|
Such high prices!The prices are outrageous given how low the speeds are compared to cable! (for example, Comcast) | |
|
| banditws6Shrinking Time and Distance Premium Member join:2001-08-18 Frisco, TX |
banditws6
Premium Member
2013-Mar-21 10:49 am
Re: Such high prices!But not so much compared to Time Warner. If I could actually see those speeds promised by the 30/3 package, I might be willing to switch away from TWC. The latter wants $80-$85 in my area for 30/5, which I'm not willing to pay. | |
|
| | SunnyD join:2009-03-20 Madison, AL |
SunnyD
Member
2013-Mar-21 11:13 am
Re: Such high prices!Arguably... I pay the same price for 6M/768Kb ADSL from AT&T as that 18M/1.5M UVerse package. I'd gladly take an upgrade if they bothered to offer it to me.
Odds are Comcast will be servicing my neighborhood here sooner than AT&T even considers opening up more capacity (no new homes can even get ADSL in our subdivision) let alone upgrading us to UVerse. | |
|
| | keithps Premium Member join:2002-06-26 Soddy Daisy, TN |
to banditws6
And yet, people continue to bash on the muni-broadband. Probably because they are mad that for $70/month I can get 100/100. AT&T has U-verse availble here, but you can imagine the uptake rate is pretty low. | |
|
| | | elray join:2000-12-16 Santa Monica, CA
1 recommendation |
elray
Member
2013-Mar-21 12:10 pm
Re: Such high prices!said by keithps:And yet, people continue to bash on the muni-broadband. Probably because they are mad that for $70/month I can get 100/100. AT&T has U-verse availble here, but you can imagine the uptake rate is pretty low. We will continue to bash. We have a choice, when it comes to whether we pay AT&T. Such is not the case when the government decides to "compete" using our tax money. | |
|
| | | | |
Re: Such high prices!If they're using our tax money then it's probably the best use of tax money since the government brought electricity to us. They compete for security (police, military), roads, schools, etc. Why not internet? | |
|
| | | | | KearnstdSpace Elf Premium Member join:2002-01-22 Mullica Hill, NJ |
Kearnstd
Premium Member
2013-Mar-21 2:38 pm
Re: Such high prices!I think a lot of people forget about the rural electrification act. Which strangely enough happened because of the same reason rural areas lack good broadband. the private power companies stated that rural areas were not profitable.
It should be noted that projects like Hoover Dam are at least partially linked to such bills, And they have repaid themselves. | |
|
| | | | | | |
Re: Such high prices!You do realize that private companies can not enforce laws right? Hence the reasons that the gov't enforces the law.
And no the gov't should NOT be in business to compete. If those areas that can't get U-Verse of Fiber or any services that they think they need- they need to start their own Co-Op and build out themselves. How do you think many rural areas got phone services that AT&T didn't want to wire back then? Co-ops are still alive and doing well and many of them have FTTH and had it well before VZ and Google decided to deploy. I can give you links to many of them. Hell, many actually provide quality support as well and are local companies, compared to Google | |
|
| | | | | | | WhatNow Premium Member join:2009-05-06 Charlotte, NC |
WhatNow
Premium Member
2013-Mar-24 9:11 pm
Re: Such high prices!The power co-op or private power companies should start building FTTH networks. It might be wise to stay out of the content business and just provide the cable to the side of the house like they do with power. Let independent companies provide the content and the inside the house equipment. | |
|
| | | | | | | Cobra11M join:2010-12-23 Mineral Wells, TX |
to TBBroadband
the problem here though, is AT&T and others prohibit community start ups or smaller companies from goin in and takeing rural areas... it wouldn't be a issue if the cable co's and others would be willing to take the rural areas... but no instead AT&T, Verizon and others have been taking tax payers money for the last 10 years to build the network and never did... Universal Service fund.. so once again it comes back to the government.. if your gonna stand up for the corps make sure they are doing the job and not just milkin something they will never touch | |
|
| | | | | | | |
to TBBroadband
The problem with that idea is the fact that it ignores that it is the GOVERNMENT who has setup this system of non-competition to begin with! The government grants these companies "franchises" in a lot of areas which is more or less nothing than creating a government-sanctioned monopoly or duopoly. Joe Dirt from the down the street can't simply start stringing up or burying fiber all around town simply because he decides to do so. If government just GOT OUT OF THE WAY, there would be a hell of a lot more competition than we have today and prices would be a hell of a lot lower. | |
|
| | | | | elray join:2000-12-16 Santa Monica, CA
1 recommendation |
to biochemistry
said by biochemistry:If they're using our tax money then it's probably the best use of tax money since the government brought electricity to us. They compete for security (police, military), roads, schools, etc. Why not internet? Because those are moneys already wasted - the federal government has no business in schools or police; roads and power are debatable, and we're a couple trillion short each year. If "better broadband" is so important to your community, put it to a vote - form and fund a coop, and get it done. Stop waiting for the rest of us to pay for it. | |
|
| | | | | | |
DataRiker
Premium Member
2013-Mar-21 10:39 pm
Re: Such high prices!said by elray:said by biochemistry:If they're using our tax money then it's probably the best use of tax money since the government brought electricity to us. They compete for security (police, military), roads, schools, etc. Why not internet? Because those are moneys already wasted - the federal government has no business in schools or police; roads and power are debatable, and we're a couple trillion short each year. If "better broadband" is so important to your community, put it to a vote - form and fund a coop, and get it done. Stop waiting for the rest of us to pay for it. But private corporations are some of the biggest recipients of public handouts ( ATT paid ZERO taxes AND got a enormous tax refund last year ) That is arguably the best government handout of all. | |
|
| | | | | | KearnstdSpace Elf Premium Member join:2002-01-22 Mullica Hill, NJ |
to elray
if corporations ran the schools most of the country would have no education because it would not be freely available.
Then again that is what the 1% want. | |
|
| | | | | | | elray join:2000-12-16 Santa Monica, CA |
elray
Member
2013-Mar-22 11:38 am
Re: Such high prices!said by Kearnstd:if corporations ran the schools most of the country would have no education because it would not be freely available.
Then again that is what the 1% want. Actually, the "1%" want the masses well-educated, so they are as intelligent and as cheap as the offshore labor force. Unfortunately, the elites that run our country are not the "1%", they prefer to keep the masses ignorant - and that is why we have the massive public indoctrination system. Public education is "free" by law, but it doesn't have to be operated by the government; we would see far superior results if schools were run competitively by corporations, and parents had the choice where to send their kids. There is no public function that can't be contracted out, usually for the better. | |
|
| | | | | | | jduffy Premium Member join:2006-08-20 Cincinnati, OH |
to Kearnstd
LOL, if corporations ran education, it would be 1/3rd the price and people would actually get an education. With government control now, it cost far more than it should and people get degrees without having an education. | |
|
| | | | | | | | |
Re: Such high prices!said by jduffy:LOL, if corporations ran education, it would be 1/3rd the price and people would actually get an education. With government control now, it cost far more than it should and people get degrees without having an education. Wow people actually believe this nonsense you just posted? Talk about NOT having an education (you). If a corporation ran education, the only thing they would care about would be profits and their shareholders. There are some things, such as education and healthcare, that NEEDS to be run by the government. But then again I look at your avatar and that explains everything... | |
|
| | | | | | | | | BiggA Premium Member join:2005-11-23 Central CT |
BiggA
Premium Member
2013-Mar-31 1:01 am
Re: Such high prices!Exactly. He's another one of these people who apparently failed social studies because he doesn't understand what socialism is. | |
|
| | | | | | Cobra11M join:2010-12-23 Mineral Wells, TX |
to elray
... problem here is the companies are prohibiting community broadband projects threw out all the states.. this should be illegal for them to prohibit anyone | |
|
| | | | | | |
to elray
You're paying for it already however except the money went into the private corporations' pockets and disappeared! Per, an article linked to on the front page: "The telcos have pocketed an estimated $340 billion â thats about $3,000 per household â to build-out Gores fantasy. Where is it?" | |
|
| | | | |
to elray
Few bash. Really it is only those that are have more to lose because their interest lies with the corporations and little to do with spending tax money. Those same people are perfectly fine with using our tax money to prop up the profits of those very same companies they are trying to protect.
And I would agree with the other poster. If our government decided to roll out fiber to every home and business it would be the best use of $500 billion dollars this nation has spent in a century. | |
|
| | | | | |
Re: Such high prices!waste of money and I'm not tied to any corp that offers broadband. If these people wanted faster and cheaper prices, then yes, they should pay for it and form a co-op. How do you think areas got things back when. They didn't want for the gov't to do it for them and ask/demand regulation; they actually stood on their own two feet and did it themselves. And this day many of those areas are far better off in terms of communications than NYC or other metro areas. | |
|
| | | | | | |
tlylework
Anon
2013-Mar-22 8:36 am
Re: Such high prices!So what do you do when those same corporations who say an area is not profitable lobby members of congress to stop localities from doing just what you're saying? Yeah, you got nothing for that. | |
|
| | | | | | | |
anonymousey
Anon
2013-Mar-23 7:50 am
Re: Such high prices!lmao. How do you say nailed in french? | |
|
| | | | |
to elray
Sadly, not all of us have a choice. I live in a rural area and AT&T is it for ISP choices. I have 2x 18/1 Uverse connections to my house, load balanced through pfsense so everyone gets an even share, but still, I'd love to have a choice that isn't AT&T. =) Speedtest: » www.speedtest.net/result ··· 1042.png | |
|
| | | BiggA Premium Member join:2005-11-23 Central CT ·Frontier FiberOp.. Asus RT-AC68
|
to keithps
It depends on the implementation. In Tacoma, WA, they have Click!, which can't compete with Comcast, and here is Groton, CT, we used to have muni broadband until they sold it to a private investment firm. They do have an 860mhz HFC plant, however, compared to Comcast's 860mhz, so once they kill analog, they will either dominate or light enough of a fire under Comcast's butt to get them out of neutral and into plant upgrade mode.
Other systems, like FTTH, are incredible. What is definitely true is that no laws should be made preventing municipalities from building out. Competition can't hurt, and even if my local formerly muni-broadband network isn't very good, I can at least use it to threaten Comcast with after my 2-year deal is up... | |
|
| | djrobx Premium Member join:2000-05-31 Reno, NV |
to banditws6
said by banditws6:But not so much compared to Time Warner. If I could actually see those speeds promised by the 30/3 package, I might be willing to switch away from TWC. The latter wants $80-$85 in my area for 30/5, which I'm not willing to pay. I'd still pay more to TWC. At least for the time being, they do not cap their service and have publicly stated that they don't. The trick to TWC is to call and beg to be put on a promo pricing. I think AT&T still hasn't started enforcing caps on their service yet, but they advertise only 250GB for U-verse. | |
|
| | | Boricua Premium Member join:2002-01-26 Sacramuerto |
Boricua
Premium Member
2013-Mar-21 1:07 pm
Re: Such high prices!said by djrobx:I think AT&T still hasn't started enforcing caps on their service yet, but they advertise only 250GB for U-verse. So far, they haven't capped. I've been with U-Verse since my neighborhood got it (2009) and still downloading freely. Just recently I went from 6 mpbs back down to 3 as the price was getting too much for my wallet. | |
|
| | | banditws6Shrinking Time and Distance Premium Member join:2001-08-18 Frisco, TX |
to djrobx
That is an admitted concern, but the most data I've ever consumed (both up and downstream combined) in a month over the last two years is still just half of what U-Verse's stated cap is so I'm not that worried about it.
What worries me is the technology behind U-Verse and, based on user feedback, how I'm less likely to reach the speeds of the tier I'm paying for than I would be on cable. That's what's kept me from trying U-Verse until now; their top tier at my address is only 3/.5 faster than my TWC standard package, and I might lock myself into a contract only to realize less speed than I see today. | |
|
| | | |
to djrobx
They may not say that, their their TOS says that have an invisible cap. If you use too much yes they can enforce it.
Also as far as U-Verse goes, only certain customers see the 250gig cap. And that for the most part is residential. Business customers do not see that, nor are they charged a modem rental fee. | |
|
| |
88615298 (banned) join:2004-07-28 West Tenness |
88615298 (banned)
Member
2013-Mar-21 10:42 am
PleaseMost people in my area are lucky if they can get 6 Mbps "u-verse". My house only qualifies for 12 Mbps even thou the max for the area is 18. So how is at&t going to magically bump me from 12 to 18 if they can't offer 18 now?
Also does this mean they will be getting rid of the 765 kbps and 1.5 Mbps tiers? If so at least 1/3 of at&t customers in my area are screwed. | |
|
| |
Re: PleaseI got bumped from 12 to 18 about a month ago because they didn't stop charging me for some Redzone HD package. Try to give them a call they might just bump you up | |
|
morboComplete Your Transaction join:2002-01-22 00000
1 recommendation |
morbo
Member
2013-Mar-21 10:55 am
Slow and expensiveThe tiers are slow and expensive. Not a great combination. | |
|
|
lolWhen these speeds come out. I will be able to get it for $40 on Verzion Fios. | |
|
| |
tauwyt
Anon
2013-Mar-21 11:13 am
Re: lolsaid by brianiscool:When these speeds come out. I will be able to get it for $40 on Verzion Fios. And if you end up living in an area controlled by ATT/TWC? Not all cities are created equal when it comes to providers... | |
|
| | |
Re: lolsaid by tauwyt :said by brianiscool:When these speeds come out. I will be able to get it for $40 on Verzion Fios. And if you end up living in an area controlled by ATT/TWC? Not all cities are created equal when it comes to providers... Looks like TWC is testing 20 Mbps on the upload so 50/20 or 75/20 for less money than uverse is very good. | |
|
|
bwclark
Member
2013-Mar-21 11:11 am
Uverse Baby!!WOW!!!
I guess it is good-bye dsl @ 3 mb down for me....here comes the Uverse!! | |
|
|
great!Great! Now how about building out just a little more?!? Maybe every year just upgrade a certain percentage in every state... Too much? Sell off in that state... Tired of being held back.. Specially being not in a rural area :-/ | |
|
| |
Re: great!You can form a co-op and go to AT&T and offer to buy out the area you live in if you and the group think you could do better. I'm sure that they'd love getting rid of an area that they don't want. | |
|
|
Your thoughts on this rumored new pricing?- too little, too late, TOO expensive - still doesn't solve the shortcomings of their TV service - namely the poor HD picture quality & max of 4 HD streams (& VERY few people can even get that!) | |
|
| DrexBeer...The other white meat. Premium Member join:2000-02-24 Not There |
Drex
Premium Member
2013-Mar-21 12:53 pm
Re: Your thoughts on this rumored new pricing?said by dishrich:- too little, too late, TOO expensive - still doesn't solve the shortcomings of their TV service - namely the poor HD picture quality & max of 4 HD streams (& VERY few people can even get that!) Totally agree! I dumped the TV service after a year due to the poor HD quality and the max 3 streams I could have. I had the 12/1 service for ~$40/month which I see no longer exists. So my only option now would be 18/1 @ $51 +TTL? Too expensive if you ask me. | |
|
| KearnstdSpace Elf Premium Member join:2002-01-22 Mullica Hill, NJ |
to dishrich
said by dishrich:- too little, too late, TOO expensive - still doesn't solve the shortcomings of their TV service - namely the poor HD picture quality & max of 4 HD streams (& VERY few people can even get that!) This is their main downfall vs cable. if a home on say Comcast has three multiple tuner DVRs, they can run 6 HD streams and still are able to watch HD on Netflix or download the latest game from Steam at their full subscribed speed. afaik on Uverse if one uses all 4 of the HD streams the internet is impacted. | |
|
PeteC2Got Mouse? MVM join:2002-01-20 Bristol, CT |
PeteC2
MVM
2013-Mar-21 11:57 am
This is why I left AT&TI had AT&T dsl for over 10 years, but left for Comcast for this very reason - speeds versus price. I was paying nearly $50 for a 6/.8 dsl connection, which gave me more like 5.1/.76 with a lousy 150gb/month data cap We couldn't even get Uverse internetuntil fairly recently. Comcast gives me a 20/4 tier for the same $51...and I actually get 22/4.5 speeds, not including the "power-boost" bump (which I believe will be going away anyway. For the past year, Comcast has suspended caps, but when they come back, at least they will be higher than AT&T's. If I went to Uverse 18/1.5 tier, I still wouldbe getting performance somewhat lower than the stated plan. Both services are/were stable here, however, Comcast support has definitely been a few notches above AT&T's support...though frankly no ISP customer support services is exactly "stellar" | |
|
moes Premium Member join:2009-11-15 Cedar City, UT |
moes
Premium Member
2013-Mar-21 12:15 pm
WHY u make me title for!Got to love it, we DSL users, loyal DSL users, keep getting punched in the nuts.
Why oh why can I can not convince an older family member that she can stop depending on these chumps any day now and let me move to a quality provider. | |
|
|
Dear SBCYeah, I know, you like to call yourself "at&t," these days, but nobody's really fooled. Especially when, in traditional SBC fashion, you go out of your way to stretch what you, yourself, have called obsolete technology beyond any sane limit.
So now you're going to try to compete with the cable companies, who've been offering way more speed than you (because they can and you can't) by bonding pairs. Wonderful. What are you going to do when you run out of pairs? And where the pairs exist: How much time and money are you going to continue putting into making that tired old outside copper plant support technology it was never designed to support? How much longer are you going to try to dodge actually investing in modern bandwidth delivery infrastructure?
How much longer are you going to continue short-changing your customers?
My guess: As long as you think you can get away with it. That's why I'm no longer an SBC customer, and will continue no longer being an SBC customer as long as you keep behaving like a 2nd-rate company... Hey! New acronym for you: Second-rate Broadband Company. Yeah...
Jim | |
|
| ••••••••••••••• |
1 recommendation |
cable is shaking in their bootsNo wonder cable is not competing on price. They don't have to when the telco refuses to do so. | |
|
| |
Re: cable is shaking in their bootsI'm thinking its some sorta buddy system they have going on.. | |
|
Kamus join:2011-01-27 El Paso, TX
1 recommendation |
Kamus
Member
2013-Mar-21 1:38 pm
Obsolete speeds before it even gets releasedOuch, has to suck being an AT&T customer with no alternatives. those speeds are what we'd expect from them last decade. | |
|
| silbaco Premium Member join:2009-08-03 USA |
silbaco
Premium Member
2013-Mar-21 3:34 pm
Re: Obsolete speeds before it even gets releasedThey are not last decade, but they are not very competitive either. | |
|
Craiger join:2012-07-05 Chesterfield, MO |
Uverse prices And DSL Prices?Anyone know if those are just Uverse DSL prices or will those also be ATT DSL prices? Or with those prices will Uverse DSL merge with ATT DSL? Thanks. | |
|
| |
Re: Uverse prices And DSL Prices?Most of the DSL serviced area's will be forced over to Uverse in the next couple of years. Area's that do not make Att enough money will be sold to the highest DSL bidder. | |
|
| lkrupp join:2001-07-14 Collinsville, IL |
to Craiger
Regular DSL (or ATT DSL as your call it) is not capable of the speeds mentioned so NO in answer to both your questions. | |
|
|
FACTAT&T does not have the technology to push more than 25 megabits through ages old copper networks. Anything above 25 megabits will be with bonded DSL technologies or not at all over copper. The only other solution that's reasonable is FTTP or COAX networks from the node. So, buy fiber or buy coax docsis to upgrade the 45+mbit tiers. Spend the money to upgrade cusotmers, stop being CHEAP. | |
|
|
FTTP?I assume FTTP will be left to rot on this.
What's worse in my area is that I'd pay AT&T for 45mbit what I pay Charter for 100mbit.
*sigh* | |
|
| BiggA Premium Member join:2005-11-23 Central CT |
BiggA
Premium Member
2013-Mar-21 9:13 pm
Re: FTTP?Probably upgraded to 85mbps while copper users see 100mbps. AT&T is unbelievable sometimes. They built a platform that could gradually upgrade over to FTTH, and they even manage to screw that up! | |
|
| | Cobra11M join:2010-12-23 Mineral Wells, TX |
Re: FTTP?when your racking in billions you don't care nor will you ever care.. AT&T and their old name Ma-Bell is all the same | |
|
David Premium Member join:2002-05-30 Granite City, IL |
David
Premium Member
2013-Mar-21 8:09 pm
I wonder who will give me the $1 now?If I had a dollar for every time AT&T speculation on this site happens, I wouldn't be posting this by now.
The prices aren't set and won't be set till the time is right. Even regulatory would be involved. So I hardly would consider those set in stone till they become available. Even I don't know what they are so I seriously can't see them knowing before the initial launch.
I stopped reading the prices when I saw 3/1 for $41 a month. I know that's way off the marker. | |
|
| •••• |
BiggA Premium Member join:2005-11-23 Central CT ·Frontier FiberOp.. Asus RT-AC68
|
BiggA
Premium Member
2013-Mar-21 9:07 pm
Cable will continue to kick their @$$Whoever has the most bandwidth wins, and cable has 50x the bandwidth that U-Verse does... They just can't compete, as they are playing catch-up, and they can only pair bond their way out of the mess they created for so long. At some point, they will run out of pairs. I wonder how long it will take them to realize that they need to run GPON fiber to compete? | |
|
| •••• |
|
What's the point?1) They throttle the crap out of Uverse. Got the 45 down and two of us couldn't even play Warcraft without randomly lagging out. If only one plays wow it was fine for extended periods. If 2 if us played we got crap service and lag out after a short bit. Had a 10Mbps cable modem at the same time. When I switched the router to the cable modem the two of use could play without lagging out. There is something to be said for advertising high speed then throttling so you can't use the advertised speed. Time Warner does the same with Youtube.
2) You don't get a drop of extra bandwidth for paying for premium. Whether you pay $19 or $100+ your only paying to run past your caps faster if you try to use that speed much at all. | |
|
|
UpgradedJust got my $48 comcast 25/5 hsi increased to 50/10 for free | |
|
famu720 join:2008-03-24 Greenville, SC |
famu720
Member
2013-Mar-22 10:52 pm
AT& new Uverse speedsWhen will AT&T FINALLY wake up and do FTTH @ one gigabit down and up for its entire footprint. The company's cheapskate behavior will bring them to their knees. AT&T is not anywhere near competitve w/ cable or muni-fiber. | |
|
| ••••
|
|
|