republican-creole
site Search:


 
   
story category
AT&T: Verizon's FiOS Slowdown Justifies Our U-Verse Plan
'Investment strategy and the network strategy was the right one.'
by Karl Bode Tuesday 10-Aug-2010 tags: dsl · Fiber · business · alternatives · bandwidth · Verizon FiOS · AT&T U-Verse
As we noted last month, AT&T has finally gotten around to deploying bonded VDSL, which enlists a second copper pair to each house to increase U-Verse's maximum delivery range another 1-2,000 feet from the VRAD. AT&T's VP of U-verse and video products, Jeff Weber, talks to Fierce IPTV about U-Verse, which he insists is "a state of the art product" at one-fourth the cost of running last mile fiber. Weber also claims that Verizon's decision to stop deploying FiOS into new markets validates AT&T's decision to stick with last-mile copper:

We have a different footprint, so I wouldn't say opportunity in the sense of real significant head-to-head video competition, but I do think it's a crystal clear validation that the strategy we took, the architecture and investment at a fundamentally, order of magnitude different level of cost to go do this, was the right one, as opposed to the really expensive, slower way of going at this. So, we don't compete in wireline footprint head-to-head, but it is a validation that the investment strategy and the network strategy was the right one.

Of course a major difference is that with last-mile fiber already deployed to half their markets, Verizon's in a position to offer 50 Mbps (and soon 100 Mbps) service to customers in markets where cable operators are offering 50 Mbps or faster service. Verizon's also not having to juggle compression and bandwidth to manage their TV ambitions, and they're in a position with GPON upgrades and a shift to IPTV to compete for the next decade.

In contrast, AT&T's top data tier sits at 24 Mbps and remains distance-constrained, the company is consistently battling bandwidth limitations and consumer expectations, and AT&T's eventually going to have to upgrade that last-mile anyway. It's also worth noting that AT&T slowed U-Verse expansion as well -- the company hoping to pass 30 million homes by end of 2011, a goal they originally claimed they'd pass a year or two ago.

It's really not clear how Verizon's decision to stop FiOS expansion justifies U-Verse in any way. Verizon slowed FiOS because they wanted to up penetration in deployed markets, but also because they saw the potential to net taxpayer money through stimulus funding and USF "reform." In the end, Verizon's already done the heavy lifting AT&T simply managed to defer for another day.

view: topics flat text 
Post a:
geonap
lolatidiots

join:2005-12-14
Glendale, CA
kudos:1

justified slowdown?

why wont they justify the slow speed tiers they have ?

Chris 313
Come get some
Premium
join:2004-07-18
Houma, LA
Reviews:
·AT&T U-Verse
·Comcast Digital ..
·Comcast

2 edits

Re: justified slowdown?

said by geonap:

why wont they justify the slow speed tiers they have ?
Their justification for the slow speeds is the insistance on using old copper vs fiber like FiOS is doing. You can only cram so much down the old copper wire. And it looks that besides a miraculous breakthrough in copper tech that actually produces results in real world tests, they're already at the limit.

And they wonder why cable kicking their ass with triple play, eh?
Sammer

join:2005-12-22
Canonsburg, PA

Re: justified slowdown?

said by Chris 313:

Their justification for the slow speeds is the insistance on using old copper vs fiber like FiOS is doing. You can only cram so much down the old copper wire. And it looks that besides a miraculous breakthrough in copper tech that actually produces results in real world tests, they're already at the limit.

And they wonder why cable kicking their ass with triple play, eh?
Actually U-Verse could provide 50 Mbps (fast enough to compete with cable today) if AT&T wasn't so cheap and installed enough nodes. Not installing enough U-Verse fiber nodes is the real reason they can claim they are only spending about 1/4 (actually about 1/3) the cost of FTTH.

Rambo76098

join:2003-02-21
Columbus, OH
Reviews:
·WOW Internet and..
·AT&T Midwest
·AT&T U-Verse
·Insight Communic..

Re: justified slowdown?

I don't get this either, the tech that installed my Uverse service last week showed me he was able to get ~60MBPS in my building (can see VRAD from my condo, can't remember how many feet he said it was). If they are able to get this high (at least on people real close to the VRAD), why not offer higher tiers than 24MBPS?
Skippy25

join:2000-09-13
Hazelwood, MO
Really? Because at my house they can't even give me 2 HD feeds, nor can they give me 10mb or greater internet speeds.

I simply don't qualify for either of those services because of their crap last mile to my house.
glinc

join:2009-04-07
New York, NY
Exactly. FiOS is future proof and for many years to come. Just wait and see...

jmn1207
Premium
join:2000-07-19
Ashburn, VA

Crazy Talk

While U-Verse's picture quality may not be up to par with FiOS, it's implementation allows for adding an unlimited amount of new channels, especially new bandwidth intensive HD channels. FiOS, on the other hand, has run into a brick wall with regards to capacity, and is currently scrambling around trying to free-up some valuable space. Verizon recently dropped 4 HD channels (West Coast feeds of premium movie channels) just to be able to add some new ones. Verizon's infrastructure has plenty of potential, but the TV section is using cable's QAM system to deliver video content, with the exception of their Video on Demand, which is using IPTV.
geonap
lolatidiots

join:2005-12-14
Glendale, CA
kudos:1

Re: Crazy Talk

with capacity the bigger issue, i'd rather have limitations in the technology they use to deliver video over fiber rather than using something good over copper.
Cogdis

join:2007-03-26
Floral Park, NY

2 edits
True but Verizon planned way ahead for this eventuality, and they have options available to them (which they haven't needed yet).

I like that Verizon chose a highly reliable technology in QAM over a very immature tech (at the time) in IPTV. Now that the kinks are being worked out, Verizon can add or move some channels to this new technology while still keeping most of the channels on a system that just works.

On a side note: Man I love my Fios internet!
wombough

join:2001-08-30
Albany, GA

2 edits
and if you are watching more then on HD stream your internet slows to dial up. Come on are you really trying to compare copper to home verses fiber to your home? My mom has it (FIOS)up in NJ and their picture HD offerings and internet speed can not be compared to! I will take a few less channels due to QAM(for now) limits to no compression and no bandwidth issues. While even compressed all to hell ATT still can't deliver a steady 24mbs due to the limit of bandwidth they can send to your home. I think its around 100mbs if your close enough.
innoman
-
Premium
join:2002-05-07
Dallas, TX
kudos:1
Reviews:
·VoicePulse

Re: Crazy Talk

I actually loved my U-Verse service until I moved to Dallas, TX. I almost regret not going with a place that had FiOS (like Plano). I wanted to live where I live though. U-Verse here is terrible!

I couldn't even get my TV to record a show I wanted to finish later last night. It wouldn't even change the channel. My internet has stopped working randomly several times.

A few people here have told me they had issues with U-Verse and went with TWC because of them.

I WANT FiOS! And it's absurd AT&T hasn't started pushing last mile fiber by now.
hottboiinnc
ME

join:2003-10-15
Cleveland, OH

Re: Crazy Talk

want FiOS move to a VZ market they don't plan on selling anytime soon.
innoman
-
Premium
join:2002-05-07
Dallas, TX
kudos:1

Re: Crazy Talk

I know. I am near one but not in one. But I like my place too much to move away . We can get 50M RR though... I could always switch to that I guess.
pappy97

join:2007-03-12
Dallas, TX
said by innoman:

I actually loved my U-Verse service until I moved to Dallas, TX. I almost regret not going with a place that had FiOS (like Plano). I wanted to live where I live though. U-Verse here is terrible!

I couldn't even get my TV to record a show I wanted to finish later last night. It wouldn't even change the channel. My internet has stopped working randomly several times.

A few people here have told me they had issues with U-Verse and went with TWC because of them.

I WANT FiOS! And it's absurd AT&T hasn't started pushing last mile fiber by now.
That's why when I moved to the Dallas metro last November, my first filter for homes was cities with FIOS. I'd kill myself if I moved here and didn't move into a FIOS city.
pappy97

join:2007-03-12
Dallas, TX

Re: Crazy Talk

And frankly I'm surprised anyone who frequents DSL reports and moves to the DFW metro would do the same thing. There are many DFW burbs with FIOS, and it's easy to find out which ones have it and which don't. Hell even before I viewed houses I went to the FIOS website to make sure that particular address was getting FIOS. I used to do 50/20 with them, but now I scaled back to 25/25 for $44.99/mo. (I do internet only). Pretty good deal IMHO.

RiseAbove
Premium
join:2004-01-30
Reviews:
·Verizon FiOS

Re: Crazy Talk

said by pappy97:

And frankly I'm surprised anyone who frequents DSL reports and moves to the DFW metro would do the same thing. There are many DFW burbs with FIOS, and it's easy to find out which ones have it and which don't. Hell even before I viewed houses I went to the FIOS website to make sure that particular address was getting FIOS. I used to do 50/20 with them, but now I scaled back to 25/25 for $44.99/mo. (I do internet only). Pretty good deal IMHO.
Let me join the pile of people who are in the DFW area with FIOS. In fact the week I moved into this place they start the roll out of FIOS in the neighborhood. I got lucky because the first place we wanted got snatched up so when we selected this we were kind of bummed that FIOS wasn't an option but when we saw the trucks in that first week it was a great sign of things to come.

I still don't understand why AT&T things copper is the way of the future and why they should keep trying to invest in ways to maximize it instead of taking all of that money and going the way Verizon does. FIOS blows Uverse out of the in terms of clarity and quality. HD on Uverse has way to many pixels and artifacts to even enjoy.
innoman
-
Premium
join:2002-05-07
Dallas, TX
kudos:1
Reviews:
·VoicePulse
I surprise myself . I just wanted to live where I live. I wanted to be in the middle of everything, so to speak, so I could meet more people, etc... I didn't let connectivity rule my decisions like I usually would. I have chosen where I want to live a few times based on what kind of internet access was available.

jmn1207
Premium
join:2000-07-19
Ashburn, VA

Re: Crazy Talk

What? You chose a place to reside based on a physical location and its surrounding community? You definitely need to get your priorities in order.

For many of us, much of our social interaction is confined to a networked device, so having a great internet connection is paramount to this aspect of our lives. It might be sad, but it's the sad truth.
innoman
-
Premium
join:2002-05-07
Dallas, TX
kudos:1
Reviews:
·VoicePulse

Re: Crazy Talk

said by jmn1207:

What? You chose a place to reside based on a physical location and its surrounding community? You definitely need to get your priorities in order.
Crazy talk isn't it? Ha!

It seems most of my social interaction takes place on my phone which just doesn't have a good connection either (iPhone - ATT). But I can totally relate.

I'm just trying to find some balance in my life... AT&T is making this too difficult ATM.

NPGMBR

join:2001-03-28
Arlington, VA
I just moved from a building with FIOS to one that only offers Comcast. I REALLY Really really miss my FIOS. Comcat is not bad but my intenet speeds are not as fast at certain times of the day and I often get pixelization and audio skip on the tube. Problems I never had with FIOS.

I also found Verizon's channel line-up to be smarter than Comcast's line-up and Verizon offers a helluva lot more channels (not that I could ever watch them all) but they're there.
innoman
-
Premium
join:2002-05-07
Dallas, TX
kudos:1
Reviews:
·VoicePulse
I searched FiOS areas first but I wanted to live in Dallas. I did research to see if any of the places in the area I wanted to live had FiOS. Maybe when I move next (whether into a house or another rental), I'll be willing to move somewhere in the metroplex that does have FiOS.
bogey780

join:2004-03-19
Here
kudos:1
'and if you are watching more then on HD stream your internet slows to dial up. '

That's not how it works.

'While even compressed all to hell ATT still can't deliver a steady 24mbs due to the limit of bandwidth they can send to your home.'

What were you trying to say with this?
patcat88

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

Re: Crazy Talk

TVs have higher QOS than your internet connection. If you have all X uverse boxes turned to HD channels, they will bite out of your internet pool of bandwidth to run themselves.
bogey780

join:2004-03-19
Here
kudos:1

Re: Crazy Talk

You can't take enough bandwidth away t the TVs to turn it into dial-up. The slowest you can get the line down to is about 12Mb/s.
wombough

join:2001-08-30
Albany, GA

Re: Crazy Talk

I beg to disagree if you had 6 tvs hooked up you can. If not either your internet connection will be in and out or your tv will be unwatchable. Like I said 100mbs is all you can get so something has to give.
bogey780

join:2004-03-19
Here
kudos:1

Re: Crazy Talk

You seriously don't know how Uverse works. The fact you don't even know what the gateway speeds on Uverse is a huge signal to everyone that you don't know what you're talking about.
wombough

join:2001-08-30
Albany, GA

Re: Crazy Talk

well please let me know since you know how it works. My dad has it and he syncs at 53mbs. So what am I missing on how it works?
bogey780

join:2004-03-19
Here
kudos:1

Re: Crazy Talk

He's not syncing at 53mb/s
wombough

join:2001-08-30
Albany, GA

Re: Crazy Talk

wow you even know what others are syncing at! ATT even says you can sync at that or 100 max
bogey780

join:2004-03-19
Here
kudos:1

Re: Crazy Talk

'ATT even says you can sync at that or 100 max'

No they're not.
wombough

join:2001-08-30
Albany, GA

Re: Crazy Talk

hey expert do you know sync is not the same as real bandwidth. Its like your computer sync with a cable modem at 100mbs but you don' that 100 due to you might only subscribe to 10. They sync higher then the bandwidth that is available. As att said bonded copper would bump it to 50 to 80mbs available.
bogey780

join:2004-03-19
Here
kudos:1

Re: Crazy Talk

No, you're wrong about the technology. The reason why it's called sync is because it's short for synchronize. The modem synchronizes with the DSLAM and the bitrate is set during the negotiation based upon port settings and available bandwidth. There's only a handful of set profiles for sync rates.

Have you ever actually touched a VDSL modem?
The Gizmo

join:2002-03-12
Pearland, TX
Reviews:
·AT&T U-Verse
Just to clear things up, you can only watch U-Verse on 4 TVs at once, being 3HD/1SD, and doing that still leaves a little bit more than 12mbps left for internet (assuming you're on the 32/5 sync rate).

The RG also shows two things, the current sync rate, and the estimated maximum. AT&T currently does not (to my knowledge) sync anyone's RG faster than 32/5 despite their estimated maximum sync rate. My estimated maximum is 53mbps, but the line is only on the 32/5. Meaning my line has 32mbps of download bandwidth for TV and Internet. The TV currently only ever uses 20mbps, and the internet only ever uses 12mbps (for the 12mbps plan).

Don't get me wrong, I'd rather have FTTH, but since U-Verse is all I can get, I'd rather have VDSL2 than dialup.
wombough

join:2001-08-30
Albany, GA

Re: Crazy Talk

thank you. You actually stated things and talked like you know what your saying unlike the other so called expert. So my point on people that sighn up for 24mb (if I read it correct they are offering that now it used to be max 18) would have issues with achieving that speed if they watched the 3hd and 1 sd streams?

And thank you for explaining some things.
bogey780

join:2004-03-19
Here
kudos:1

Re: Crazy Talk

My first post to you stated what the max sync rate allowed on Uverse is set at and how much per stream you get.

This probably would have went over better if you had actually researched your numbers after being told they were wrong instead of insisting they were right and looking only for whatever you could google that might support your assertions while ignoring anything that said otherwise.
wombough

join:2001-08-30
Albany, GA

Re: Crazy Talk

no you were the expert so you should have stated excatly how it works.
Now my hole point that uverse sucks as it is limited to X amount (about 30 megs from what you say) and distance. FIOS is not limited by either.
bogey780

join:2004-03-19
Here
kudos:1

Re: Crazy Talk

Sure... change the subject away from your gross misunderstanding of how the profiling system works for Uverse.

You're failing. Now you're flailing. So I'm bailing.
wombough

join:2001-08-30
Albany, GA
yes it is how it works. And if you say not show me proof. And I was saying they compress the hell out of HD to try and lower how many mb the stream is to keep the internet at speed.
patcat88

join:2002-04-05
Jamaica, NY
kudos:1
said by wombough:

While even compressed all to hell ATT still can't deliver a steady 24mbs due to the limit of bandwidth they can send to your home. I think its around 100mbs if your close enough.
The problem is, I think, ASDL has a "breathing" problem, if theres more than 25% of the pairs, with DSL, and all the ADSL pairs in the trunk cable are floored, they will generate so much interference they all start going to a slower rate since they all send interference into each other.

IANAE, so I'm not sure if my hypothesis is correct. Some protocols just send null frames when there is no data, rather than turn off the transmitter, so the amount of interference/noise they are generating is the same whether or not data is being sent through the link.

KrK
Heavy Artillery For The Little Guy
Premium
join:2000-01-17
Tulsa, OK
Reviews:
·AT&T DSL Service
And what's to stop Verizon from implementing further IP technology over their now existing FTTH setup?

They can own U-verse.

AT&T losing DSL subs and not gaining as many U-Verse subs to compensate. That should spell volumes.
--
"Fascism should more properly be called corporatism because it is the merger of state and corporate power." -- Benito Mussolini
wombough

join:2001-08-30
Albany, GA

1 edit

Re: Crazy Talk

you are so correct. They are basically limitless in possibilities due to their decision to run FTTH. All cable has to do when they deploy DOCIS 3.0 is say offer 30/5 speed and att can't compete.
bogey780

join:2004-03-19
Here
kudos:1
'And what's to stop Verizon from implementing further IP technology over their now existing FTTH setup?'

What's to stop AT&T from extending the fiber the last couple thousand feet since they have the IP platform figured out?
patcat88

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

Re: Crazy Talk

said by bogey780:

'And what's to stop Verizon from implementing further IP technology over their now existing FTTH setup?'

What's to stop AT&T from extending the fiber the last couple thousand feet since they have the IP platform figured out?
Depreciation on the Uverse upgrades forbids any upgrades.
wombough

join:2001-08-30
Albany, GA
they have it figured out. You watch it at all. Their HD sucks. I rather watch SD from direct or Dish then their HD.
bsoft

join:2004-03-28
Boulder, CO
The QAM system Verizon is using now has no problems supporting 250+ full-bitrate HD channels (which takes about 750MHz worth of bandwidth). If there are problems with capacity now, I think it has more to do with Verizon's implementation than it does with QAM-based cable systems in general.
wombough

join:2001-08-30
Albany, GA

Re: Crazy Talk

I doubt it is capacity issues and more on contract issues with channel owners. That is my guess.

Alakar
Facts do not cease to exist when ignored

join:2001-03-23
Milwaukee, WI

Pretty Accurate

I think the guy from AT&T has a good point. Fios and Uverse market penetration numbers are pretty similar, especially when you take into account that Fios started before Uverse. AT&T spent about 1/5 of what Verizon did to get similar results. While Fios is "in a position to offer 50 Mbps (and soon 100 Mbps) service to customers", they aren't buying in the numbers Verizon anticipated or needed for decent ROI.

What people around here don't seem to get is that broadband speed is the least important feature to a majority of the population when buying this kind of service. Channel lineup, Voip reliability and quality, picture quality all rank ahead.
--
"Necessity is the plea for every infringement of human freedom; it is the argument of tyrants; it is the creed of slaves." William Pitt the Younger

See 25 replies to this post
jca2050
Premium
join:2002-02-04
Hacienda Heights, CA
Reviews:
·Verizon FiOS

1 edit

U-Verse

They are going to continue to fall behind unless they finally upgrade their infrastructure. what are they going to do in a year or two when Verizon and cable operators are offering 100-150mbps tiers and their VDSL is still limited to 1/4th that speed or less? They should count themselves lucky that they don't have to compete with FiOS directly.
wombough

join:2001-08-30
Albany, GA

Re: U-Verse

exactly. and it seems to depend on were you live as uverse is good to very bad. FIOS seems to be good everywhere it is. They cant hardly compete with cable that is on DOCIS 2.0 let alone when they all upgrade to 3.0.
The Gizmo

join:2002-03-12
Pearland, TX
lol if it's Comcast, it wouldn't matter. 100mbps and 150mbps are mostly useless IMO with a 250GB cap. In fact you can exceed 250GBs in less than 12 hours at 50mbps.
wombough

join:2001-08-30
Albany, GA

Re: U-Verse

I will definitely give you that. CAPS are BS.

doublea

join:2007-06-04
Petaluma, CA

24mbps... not even close.

Would love to get 24mbps, but I can't.

Most houses in my area with uverse is hit or miss, with the max speed being 12mbps...
wombough

join:2001-08-30
Albany, GA

Re: 24mbps... not even close.

yeah and as I said in another post even DSL is almost reaching those speeds. Some areas are at 10.

FBGuy
yippee ki yay
Premium
join:2005-03-19

Re: 24mbps... not even close.

u-verse is dsl. well most of the time.
tmc8080

join:2004-04-24
Brooklyn, NY
Reviews:
·Optimum Online
·Verizon FiOS

the big gamble

even the former Bell Atlantic build knew that eventually FTTP was the end game. what they didn't plan on was cap expense needed to deploy a (then) ultra expensive and new technology. how many years of 56k modems were consumers satisfied with before broadband ended up replacing it? some day in the future, DSL will run out of bandwidth-- this is not technology that will run hundreds of megabits through a vrad to the customer's home. fiber and coax does that..not thin pair POTS 18-22gauge strand pairs (conditioned to the extreme). then once the obvious becomes a financia albatross to AT&T, HOW MUCH will they have to ante up to close the last mile with fiber?

right now competition isn't exactly that fierce between Verizon and Comcast.. but once it is.. and the spillover of Comcast outpacing Uverse broadband happens (yeah, once in a Gulf oil disaster while... )
BiggA

join:2005-11-23
EARTH

Bandwidth

Whoever has the most bandwidth wins in the long run.

Cable's total bandwidth: 5.13gbps

Fios's total bandwidth: 7.53gbps

U-Verse's total bandwidth: 0.032gbps

All three are trying to offer the same service.
vengance01

join:2009-03-06
Encino, CA
Reviews:
·AT&T U-Verse

Re: Bandwidth

While I agree ATT is backing themselves into a corner, U-Verse works just find for me. They offer a rock solid connection, decent price, and good features. I have 2 HD tvs and 12/1.5 Internet. Everything works. TWC's internet is hit or miss in my area and I live in an ATT foot print. No Fios love for me. I hope ATT does start to convert the old copper to Fiber. Only time will tell, but I am happy for now.

anon19730102

@sbcglobal.net
This is not an honest comparison to anyone that knows the technologies involved. I care not to waste any further time on ridiculous posts like this.

I agree UVerse needs to start transitioning to FTTH or at least FTTC, but for now (and with price factored in), UVerse can stay competitive for the next few years... probably 5. But they can't wait to the end to do something... they will have to start some transition in the next two to three years, I suspect, even taking into account likely improvements is VDSL2 and DSM. But you never know, these technologies advances that keep wringing more capacity out of copper never intended for such use never ceases to amaze me. Maybe T will get lucky. Eventually though, they'll have to bring fiber closer, and they know that.
BiggA

join:2005-11-23
EARTH
Reviews:
·Comcast

Re: Bandwidth

Yes, you can argue IPTV only needs to send streams required at that time, but then small-node QAM with SDV can do a similar trickery. And none of the three handle data the same way.

However, in the end, bandwidth is important, and those numbers are very close to correct (if anything Fios has a tiny bit more because of phone service, and cable could build to 1ghz).

Showing how much capacity each system has is not silly, even if it's not a direct comparison... but in the end, that data's got to get there somehow.

I don't think they get it. If they did, they would have at least some pilot projects for brownfield FTTH (even if we're talking 20K homes, SOMETHING), and it wouldn't be running at 25/2, it would be running at more like a gigabit, with internet packages up to 100mbps like Comcast.

fiber_man
Things Happen For A Reason
Premium
join:2001-01-27
Port Saint Lucie, FL
Where did you get the numbers from. AT&T IS using a 1 gig connection to every Vrad for now. Theyn can scale it up to 10/100 gigs or even Terrabit if needed.
--
GO NOLES!!
BiggA

join:2005-11-23
EARTH

Re: Bandwidth

So? They can only get 32mbps to the home. The other numbers are also to the home, albeit for partially broadcast signals.
twill1989

join:2009-01-03
Goose Creek, SC

Uverse is fine for now

I know it's not the politically correct thing to say around here, but AT&T might be right on this. I know anything even remotely connected to AT&T around here is viewed as being evil, but I think AT&T had the right investment strategy THIS time.

I'm not a AT&T fanboi or whatever, if those even exist, (I just dropped my AT&T DSL line for Comcast actually) but AT&T seems to be keeping on pace with Verizon's FiOS despite being a year or two behind deployment. Yes, both Verizon and AT&T are slowing down their deployments, but AT&T's ability to deploy Uverse is inherently easier than Verizon's ability to deploy FiOS.

Yes, FiOS is the superior technology. No one will refute that (besides maybe a lying cable salesman promoting cablevision or comcast). Yes, both companies are hemorrhaging traditional DSL customers. When you're losing that much blood, the question is how do you stop the blood loss in the quickest time possible? Uverse might be slower than DOCSIS 3 and FiOS, but it's an viable answer to the cable companies' attacks. 24 Mbps is nothing to laugh at, as someone said earlier. And it does give AT&T the ability to do a triple play.

And what a lot of people are missing out on is AT&T is doing a lot of the hardwork of a optical network buildout now with Uverse. AT&T can use the Uverse network to later create a active optical network.

When Uverse becomes available here in the next two months, I'll be switching back to AT&T.

tlylework

@sbcglobal.net

FIOS not available.

I have Uverse because I don't like cable. I've seen it at my sisters house and i am not impressed, and everyone in my house really likes Uverse.
I cannot see paying more than the $55 a month for internet I have now, so higher speeds don't mean much too me. I can download almost anything I want in less than 5 minutes for the most part.
The higher speeds come with a premium that I don't want to pay. I could afford to pay more, but why? I sync at around 53 MB/S to the Vrad, so in my opinion AT&T could already offer me more, but I wouldn't pay for it anyway.

Now FIOS probably is better, maybe, but it is not even offered anywhere near me and it doesn't sound like verizon is expanding anytime soon, so what is the point?

See 20 replies to this post

morbo
Complete Your Transaction

join:2002-01-22
00000

AT&T translation: Our half-assed strategy isn't so bad!

U-Verse is a highly polished turd that AT&T is incredible proud of. Way to go, AT&T.

rma153

@spcsdns.net

Re: AT&T translation: Our half-assed strategy isn't so bad!

Without having overspent on FTTH, it will be easier for AT&T to exit the wireline business in favor of the much more lucrative future of wireless (unregulated), which is what the operators would rather do. Verizon has sold off a lot of wireline already.
wombough

join:2001-08-30
Albany, GA

Re: AT&T translation: Our half-assed strategy isn't so bad!

if that was the case why spend at all? Just keep DSL and landline if you are going to get out. Makes no sense to me that they are planing on getting out. If that was the case do what sprint did and just get out.
meehawl

join:2002-02-04
San Diego, CA

U-Verse FAIL

AT&T tried *four* times to install U-Verse in my house. Eventually the install was escalated to the regional "super engineer", who when he arrived certainly knew his shit. Unlike the other installers where, when the "modem" failed to light up correctly they just said "line trouble" and quickly left, he was able to diagnose that the copper from the AT&T box to the houses (installed in the 1980s) was incapable of sustaining the necessary upstream signal for more than a few minutes at a time and pronounced U-Verse DOA for the entire gated community. I've lost faith in AT&T's last-segment "solution".
McBane

join:2008-08-22
Plano, TX

This justifies me living on the VZ side of town.

Everytime I see the "AT&T covers 97% of America" commercial, makes me glad I'm that 3%. I should make myself a 3% leather jacket or get a 3% tattoo.

Monday, 04-Jun 21:29:48 Terms of Use & Privacy | feedback | contact | Hosting by nac.net - DSL,Hosting & Co-lo
over 12.5 years online © 1999-2012 dslreports.com.