlimited. Don't forget all the extra money spent to handle all the customer service problems and billing problems with per byte billing.
Per byte billing is a huge expense that a serious investor would not want to pay for.
A serious investor would rather not have ATT spend a fortune on extra expenses to try to implement a policy to nickel and dime customers, but would rather have them raise prices a little by taking advantage of their monopoly.

FFH5
Premium Member
join:2002-03-03
Tavistock NJ

FFH5

Premium Member

Re: Doesn't work for any uverse customers.

said by Oh_No:

Who a real company answers to:
1. Customers
2. Employees
3. Investors

You have the stakeholders right. But in the wrong order. There isn't a CEO in the USA that doesn't have Investors 1st. Well, at least not one who wants to keep his job.

1. Investors
2. Customers
3. Employees.

Oh_No
Trogglus normalus
join:2011-05-21
Chicago, IL

Oh_No

Member

Re: Doesn't work for any uverse customers.

said by FFH5:

said by Oh_No:

Who a real company answers to:
1. Customers
2. Employees
3. Investors

You have the stakeholders right. But in the wrong order. There isn't a CEO in the USA that doesn't have Investors 1st. Well, at least not one who wants to keep his job.

1. Investors
2. Customers
3. Employees.

I said real companies.
1. Customers
2. Employees
3. Investors

A CEO should not be voted in or out by "investors" it should be by employees. Employees have more to lose than any stock market investor.

Anyways employees are bigger investors in your company than your stock investors.
Wilsdom
join:2009-08-06

Wilsdom to houkouonchi

Member

to houkouonchi
Unless you want the 5TB you are wasting your time. AT&T's complaints about the pain they feel from high-bandwidth users is 100% BS.

OSUGoose
join:2007-12-27
Columbus, OH

OSUGoose to houkouonchi

Member

to houkouonchi
They dont even work for all DSL customers either

vincewarde
@sbcglobal.net

vincewarde

Anon

Re: Doesn't work for any uverse customers.

They will work very hard to figure out a way to implement caps because they know that they will lose a lot of video customers if they do not. Right now only a small percentage of users elect to pass on TV service and get their video entertainment via the internet. I am one of them. Between what I can get on Netflix, Hulu, and Shy Angel IPTV (gives me Fox News and lots of sports channels) and my antenna I get just what want. Including the streaming service portion of Netflix, the cost is about $35.00. My home network lets me access programing in any room I wish, and on my TVs. To get the same programing on the same number of sets would cost me close to $100.00.

If too many people figure out that they can have more choice for less money, more people will opt out of their TV plan, as I have. If they don't stop it now they will really be in trouble when the next more efficient video codec comes along. Lowering their bandwidth limit would probably cause them to face an anti-trust action.

If AT&T were smart, they would bit the bullet and reduce the cost of their plans, offer more choice and try to compete with services on the net.

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

pnh102

Premium Member

Perfect Role For Government

In an ideal world, states and possibly even the federal government would be allowed to audit these meters to ensure their accuracy, just like they do with metered services like electricity, water and sewage, scales that are used for purposes of commerce, and things that are sold by the unit, like gasoline.

Yea yea yea we all know this isn't going to happen.
45612019 (banned)
join:2004-02-05
New York, NY

45612019 (banned)

Member

Re: Perfect Role For Government

In an ideal world, these meters wouldn't exist.

The perfect role for government here is to ban the concept of "bandwidth caps" entirely, alongside the enforcement of network neutrality.
FactChecker
Premium Member
join:2008-06-03

1 recommendation

FactChecker

Premium Member

Re: Perfect Role For Government

said by 45612019:

In an ideal world, these meters wouldn't exist.

The perfect role for government here is to ban the concept of "bandwidth caps" entirely, alongside the enforcement of network neutrality.

Do you think the same holds true with wireless broadband? What about wireless cell minutes?, What about cloud storage, virtual web hosting, etc.

When someone builds an infrastructure/service with resources that are shared/oversubscribed the return or profit of that shared service directly correlates with the oversubscription model.

If someone starts using their cell phone as a baby monitor, or opens up their wireless for all neighbors to use, or starts sharing video titles from their home to everyone on the Internet, or their cloud drive, etc it changes the business model related to the costs to build and support the increased dedicated capacity/user required.

All networks are shared and oversubscribed. Residential services are not sized and priced for commercial-like dedicated bandwidth 7x24. You don't have to like it, but at least you should understand the variables.

Oh_No
Trogglus normalus
join:2011-05-21
Chicago, IL

1 edit

Oh_No

Member

Re: Perfect Role For Government

ATT is not oversubscribed.
ATT IS the internet as a Tieir one ISP.
Companies that resell internet access from Tier one ISPs can be oversold as they might not buy enough capacity, but Tier one ISP are the internet so if they are oversold there is a global problem.
FactChecker
Premium Member
join:2008-06-03

1 recommendation

FactChecker

Premium Member

Re: Perfect Role For Government

said by Oh_No:

ATT is not oversubscribed.
ATT IS the internet as a Tieir one ISP.
Companies that resell internet access from Tier one ISPs can be oversold as they might not buy enough capacity, but Tier one ISP are the internet so if they are oversold there is a global problem.

It explains a lot if people actually believe this.

The lack of understanding on how networks are built and operate translate into unrealistic expectations and uneducated opinions.

ptrowski
Got Helix?
Premium Member
join:2005-03-14
Woodstock, CT

ptrowski

Premium Member

Re: Perfect Role For Government

At&t wireless is not capping and throttling due to congestion. It's about money.
FactChecker
Premium Member
join:2008-06-03

FactChecker

Premium Member

Re: Perfect Role For Government

said by ptrowski:

At&t wireless is not capping and throttling due to congestion. It's about money.

Everything is about money. The general rule of networking is it cost more to support more usage over any shared network (wired or wireless). How you address situations that cost more (greed vs need factor) is specific to the company.

Oh_No
Trogglus normalus
join:2011-05-21
Chicago, IL

Oh_No to FactChecker

Member

to FactChecker
said by FactChecker:

said by Oh_No:

ATT is not oversubscribed.
ATT IS the internet as a Tieir one ISP.
Companies that resell internet access from Tier one ISPs can be oversold as they might not buy enough capacity, but Tier one ISP are the internet so if they are oversold there is a global problem.

It explains a lot if people actually believe this.

The lack of understanding on how networks are built and operate translate into unrealistic expectations and uneducated opinions.

I know how networks are built and operated.
I know what equipment they use, and I know what it costs.

ATT has more capacity than any other network.
»www.corp.att.com/globaln ··· _map.swf
»ipnetwork.bgtmo.ip.att.n ··· lay.html

Now you want to say it's ATT LAN with the constraints, next week you will say its their backbone. People like you are funny and need some education.
FactChecker
Premium Member
join:2008-06-03

FactChecker

Premium Member

Re: Perfect Role For Government

said by Oh_No:

I know how networks are built and operated.
I know what equipment they use, and I know what it costs.

ATT has more capacity than any other network.
»www.corp.att.com/globaln ··· _map.swf
»ipnetwork.bgtmo.ip.att.n ··· lay.html

Now you want to say it's ATT LAN with the constraints, next week you will say its their backbone. People like you are funny and need some education.

Thanks for the marketing maps and latency stats. Not sure this translates into the costs to grow networks, oversubscription models or capacity, but they are nice.

NormanS
I gave her time to steal my mind away
MVM
join:2001-02-14
San Jose, CA
TP-Link TD-8616
Asus RT-AC66U B1
Netgear FR114P

1 recommendation

NormanS to Oh_No

MVM

to Oh_No
said by Oh_No:

ATT is not oversubscribed.
ATT IS the internet as a Tieir one ISP.
Companies that resell internet access from Tier one ISPs can be oversold as they might not buy enough capacity, but Tier one ISP are the internet so if they are oversold there is a global problem.

Until SBC bought AT&T, there were two separate networks:

• AS7018 (AT&T Services; the Tier 1 backbone (formerly "AT&T Worldnet Services").
• AS7132 (AT&T Internet Services; the "Last Mile" customer network (formerly "SBC Internet Services")).

ATTS is traded with other Tier 1 networks "consideration free". ATTIS is, traditionally, "oversold", as are all "Last Mile" networks, serving residential customers. SBC buying AT&T did not change this. ATTIS is comparable to Comcast's CRAN, but nothing at all like Tier 1 network.
Skippy25
join:2000-09-13
Hazelwood, MO

Skippy25 to FactChecker

Member

to FactChecker
Then I guess they need to address their network as needed in one of the 3 ways:

1.) Invest in infrastructure
2.) Raise rates to lower demand
3.) Do nothing and let the quality of the network discourage use and encourage users to go elsewhere thus freeing up more bandwidth for those that stay.

The funny thing about a network is that it ALWAYS runs as fast as it can regardless of the load on it. It may not take 100% utilization or even 10% utilization to do so, but it is certainly doing its part as fast as it can.

famu720
join:2008-03-24
Greenville, SC

1 recommendation

famu720

Member

AT&T Struggling With Meter Accuracy

Instead of metering usage, how about AT&T scrap the caps and upgrade the network to exceed demand. It is not the customer's fault you refuse to keep up with demand.

footballdude
Premium Member
join:2002-08-13
Imperial, MO

footballdude

Premium Member

Re: AT&T Struggling With Meter Accuracy

said by famu720:

Instead of metering usage, how about AT&T scrap the caps and upgrade the network to exceed demand. It is not the customer's fault you refuse to keep up with demand.

According to the AT&T investor relations web site, they spent twenty three billion on network upgrades in 2010. Exactly how much do you propose they should be spending?

It's pretty easy to sit back and say 'make it better', but someone has to pay for that.

Bugger
@rr.com

Bugger

Anon

Re: AT&T Struggling With Meter Accuracy

Twenty three and a half billion... Did they spend this pocket change on FTTH? No?! Did they spend it on expanding U-verse? Not really?! Then what did they spend it on? Wireless?! Well that's fantastic, but it doesn't help the poor souls on ADSL 1.5 Mbps/384 kbps now, does it?
45612019 (banned)
join:2004-02-05
New York, NY

45612019 (banned)

Member

Re: AT&T Struggling With Meter Accuracy

said by Bugger :

Twenty three and a half billion... Did they spend this pocket change on FTTH? No?! Did they spend it on expanding U-verse? Not really?! Then what did they spend it on? Wireless?! Well that's fantastic, but it doesn't help the poor souls on ADSL 1.5 Mbps/384 kbps now, does it?

It probably does. I can't think of a better way to roll out faster speeds to a sparse rural area than throwing up some wireless towers.

Bugger
@rr.com

Bugger

Anon

Re: AT&T Struggling With Meter Accuracy

Well, assuming that T is deploying more towers and RAN capacity where these customers are, replacing expensive, slow and unreliable land-line data service with even more expensive, slow, and less reliable wireless data service is not a winning proposition. There are still different needs for both. And while T has been throwing billions at wireless: lobbying the FCC, buying spectrum, building the occasional tower, upgrading from AMPS to TDMA to GSM/GPRS to EDGE to UMTS to HSDPA+ these 12-year-old DSLAMs and modems have remained untouched. And since this is DSLreports.com, not WirelessGaffe.com I think this is very disconcerting. And now T slams the users with consumption caps, how rude!

NormanS
I gave her time to steal my mind away
MVM
join:2001-02-14
San Jose, CA
TP-Link TD-8616
Asus RT-AC66U B1
Netgear FR114P

NormanS to Bugger

MVM

to Bugger
said by Bugger :

Twenty three and a half billion... Did they spend this pocket change on FTTH? No?! Did they spend it on expanding U-verse? Not really?! Then what did they spend it on?

I wonder? Did they spend it on AS7018, or AS7132? They own both, but only AS7132 is amenable to FTTH. AS7018 is probably already 100% fiber; but they might have decided they need more core capacity for AS7018 (or more edge capacity for customers, such as Blizzard), over any kind of "Last Mile" fiber for AS7132.

Bugger
@rr.com

Bugger to footballdude

Anon

to footballdude
And if they spent it on consumption meters, boy, they'd better get their/investors/my money back, 'cause I sure am not happy with this kind of revelry.

Oh_No
Trogglus normalus
join:2011-05-21
Chicago, IL

Oh_No to footballdude

Member

to footballdude
said by footballdude:

said by famu720:

Instead of metering usage, how about AT&T scrap the caps and upgrade the network to exceed demand. It is not the customer's fault you refuse to keep up with demand.

According to the AT&T investor relations web site, they spent twenty three billion on network upgrades in 2010. Exactly how much do you propose they should be spending?

It's pretty easy to sit back and say 'make it better', but someone has to pay for that.

$3 billion if I was a stock holder I would have been pissed since they will eventually have to spend another $3 billion for FTTH.
In this weak economy and after Verizon slowed down installing FTTH it is the best time to get the cheapest prices to run FTTH.
They get a bonus of not needing any lawn fridges.
45612019 (banned)
join:2004-02-05
New York, NY

45612019 (banned) to famu720

Member

to famu720
The network is already keeping up with demand just fine. This has nothing to do with demand on the network and everyone knows it.
btop
join:2011-06-26

btop to famu720

Member

to famu720
Nor is it our fault that AT&T continues to sign up more users with discounted rates.

Snakeoil
Ignore Button. The coward's feature.
Premium Member
join:2000-08-05
united state

1 recommendation

Snakeoil

Premium Member

T mobile will fix this

Sarcasm: The buyout of T-mobile will fix the meters and get everything running the way it's supposed. It's for the children you know.

Bill Neilson
Premium Member
join:2009-07-08
Alexandria, VA

Bill Neilson

Premium Member

So what? Why does AT&T care?

If their data meter goes crazy and says 1000 people went over the limit when none of them did, who exactly is going to punish them?

Would many of those 1000 just pay the penalties anyway? Probably since they don't know better with technology.

Bottom line, the WORST that can happen is someone take AT&T to Court and at the end of the day, get AT&T to admit no wrong-doing yet have them pay a HUGE $1000 fine and promise to be perfect angels in the future.

Some may say, "Yea, but if their meter goes wrong, people will NOT want to be a part of that!".......who thinks AT&T and others won't release statement after statement claiming that 99.9999% of their meters are super-perfect accurate? Many consumers evidently eat up whatever their press release assert.

The ISP's already have brain-washed the ignorant into thinking that anyone using above 2gb is a bandwidth abuser...oh, except if they pay a bit more.

••••

rchandra
Stargate Universe fan
Premium Member
join:2000-11-09
14225-2105
ARRIS ONT1000GJ4
EnGenius EAP1250

rchandra

Premium Member

like the music and movie industries

Seems to me this is a lot like song and movie downloads, CDs, and DVDs. They've expending so much energy, time, and money to come up with "innovative" ways to copy-protect the content, only to find out their efforts were largely ineffective (DeCSS for example). Likewise, it seems obvious that AT&T's estimate about the effort required to implement their plan was far less than the actual effort, time, money, etc. required, especially if they can't even tell when these new "meters" will actually be in place and be accurate. In the end, will it be worth it? It just smacks of greed to me.

mod_wastrel
anonome
join:2008-03-28

mod_wastrel

Member

Tsk, tsk, tsk...

Nobody ever said that scamming your customers was going to be easy.

JasonOD
@comcast.net

JasonOD

Anon

Unfortunately AT&T fooled themselves a little.....

And their investors too. Dropping in a UBB system costs real money and lots of time. It's not trivial. Somebody over promised and under delivered here.
tivoboy
join:2004-05-10
Menlo Park, CA

tivoboy

Member

Not on my dsl

My dsl continues to say "cannot report usage for this account" Not sure why
mdlund0
join:2011-08-02
Lawrence, KS

mdlund0

Member

Internet vs. TV

Since both TV and Internet travel down the same pipe on U-Verse, I might suggest that the problem that they are having is separating the two. It's probably very easy to measure the total line usage, but when you have a variable bitstream being piped for video, it will be hard to subtract that from the total to get an accurate measure of the "internet usage". Just a theory.

-M
flbas1
join:2010-02-03
Fort Lauderdale, FL

flbas1

Member

problems with the meters

1) how to differentiate between TV traffic and internet traffic. Yea, it sounds easy - like turning on logging onto the internet routers - until you have to upgrade the infrastructure to keep up with the amount of internet traffic users will generate.

2) how to prevent script kiddies from "ping of death" your IP addr. from what I understand, there is no good way to disconnect your public IP addr while watching TV, and if the script kiddies get your IP and just PING it - with or without the response - does that add to your usage? how can the meters remove it? Does the pattern work for HTTP traffic also?

3) how not to violate Net Neutrality rules. the ATT website is on the internet - they will want to copy it somewhere so that users do not get charged for paying bills or buying new service - like how its done on your cell (611). And possibly some other services (network sites, shows, etc).

FrenchyChuck
@bell.ca

FrenchyChuck

Anon

I wonder if it has anything to do with all the cancellations

After seeing all the cancellations AT&T just came up with the line about broken meters hoping they wouldn't lose all their dsl subscribers.
45612019 (banned)
join:2004-02-05
New York, NY

45612019 (banned)

Member

Re: I wonder if it has anything to do with all the cancellations

Well this was certainly the catalyst the caused me to cancel my Internet and TV service with AT&T. So if their goal with this bandwidth cap bullshit was to stop people from canceling their U-verse TV service and going to Netflix, they fucked up royally. I canceled all my services with AT&T.
elray
join:2000-12-16
Santa Monica, CA

elray

Member

Incompetence is as Incompetence does

Its unfortunate that the mental giants in AT&T management couldn't be bothered to think through UBB thoroughly enough to do it right, the first time, for the benefit of all concerned.

But as I predicted long ago, here they are, waiving their metering because it simply wasn't designed, engineered, proven, or tested for accountability and accuracy. In the end, they will throw up their hands, charge more for slower tiers, and resort to other traffic-shaping methods.

If we are going to do UBB, it needs to be a genuine utility-meter device or protocol, which can be certified for accuracy by a 3rd-party testing firm, and it needs to support a lot more than just basic volume metering.
Wilsdom
join:2009-08-06

Wilsdom

Member

If they were only moderately greedy

it would have been simpler to just downgrade everyone to a lower speed and add new higher-priced tiers.

IH8ATTNOW
@sbcglobal.net

IH8ATTNOW

Anon

Re: My DSL still has no usage info

ever since May 1st, My DSL said no usage, do not be concerned if you don't see your usage.

About 2 weeks ago, it changed.

Since I only have DSL with NO Home Phone and my account number is a 10 digit account # and NOT an actual phone number

(when I enter it into the automated system when I call AT&T, it never finds it and I have to get redirected to a live person)

now it's saying:

NO DSL associated with this account under usage

and

NO Phone number associated with this account under billing

yet I still get a bill each month for $19.95, how's that for lack of logic?

ctceo
Premium Member
join:2001-04-26
South Bend, IN

ctceo

Premium Member

I Call BS

I find it REAL hard to believe that hardware thats had software that's had reliable data tracking for over 2 decades is suddenly so glitchy. I've never had a problem with my router keeping track, windows OS never has had a problem watching incoming and outgoing. Hell they NEVER seem to have any problems keeping track of sending your bill EVERY month. What gives now?

•••••••••

t3ln3t
@datareturn.com

t3ln3t

Anon

funny, but sad too, but more funny than anything

Back when DSL was first being installed, California, then Texas ... DSL users were sucking down SO much 'stuff' from Usenet (now dead, I know) that good ol' SBC decided to institute caps on the Usenet servers.

A decision was made to limit users to 128k. SBC even got sued for doing this!

In the end, the courts let SBC do it, and there were NOT massive cancellations, like some customers claimed there would be.

I don't think this bandwidth hogging thing, is widespread. It's maybe 10% of the customer base, with really good connections, that use the hell out of it.

I still say Death to at&t
and down with ma' bell
however I know this isn't going to be the straw that breaks the camel's back.

•••
aperture
join:2008-02-03
Dallas, TX

aperture

Member

Has anyone taken a count?

I don't know how it would translate to the real world, but has anyone here counted or estimated the number of users who have dumped AT&T because of the caps?

•••
btop
join:2011-06-26

btop

Member

If 0.00 GB is accurate, that's fine by me!

Not a matter of accuracy, says AT&T? Really? Then how they say that I used 0.00 GB for the entire months of June and July must be accurate. Not "unavailable" or similar, but 0.00 used. If they insist...!
moes
Premium Member
join:2009-11-15
Cedar City, UT

moes

Premium Member

I could careless about video through att

Srsly, I got to experience this so called uverse at my buddies the other night, I did a test. it wont handle 2 hd streams and downloading 5 torrents (yes legal iso's) at the same time. it bogged and then stalled and the damn modem reset. So I know what's best when it comes to video and thats flipping comcast and I know they have issues, but at least there not going "derp" we just do this shit because we say we have bandwidth hogs. erm does not work like that. but they fool the country into think it does because alot of normal internet users have no flipping clue, I think it's time to start a campaign on youtube, watch for it.

technologiq
EU2251
join:2000-08-08
Reno, NV

technologiq

Member

Meters aren't accurate...

As someone who has/had U-Verse during the UBB trials in Reno I can say that their meter didn't work worth a crap. It would almost always be off by SEVERAL gigs (sometimes too little, sometimes too much) and took DAYS to update. This was with a FTTP install. I actually think they are having problems making it work correctly with anyone with FTTP. If I had to guess their solution to this will be pulling the info from the RG's.
page: 1 · 2 · next