hottboiinnc
ME
join:2003-10-15
Cleveland, OH
 ·Time Warner Cable
·buckeye cable
| reply to bogey780
Re: Congrats
I meant T does not know how to build an brand new network this size. If they did they would have done it right the first time. you and i both know it comes down to them putting the cost on someone else later on down the road. I don't know why you just don't admit that they don't give a damn.
If T knew how to build out a brand new next Generation network they would have skipped the DSL and the copper and went to FTTH. Not the other way around. |
|
bogey780
join:2004-03-19
Here | reply to hottboiinnc
'AT$T doesnt know how to build a network this size either.'
I'll just highlight that sentence and cut out there. Yea, T has no experience in nationwide telco deployment. |
|
hottboiinnc
ME
join:2003-10-15
Cleveland, OH
·Time Warner Cable
·buckeye cable
| reply to bogey780
AT$T doesnt know how to build a network this size either. IF they did they would be building out FTTH instead of their crappy DSL service.
Give it up. we both know that the cable companies will pound T's DSL out of the water before they can even start to offer it to entire cities.
Cable companies are already upgrading their networks and T is slowly doing it. The cable company here where i live has already upgraded speeds once this year and is preparing to do it again soon with DOCSIS 3. and where is T? Still trying to install their crappy VARDs on the corners hoping they can get people to sign up.
Their one thing sounds funny though 700 homes per VARD. Why do i see them on almost every corner in Toledo? Especially in my area? If that was true I wouldnt need to see as many.
Sounds again like someone at T doesnt know what in the hell their talking about.
But as far as affordable! HA! Why is their product priced so much higher than anyone else's? Because even one of their spokespersons said they do NOT compete on price. They compete on product which is a laugh there! they really do not have one!
They limit the amount of streams of TV you can watch and their service is capped at 10/1 for pretty much ever because the only way to compete with anyone is to RE-build out again. Which means more $$$$ from the stockholders and more $$$ from the customers in higher bills. Nobody is going to keep paying for T's screw ups.
Ed is gone they need to scrap the DSL shit and move over to FTTH if they wanna stay in the game. |
|
bogey780
join:2004-03-19
Here
| reply to hottboiinnc
And what training in telecommunications do you have? If you don't know how a network works, how can you expect people to take advice from you on how to build one?
Sure, T could listen to you, and make sure that they make sure no one gets upgraded except a few places. And at a premium rate. Or they could hook up more houses with an affordable quality product. |
|
hottboiinnc
ME
join:2003-10-15
Cleveland, OH
·Time Warner Cable
·buckeye cable
| reply to bogey780
an untested system? how do you figure FTTH by T is untested. They have several markets around the Country that are fully FTTH. My friend is in one in Monroe County MI. Full FTTH build out.
It must not be much if T can afford to build that out and it works fine to this day. hmmmm untested yep sure it is.
but go figure a T employee defending them on a stupid move. and expanding DSL! WTF! Why would you worry about expanding DSL when they should be bringing in something that can compete with DOCSIS 3.0. T is gonna be up a shi& creek when DOCSIS 3 hits their markets. Especially when they have to go out and REBUILD the network AGAIN!
Shareholders will not be happy. |
|
bogey780
join:2004-03-19
Here
| reply to hottboiinnc
Well why didn't cable do it right the first time and run an OC-768 to every house?
This isn't a simple industry. And yes, IPTV availability is growing in each city. Same as DSL availability. And it ads a lot less to the bottom line then spending lots of cash up front on an untested system. |
|
hottboiinnc
ME
join:2003-10-15
Cleveland, OH
·Time Warner Cable
·buckeye cable
| reply to bogey780
a major IPTV Network in every city how do you figure? its always limited by neighborhood. they only offer service where they feel like it and never keep expanding in more areas, its always "limited areas of each city". And changing things out as needed adds extra $$$$ to the bottom line. Why just skip the non-sense spending and just do it right the first time around instead of being stupid. ATT doesn't care though. The customer will end up paying for it and ATT knows it. |
|
bogey780
join:2004-03-19
Here | reply to hottboiinnc
You keep speaking of Uverse and FTTH as if they're mutually exclusive. Especially that last sentence. They're not. Uverse is designed to get a major IPTV network in every city. the infrastructure can be changed out as needed. |
|
RiseAbove
IreCruitU
Premium
join:2004-01-30
| reply to hottboiinnc
said by hottboiinnc  :I don't see how Uverse will be a lower cost to them. In not even 3 years they'll have to come back and replace all of those VARDs with FTTH and leave the big unsightly boxes their to rot and rust. how is that smart? wouldn't it be smarter to just deploy FTTH to the home the first time around instead of spending all the money for install, equipment and everything else twice? I mean com'on. It's stupid not to do it right the first time around. T just doesn't have any plans to do FTTH. especially since what 97% of their "new" build out is UVerse? Exactly what I was thinking when I saw their "deployment" plan awhile ago. A majority of the people were like "what are you an idiot, this makes no sense." Good thing they have leadership who can lead everyone into a giant brick wall time and time again. |
|
pandora
Premium
join:2001-06-01
Outland
 ·ooma
·Future Nine Corpor..
·Comcast
|  reply to hottboiinnc
I'll probably get FTTH to my home from Comcast HSI before AT&T ever delivers even UVERSE. I'm in a UVERSE city, and AT&T doesn't cover UVERSE everywhere. AT&T has got to eventually consider ubiquitous FTTH in my opinion.
--
"People demand freedom of speech as a compensation for the freedom of thought which they seldom use." |
|
hottboiinnc
ME
join:2003-10-15
Cleveland, OH
·Time Warner Cable
·buckeye cable
| reply to openbox9
I don't see how Uverse will be a lower cost to them. In not even 3 years they'll have to come back and replace all of those VARDs with FTTH and leave the big unsightly boxes their to rot and rust.
how is that smart? wouldn't it be smarter to just deploy FTTH to the home the first time around instead of spending all the money for install, equipment and everything else twice?
I mean com'on. It's stupid not to do it right the first time around. T just doesn't have any plans to do FTTH. especially since what 97% of their "new" build out is UVerse? |
|
