 
MarkyD
Premium
join:2002-08-20
Oklahoma City, OK
clubs: | Bonding. When this comes around I may give them another shot. Until then...they can't touch the speed I'm getting with Cox.
--
MCSE, ACSA, and a lot more | |
|
 | MyDogHsFleas
Premium
join:2007-08-15
Austin, TX
 ·AT&T U-Verse
 ·AT&T Southwest
| Re: Bonding. said by MarkyD  :When this comes around I may give them another shot. Until then...they can't touch the speed I'm getting with Cox. I've tried to correct Karl a few times but he keeps putting out this canard that "bonding is to increase speeds". He's wedded to the narrative that AT&T has boxed themselves into 10/1.5 as the max because they stupidly did not run new fiber to every home. Unfortunately it's just not true.
AT&T has plenty of headroom to increase Internet connection speeds well above their current 10/1.5 top offering, without resorting to pair bonding.
First, many users synch with the VRAD well above the current allowed rate of 25 Mb/sec. For example I synch at 45 Mb/sec. AT&T could easily sell new higher speeds to those users.
Second, AT&T currently allows for 2HD+2SD+VoIP within the 25 Mb/sec budget, along with 10Mb/sec Internet. They could easily provide other profiles that increase the Internet speeds at the expense of VoIP service or TV service.
Third, the rollout of VDSL2 (which is already supported in the VRAD and the STB) will increase speeds significantly.
I think what AT&T will primarily use pair bonding for is to increase the coverage range of current VRADs in less-densely-populated areas, rather than to increase speeds. | |
|
| |
MarkyD
Premium
join:2002-08-20
Oklahoma City, OK
clubs:
 ·Cox HSI
| Re: Bonding. said by MyDogHsFleas :AT&T has plenty of headroom to increase Internet connection speeds well above their current 10/1.5 top offering, without resorting to pair bonding. I know this is right...I was on U-Verse FTTP, and still could not get anything higher than 6mbps at the time (before 10mbps tier came out.)
Pretty pathetic. | |
|
| | | MyDogHsFleas
Premium
join:2007-08-15
Austin, TX
·AT&T U-Verse
·AT&T Southwest
| Re: Bonding. said by MarkyD :said by MyDogHsFleas :AT&T has plenty of headroom to increase Internet connection speeds well above their current 10/1.5 top offering, without resorting to pair bonding. I know this is right...I was on U-Verse FTTP, and still could not get anything higher than 6mbps at the time (before 10mbps tier came out.) Pretty pathetic. AT&T is doing this purposefully, and are actually being rather successful. They are lining themselves up vs. cable and are doing just enough to compete for the mass market, and not trying to chase small markets (i.e. those who want "super-fast" Internet connections). They see no need to spend money or energy creating new offerings to serve a small market (like us who would actually consume such a thing). As a result they are installing U-verse just as fast as they can, and expanding like crazy (they seem to announce a new city rollout once or twice a month). This is the same reason they did not opt to do a full FTTH buildout but stopped at the node (except for new developments where they are doing greenfield installs of FTTH). | |
|
| | 
Neyland
join:2003-02-04
USA
| First I think the whole house DVR is fantastic. Currently we have to do the same thing with a multiplexer. Wonder how they send a HD signal to the remote TV?
But, 2HD+2SD+VOIP isn't enough for our family now. We very often are either recording or watching 4 HD feeds at one time. If they allow OTA HD recording like Sat then it might solve some issues. | |
|
| | | MyDogHsFleas
Premium
join:2007-08-15
Austin, TX
·AT&T U-Verse
·AT&T Southwest
| Re: Bonding. said by Neyland :First I think the whole house DVR is fantastic. Currently we have to do the same thing with a multiplexer. Wonder how they send a HD signal to the remote TV? They don't. They send a Video over IP stream from the remote DVR to the local STB (non-DVR). Then the local STB sends it to the TV it's attached to.
But, 2HD+2SD+VOIP isn't enough for our family now. We very often are either recording or watching 4 HD feeds at one time. If they allow OTA HD recording like Sat then it might solve some issues.
Yep. U-verse is not a premium, top-of-the-line, does-everything-you-want, most-HD-channels, best-quality service -- at all. I think DirecTV owns that space.
U-verse is more a competes-reasonably-well-for-most-cable-customers service. | |
|
| | | |
Neyland
join:2003-02-04
USA | Re: Bonding. So I guess that's a no on the OTA recording?
Is that Video over IP stream from the remove DVR via Cat5 or your internal phone lines? | |
|
| | | | | MyDogHsFleas
Premium
join:2007-08-15
Austin, TX
·AT&T U-Verse
·AT&T Southwest
| Re: Bonding. said by Neyland :So I guess that's a no on the OTA recording? Right, the boxes do not have ATSC tuners.
Is that Video over IP stream from the remove DVR via Cat5 or your internal phone lines?
It's over your home IP network. Depending on how this is wired, it can be Cat5/6 or HPNA over coax. Not phone wiring. | |
|
| | | | | | |
| | 
Matt
Gone playing Dragon Age Origins
Premium
join:2003-07-20
Jamestown, NC
·North State Commun..
| said by MyDogHsFleas :AT&T has plenty of headroom to increase Internet connection speeds well above their current 10/1.5 top offering, without resorting to pair bonding. First, many users synch with the VRAD well above the current allowed rate of 25 Mb/sec. For example I synch at 45 Mb/sec. AT&T could easily sell new higher speeds to those users. And so do the folks on fiber, but according to AT&T, until they can get higher speeds to EVERYONE, they won't because they want to keep the user experience "consistent."
So, it really boils down to what percentage of people can get higher speeds without pair bonding?
--
Linux Haters Unite! | |
|
| | | MyDogHsFleas
Premium
join:2007-08-15
Austin, TX
·AT&T U-Verse
·AT&T Southwest
| Re: Bonding. said by Matt :said by MyDogHsFleas :AT&T has plenty of headroom to increase Internet connection speeds well above their current 10/1.5 top offering, without resorting to pair bonding. First, many users synch with the VRAD well above the current allowed rate of 25 Mb/sec. For example I synch at 45 Mb/sec. AT&T could easily sell new higher speeds to those users. And so do the folks on fiber, but according to AT&T, until they can get higher speeds to EVERYONE, they won't because they want to keep the user experience "consistent." So, it really boils down to what percentage of people can get higher speeds without pair bonding? Aw c'mon. That "consistent user experience" crap is just their PR spin on the truth, which is that they choose not to offer a higher speed tier for business reasons. If they decided to go to a higher speed tier that you had to qualify for, or that you had to trade off against VoIP or TV, they would. And they'd have some other PR spin to explain how it is really good for you that they did that. | |
|
S_engineer
join:2007-05-16
Chicago, IL | just curious.... just how much is att asking per month for this "experience"?
and will it be enough to finance the rebuilding of the deathstar?
--
The "Lifetime" channel is responsible for 83% of all divorces...Robert Ginty | |
|
| MyDogHsFleas
Premium
join:2007-08-15
Austin, TX
·AT&T U-Verse
·AT&T Southwest
| Re: just curious.... said by S_engineer :just how much is att asking per month for this "experience"? see »att.com/uverse for pricing and package. On the whole, it's competitive with cable (who they see as their competitor). They don't overlap with FIOS, and they don't view satellite as a competitor, really. | |
|
ptrowski
Got Helix?
Premium
join:2005-03-14
Putnam, CT
clubs: | Nice! I like the whole house idea. My wife has mentioned a few times she would like to have a feature like this. Too bad I can't get U-verse in my area. | |
|
| magnushsi
join:2002-11-06
Cedar Springs, MI | Re: Nice! Both Moto and SA systems support multi-room DVR. Has been around for a few years. I don't know if it was poor marketing or what, but the take off has been very limited. Ask your cable provider if they offer it. | |
|
| | MyDogHsFleas
Premium
join:2007-08-15
Austin, TX
·AT&T U-Verse
·AT&T Southwest
| Re: Nice! said by magnushsi :Both Moto and SA systems support multi-room DVR. Has been around for a few years. I don't know if it was poor marketing or what, but the take off has been very limited. Ask your cable provider if they offer it. I don't know of *any* cable provider that offers multi-room DVR... do you? | |
|
| | | magnushsi
join:2002-11-06
Cedar Springs, MI | Re: Nice! I know Time Warner, Charter and Comcast have all deployed multi-room DVR in some markets. | |
|
| | | | MyDogHsFleas
Premium
join:2007-08-15
Austin, TX
·AT&T U-Verse
·AT&T Southwest
| Re: Nice! said by magnushsi :I know Time Warner, Charter and Comcast have all deployed multi-room DVR in some markets. Which ones? I'm curious. | |
|
| | | | 
dvd536
as Mr. Pink as they come
Premium
join:2001-04-27
Phoenix, AZ
| said by magnushsi :I know Time Warner, Charter and Comcast have all deployed multi-room DVR in some markets. areas where fios is i bet 
--
When I gez aju zavateh na nalechoo more new yonooz tonigh molinigh - Ken Lee | |
|
| | | | | magnushsi
join:2002-11-06
Cedar Springs, MI | Re: Nice! It's been available for a lot longer than FIOS has been around...  | |
|
| | | |
| | | | MyDogHsFleas
Premium
join:2007-08-15
Austin, TX
·AT&T U-Verse
·AT&T Southwest
| Re: Nice! Good solution but it's different from Whole Home DVR.
With your solution, you have one video output on the DVR driving two TVs. Both TVs have to watch the same stream. If that's OK with you all well and good.
What WHDVR does, however, is allow you to access the DVR's recorded shows from a remote TV completely independent of what the DVR is doing at the local TV (watching a live stream or playing back a different recorded stream). Both TVs can be in use at once, doing different things. | |
|
| | | | |
Neyland
join:2003-02-04
USA
1 edit | Re: Nice! Yea we have 3 watchers in the house. Two dual tuner DVRs and a DVD player on the Modulator (one of the dual tuner DVR outputs is tied to the set big TV). These are then pumped out to the house coax in a structured wiring closet.
We take the OTA from outside and splice the modulation on top of it so every tv in the house has access to OTA + the four video feeds from the DVR and DVD player.
We only pay for two DVRs that then feed the whole house.
It seems based on your explination that it's a better solution (one we've been waiting on trust me) but you'd have to still have a box on each tv in the house plus the networked DVR. | |
|
| |
ptrowski
Got Helix?
Premium
join:2005-03-14
Putnam, CT
clubs: | We went from cable to DirectTV, ditched cable. The nice thing with DTV is being able to log into the account online and schedule the DVR from there, picking your receiver. | |
|
| | | MyDogHsFleas
Premium
join:2007-08-15
Austin, TX
·AT&T U-Verse
·AT&T Southwest
| Re: Nice! said by ptrowski :We went from cable to DirectTV, ditched cable. The nice thing with DTV is being able to log into the account online and schedule the DVR from there, picking your receiver. Actually U-verse has this feature also.
Personally, I've stuck with Time Warner Cable (despite misgivings) for TV service. I use a SlingBox to do my DVR scheduling over the Internet. It's nicer in many ways than a Web-based service, because you see exactly the same screen and remote control as you would at home, and can access all the features (including reviewing and deleting recorded programs). Plus, you can watch the damn show on your PC, not just schedule its recording. | |
|
| | | | 
PoloDude
Premium,VIP
join:2006-03-29
East Northport, NY
·Verizon FIOS
| Re: Nice! How can it record 4 shows at once? do they mean 2 shows at a time on two different dvrs? I am sure they don't mean 4 shows at once on one dvr (quad tuner?) If so this still is not that great. Other systems alreay have the multiroom dvr and you can record 2 shoes at a time on each one. Have 7 dvrs? record 14 shows at the same time.
I guess thats what happens when you stick with copper to the house.
--
I'm not as good as I once was
but I'm as good once
as i ever was. | |
|
| | | | | MyDogHsFleas
Premium
join:2007-08-15
Austin, TX
·AT&T U-Verse
·AT&T Southwest
| Re: Nice! said by PoloDude :How can it record 4 shows at once? do they mean 2 shows at a time on two different dvrs? I am sure they don't mean 4 shows at once on one dvr (quad tuner?) Yes they do mean exactly that. And there are no tuners at all, it's an IP stream, not RF.
If so this still is not that great. Other systems alreay have the multiroom dvr and you can record 2 shoes at a time on each one. Have 7 dvrs? record 14 shows at the same time.
I think you're missing the basic concept of "multiroom DVR". It means a single DVR that you can access from a different STB connected to a different TV. It does not mean "multiple DVRs".
I guess thats what happens when you stick with copper to the house.
That's got nothing to do with it, you're just buying into the "AT&T is stupid for not running fiber to every house for free" narrative. | |
|
| | | | | quirt
join:2003-09-23
North Richland Hills, TX
| said by PoloDude :How can it record 4 shows at once? do they mean 2 shows at a time on two different dvrs? I am sure they don't mean 4 shows at once on one dvr (quad tuner?) It does record 4 shows at once. This is not satellite which needs physical tuners to get the job done. | |
|
NOCMan
Verizon Fios User
Premium
join:2004-09-30
Flower Mound, TX
| Verizon is behind in the home dvr now I hated their DVR and I got a Tivo. They've had the home media function for awhile. I like the idea of being able to record 4 shows. I just wonder if it has the space so you do not record over content too fast.
--
Mac Chatter
»www.macchatter.net | |
|
| EPS
join:2008-02-13
Hingham, MA | Re: Verizon is behind in the home dvr now Speaking of VZ's whole home DVR, when are they going to get the upgrade to allow it to record HD? Long overdue, I think... | |
|
| | 
djrobx
join:2000-05-31
Valencia, CA | Re: Verizon is behind in the home dvr now According to a post I saw on AVS, it sounds like FIOS has multiroom HD capability enabled in new firmware it started rolling out in Oregon. | |
|
en102
Canadian, eh?
join:2001-01-26
Valencia, CA
·RoadRunner Cable
·DSL EXTREME
| Uverse has new DVR, but no VoIP yet in SoCal AT&T's still trying to milk that POTS line to death.
Uverse Voice not available, VoIP not available
Uverse voice for $40 gives the same sevice as POTS for $58/month. Call Vantage gives similar (now dead) for $25
If they ever want me back as a customer, I need something that works... Uverse packages are too expensive as they are for just one or the other.
--
Canada = Hollywood North | |
|
| 
Deckoh
i have..so there for i have
Premium
join:2002-07-24
San Diego, CA | Re: Uverse has new DVR, but no VoIP yet in SoCal en102, i have had voip for about 5 months now, suprised you dont? | |
|
| |
en102
Canadian, eh?
join:2001-01-26
Valencia, CA
·RoadRunner Cable
·DSL EXTREME
| Re: Uverse has new DVR, but no VoIP yet in SoCal San Diego (Chula Vista) is a different market.
Just like AT&T had 3G service a few years before the rest of SoCal, this goes with Uverse as well.
Uverse has been available here for over a year... just not voice.
--
Canada = Hollywood North | |
|
| | | |
siouxmoux
join:2007-09-25
1 edit | Maybe for Once SF/SJ Silicon Valley will get The Latest According to the letter, the upgrade is a free and automatic software update of existing gear. Yea. at least I can keep my Current Motorola DVR and not have them swap out for Cisco STBs.
And now ATT would make their target dates to add more HD channels like CSN BA HD before the end of 4Q and upgrade UV to line bonding for faster Net access for Q1 2009, that would be great. | |
|
| MyDogHsFleas
Premium
join:2007-08-15
Austin, TX
·AT&T U-Verse
·AT&T Southwest
| Re: Maybe for Once SF/SJ Silicon Valley will get The Latest said by siouxmoux :And now ATT would make their target dates to add more HD channels like CSN BA HD before the end of 4Q and upgrade UV to line bonding for faster Net access for Q1 2009, that would be great. You mean FSN I think not CSN. U-verse has been pretty poor at picking up the HD RSNs.
Check out my post under the "Bonding" topic for the real scoop -- it's not really about Internet speed. | |
|
| |
deandashl
join:2008-08-06
Osseo, MN
2 edits | Dear Comcast.... I and millions? of others have been suffering with your garbage MOTO DVR's for almost 5 YEARS now and they STILL don't really work right.
Please read article above and let me know when your version will be available. I will start giving you my updated addresses after 2012, since anything before that is a waste of time.
LOL | |
|
| EPS
join:2008-02-13
Hingham, MA | Re: Dear Comcast.... The worst part about the Moto DVRs is that you get the exact same things (with IP features I guess) from Verizon for FiOS... and they're just as bad. | |
|
|
siouxmoux1
@sbcglobal.net | Yes Comcast Bought out FSN BA. Its now CSN BA Yes Comcast Bought out FSN BA. Its now CSN BA | |
|
|
|
|
U-verse Whole Home DVR Arrives
·