Illinois Residents Not Thrilled About Losing Their AT&T Lines Wednesday Dec 17 2014 12:10 EDT Tipped by kapil We've discussed at length how AT&T's "IP transition" is being framed as some sort of evolutionary transition toward a "glorious all-IP future," but is really largely about AT&T gutting regulations in order to hang up on POTS (plain old telephone) and DSL users they simply don't want to upgrade. The name of the game is terminating these unwanted users and pushing them users toward significantly more expensive (and capped) LTE wireless service. To make this dream a reality, AT&T and Verizon have been going state by state, trying to convince local governments that if they kill off regulations requiring they keep providing POTS and DSL, those communities will somehow enter telecom infrastructure investment Utopia, where they're suddenly awash in improved technology, networks and opportunity. The latest battlefield state for AT&T is Illinois, where the Chicago Tribune notes a few locals have realized what's afoot and aren't thrilled to be facing the loss of landline (and DSL) services: quote: The Illinois Telecommunications Act is up for review this spring, and big phone companies are expected to push to eliminate a legal obligation to provide landlines, which are still the cheapest and most reliable form of phone service. In a measure being pushed by big telecom provider AT&T in states across the nation, consumer advocates say, the phone company wants to eliminate the act's "obligation to serve" requirement, which gives everyone in the state the right to landline service.
Like in other states, AT&T is giving locals the impression they'll killing DSL and POTS, but they're replacing it with amazing new fiber services: quote: Landline providers such as AT&T operate two networks at the same time — the old Time Division Multiplexing system (your landline) and a new fiber optic system that can provide voice calling and Internet-tied entertainment services. The company has said it plans to abandon the old system by 2020."Illinois consumers are demanding and choosing new communications technologies and so is every sector of our state's economy: education, health care, public safety, transportation, banking and manufacturing," AT&T Illinois President Paul La Schiazza said.
Again though, AT&T's actually frozen their U-Verse deployments, cut fixed-line investment CAPEX repeatedly, and wants to shovel these users on to much more expensive and capped LTE lines. The FCC has launched trials examining the impact killing the PSTN will have on technology (like security services), though few seem to realize that as AT&T and Verizon pull back from unwanted DSL networks, the cable monopoly will only get stronger (read: higher prices, even worse service). |
runnoft Premium Member join:2003-10-14 Nags Head, NC
7 recommendations |
runnoft
Premium Member
2014-Dec-17 1:28 pm
Drop the "obligation to serve" = drop the protectionFrom the Chicago Tribune article: "If [the Illinois Citizens Utility Board] and AARP get their way, Illinois would remain a rotary dial state in a broadband and wireless world," said [AT&T Illinois President Paul] La Schiazza. "This isn't about taking anything away, it's about delivering more of the modern communications services that consumers are demanding."
La Schiazza said in an interview that the old "obligation to serve" clause is no longer relevant. While telephone companies once had a legal monopoly on geographic regions, consumers today have a plethora of options to an "old phone connected to a wall" better ones, and at competitive prices, he said. Yes, all the fixed-income 75+-year-olds are screaming for faster, more, and bills pushing well over $100 per month for entry-level service. If "obligation to serve" should no longer apply to landline phone companies, then surely AT&T has no objection to opening up the lines and airwaves to a bunch more competitors who can probably really deliver faster and more reliable services at lower prices than AT&T. Obligation to serve was part of the equation for monopoly. Drop the obligation = drop the limits on competition. | |
3 recommendations |
If they want to use LTE instead of DSL, fineBUT, they need to offer the same price/caps they have on DSL. Sure you can get 24mb/sec LTE service, BUT you would get the same 250GB cap for $29.99 a month. The fact that they are going from wired to wireless doesn't give them the right to take away 250GB of data for under $30.00 a month. Heck, I'd take LTE at 10mb/sec for $29.99 a month, AS LONG AS I GOT 250GB of data every month. | |
|
|