site Search:


 
    All Forums Hot Topics Gallery






how-to block ads


 
Search Topic:
Share Topic
Post a:
Post a:
AuthorAll Replies


Rick
Premium,MVM
join:2001-02-06
Waterbury, CT

2 edits

reply to Rick

Re: I don't know whether most Verizon investors are for

Hmm...interesting. A story out today talking about the problem AT&T is having with their IPTV service, namely,

"Sources say dropped packets are big hangup"

"packet loss to the tune of two packets of data per minute. “A lost video packet is more than 1,400 bytes of information, and that's going to cost you a half second of video,”

Like i've questioned above, is the slow rollout really just problems with the service they can't seem to get fixed?
»Trouble With AT&T's IPTV

And, WORSE yet, is that packet loss because of the old copper they're trying to continue to use as a part of this system they're putting together, or trying to anyway...in a hurry?

Like i've stated above, it just seems to me there are some unanticipated problems going on. Now, that story comes out which seems to support my theory which you've been so quick to shoot down CWH while questioning my credibility at the same time...claiming "I'm making false statements".

Well, is lightreading making false statements too now CWH?

I'm NOT saying that someone shouldn't expect some problems with a new service or that AT&T is wrong in taking their time to try to do it right..because they should.

Once again, my issue goes back to their trying to save money versus what Verizon is doing and the fact that Verizon seems to be smoking them with their rollout.

I can't help but to wonder how AT&T will fix this because it seems to me that trying to pump video over old Copper lines is very condusive to having transmission and/or packet loss problems.

cwh

join:2006-05-14
San Antonio, TX

said by Rick:

Hmm...interesting. A story out today talking about the problem AT&T is having with their IPTV service, namely,

"Sources say dropped packets are big hangup"

"packet loss to the tune of two packets of data per minute. “A lost video packet is more than 1,400 bytes of information, and that's going to cost you a half second of video,”

Like i've questioned above, is the slow rollout really just problems with the service they can't seem to get fixed?
»Trouble With AT&T's IPTV

And, WORSE yet, is that packet loss because of the old copper they're trying to continue to use as a part of this system they're putting together, or trying to anyway...in a hurry?

THe article mentioned that packet loss is happening at the head end, not at the customer end. However the article was short on details on the packetloss. I can say that video quality has improved since my install in may. Small errors are much less frequent and I have not seen a green screen in quite a while. These problems are being worked out.

Like i've stated above, it just seems to me there are some unanticipated problems going on. Now, that story comes out which seems to support my theory which you've been so quick to shoot down CWH while questioning my credibility at the same time...claiming "I'm making false statements".
I am not sure why you think there would not be some problems wth building a nationwide video distrubtion system from scratch. This is the exact reason on why you would do a controlled roll out, so problems can be worked out before you start scaling up.

Well, is lightreading making false statements too now CWH?
I would not say they are making false statements, but they are short on details. I am not saying there are not problems, but I think it is quite obvious that lightspeed is not anywhere near diaster status.

I'm NOT saying that someone shouldn't expect some problems with a new service or that AT&T is wrong in taking their time to try to do it right..because they should.
So dont fault them for not having a faster rollout when they are trying to work any problems out. I would be interested to know how you would build a national video distribtion system and have it ready to go error free without any real world testing.

Once again, my issue goes back to their trying to save money versus what Verizon is doing and the fact that Verizon seems to be smoking them with their rollout.
And tell me again how long verizon kept fios only in keller, texas? You know that was their controlled test area. You do remember that right?

I can't help but to wonder how AT&T will fix this because it seems to me that trying to pump video over old Copper lines is very condusive to having transmission and/or packet loss problems.
I dont know how you arrived at that as the only packet loss mentioned in the article was at the head end.


Rick
Premium,MVM
join:2001-02-06
Waterbury, CT

Cwh, i'm curious about something. In looking around BBR, do you happen to notice anything somewhat strange happening between Verizon and AT&T?

I mean, between the caliber of the positive news stories..the number of people subscribing to their new services..the support of the public here who are all paying broadband customers...the negative versus positive headlines on the front page BBR news stories...

the excitement in the verizon fios forum...

Notice any difference?

I think someone would have to seriously be almost deaf dumb and blind to not notice it.

And I just don't think all these people,news stories..and whatever, are wrong.

I think there's a real divergence here in the way these companies are approaching their next generation livelyhoods, and AT&T's isn't the right way.

I, am a former Adelphia customer who was just apparently sold to Comcast the 1st of this month. I say apparently because I have yet to receive official notice of that...and except for the charge that just hit my account that says Comcast, I really have nothing else to go on other than that.

What I anticipate soon having with them is 6MB speeds..powerboost that doubles that..and the ability for 10.00 more per month to up that to 8MB/16MB respectively.

Along with that, today, I can get HDTV..4 or 5 premium channels..all for about 120.00 per month plus 7.95 for a hdtv/dvr box..and another 4.95 for DVR service.

That, is what AT&T WOULD be competing with basically TODAY and in the very near term if they even had their uverse here today to offer me anything.

The big question is, what will this look like by the time they ARE here and CAN start to compete. This is what I mean by next generation. This is next generation for them...and the competition.

I think that by that time Comcast will be well on their way to instituting docsis 3.0. I won't go into those specifications, but I think you know what that means.
Comcast will surely offer digital voice here by then also, seeing we reportedly already have the most advanced cable network in the State of Ct here in my area.

CWH..before they are even out of the gate with uverse..I think they're finished.

I am amazed that cooler and smarter minds haven't prevailed at AT&T corporate to do some very basic math here that even many of us BBR'ers could do for them.

I think those minds ARE at work at Verizon HQ..and despite their shareholders screaming about short term profits..they're manning the torpedoes and putting their shareholders through the pain.

They've got to have that to compete with Cable.
Cable is commanding the higher prices because it's the advanced service.

I don't think that AT&T will be totally out of the game with this plan, but I do think that in the next 2 to 3 years, their uverse will be remarkably like their lower end dsl is today compared to the competition.

In other words, what today is 384k to 1500k service..competing with what cable is today..versus uverse in 2 or 3 years time at 5 or 6MB..trying to compete with 3 and 4 times those numbers with cable.

Here's what else I fear for them. Why on earth would anyone really want anything that constrained, when it comes to VIDEO.
By then, the U.S. will be ALL digital,right?
No more analog. It's going Kaput.

If at&t cannot deliver multiple hdtv streams, why are people even going to want to use them?
Why should they use them when prices are available for companies that do right now?

If AT&T wants to make their mark, they need to have something even BETTER..and be more cost effective.
People just aren't going to switch from what works today
for the unknown.

Anyways, we will see. But 15 to 20 markets by years end?
I think they need to move mountains to do anything close to that by years end now.

I mean, seriously, do you see that happening now with it being mid August already?
And, you've already conceded above I think that if that number doesn't happen, then there are problems.

Is that problem called packet loss?

I guess we'll have to see.

AT&T..if you're listening..here is my challenge.

Change to fiber to the home.
Bring it to my neighborhood.
Price it competitively with Comcast.

And, i'll take it..and the next anvil to fall in my avatar will be on Comcast...

And the new AT&T Rick...will be born.


--
The life you help save just might be your own Team Discovery


cwh

join:2006-05-14
San Antonio, TX

said by Rick:

Cwh, i'm curious about something. In looking around BBR, do you happen to notice anything somewhat strange happening between Verizon and AT&T?

I mean, between the caliber of the positive news stories..the number of people subscribing to their new services..the support of the public here who are all paying broadband customers...the negative versus positive headlines on the front page BBR news stories...

the excitement in the verizon fios forum...

Notice any difference?

Yes I am not disagreeing fiber is a more interesting service, but VDSL is not going to be bad either. YOu also keep thinking that what is offered today will still be the same in a few years. We both know will not be the case with any service.

Thursday, 23-May 16:29:52 Terms of Use & Privacy | feedback | contact | Hosting by nac.net - DSL,Hosting & Co-lo
over 13.5 years online © 1999-2013 dslreports.com.
Most commented news this week
Hot Topics