 ap0803
join:2010-04-10
Guilford, CT | Pair Bonding in Guilford, CT I live 3,600 ft from a VRAD in Guilford, CT (2,600 ft to our mailbox plus 1,000 feet of driveway) and tried to get Uverse a year ago but was told that I was too far away for service.
I received a flier in my mail box yesterday saying we could get service. so I contacted the rep. today who came over to sign us up. I told her of our experience a year ago and that the only way Uverse could be available is via pair bonding. She told me that our VRAD had been updated with pair bonding and that even those customers in the 'RED' zones were now able to be provisioned. She said she would contact me tomorrow (Sun.) with an installation time/date.
Surprising that we received pair bonding before many others in the country. We are only 15 min east of New Haven, CT along the Long Island Sound but Guilford is a very rural area. Loose cows, horses, sheep, goats and the occasional bear sighting are not uncommon.
Stay tuned for more. |
|
| This is very very exciting news! for many in my area were stuck on lines that wont sync above 30 megs, in some cases we sync below 23 megs... (group of me and 3 friends with uverse in my town)
Also many of my clients complain that they were told they cant have uverse because they are too far. (From my on site computer repair clients) |
|
|
|
nishiko7Premium
join:2007-05-01
Pleasant Hill, CA | reply to ap0803
ap0803,
Exciting news indeed! Thanks for sharing with us, and please keep us posted on all the juicy details (gateway used, how done, your new sync/difference, etc).
- Alan |
|
| reply to ap0803
Good news for sure. This will be a way for ATT extend the service to generate more revenue and improve the service further. |
|
chunk73Premium
join:2002-02-22
Fairfield, CT | reply to ap0803
said by ap0803:I live 3,600 ft from a VRAD in Guilford, CT (2,600 ft to our mailbox plus 1,000 feet of driveway) and tried to get Uverse a year ago but was told that I was too far away for service. I received a flier in my mail box yesterday saying we could get service. so I contacted the rep. today who came over to sign us up. I told her of our experience a year ago and that the only way Uverse could be available is via pair bonding. She told me that our VRAD had been updated with pair bonding and that even those customers in the 'RED' zones were now able to be provisioned. She said she would contact me tomorrow (Sun.) with an installation time/date. Surprising that we received pair bonding before many others in the country. We are only 15 min east of New Haven, CT along the Long Island Sound but Guilford is a very rural area. Loose cows, horses, sheep, goats and the occasional bear sighting are not uncommon. Stay tuned for more. I will be very interested to see how this plays out. For some reason I smell sales rep BS. However I do hope I am wrong. Please keep us updated during the entire process. Very curious to see what type of gateway or inid you get if this does pan out. |
|
| reply to ap0803
Im glad people far from the vrad will have a chance to try u-verse. But will this also bring faster profiles/tiers? or is AT&T just looking to extend their reach? |
|
| I am guessing a first to extend service to those who can't due to distance, but maybe we can see this trickle down. |
|
 NuckfutsPremium
join:2003-10-18
Joliet, IL | I just want more bandwidth for HD streams. 6 mb is not cutting it. |
|
Reviews:
 ·RoadRunner Cable
| said by Nuckfuts:I just want more bandwidth for HD streams. 6 mb is not cutting it. That is not going to happen. Pair bonding is to increase the distance from which a residence can be served, not to increase bandwidth for serve-able customers. Also AT&T is going to use any additional bandwidth to make more HD streams available, not to increase the bitrate for individual streams. It's "good enough" for most people now.
If you want a higher bitrate service, switch to someone else. |
|
Reviews:
·RoadRunner Cable
| reply to chunk73
said by chunk73:For some reason I smell sales rep BS. Absolutely. I think it's 98% likely this is bogus. Like when they insist it's all fiber when it's not. |
|
alana
join:2009-10-20
Crystal Lake, IL | reply to ap0803
I checked my address where I am in IL and I still don't qualify. According to Alex last November it was because my loop was too long.
There is hope.... 
/alan |
|
NuckfutsPremium
join:2003-10-18
Joliet, IL Reviews:
 ·AT&T U-Verse
 ·DIRECTV
| reply to MyDogHsFleas
I know what they are using pair bonding for. Did not really need that kind of rundown. I was just "wishing". And I know I would need to switch. I had DishHD before U-Verse. I am more educated on services than you think but thanks anyway. And whose to say they might never? You never know what AT&T is up to next. |
|
| reply to ap0803
I'm no getting the first taste of what the people stuck on the 19 mbps profile were tasting a year ago. The fact that then they could not order the 18mbps service.
I'm seeing all of these ads on TV for speeds upto 24mbps. Ads in the mail and so on. Yet there is nothing I can do to get it, and no details on when that may change. (TBQH, all I care for is more upload.)
I know that's the way the ISP world goes, we cant all have the same service. But its a bit more frustrating to know someone two blocks away from me can, what makes my house so special :P.
It would be in ATT's interest to offer pair bonding to those of us willing to pay the $$ for it. I would be more than willing to wait untill the initial rush of new signups are over, from the people whom it could not reach before.
Again who am I to complain, I'm not on a 19 meg profile. I'm not stuck on 784k (like my friend in the next town just 10 miles north of me.) And I'm not stuck on Huges net :P
But I do live in a city of 50,000 so I expect more.... |
|
Reviews:
·RoadRunner Cable
| reply to Nuckfuts
said by Nuckfuts:I know what they are using pair bonding for. Did not really need that kind of rundown. I was just "wishing". And I know I would need to switch. I had DishHD before U-Verse. I am more educated on services than you think but thanks anyway. And whose to say they might never? You never know what AT&T is up to next. no offense intended, hopefully it was informative to those not as up-to-speed as you.
Certainly my statements about AT&T not making HD streams higher quality are my own opinion/forecast. But I have seen zero from AT&T indicating they are going in this direction. Quite the opposite in fact... statements made at their quarterly investor meetings indicate that they think they can go the opposite way! They think that by improving their proprietary codecs they can squeeze MORE HD streams into the same pipe. |
|
NuckfutsPremium
join:2003-10-18
Joliet, IL Reviews:
·AT&T U-Verse
·DIRECTV
| No offense taken. Most of my basis is the fact that my subdivision is mostly within the 3000' range and I use to locate the phone lines out here and I know how many pairs are buried vs homes and they could in a sense pair bond here with plenty of pairs left over and increase their bandwidth but knowing AT&T they won't, they will just increase streams for a selling point as you stated. Being on the 32/5 profile I wish they had some kind of programming in the VRAD that allowed more bandwidth to your HD feed when you are not using anything else. I only have one HDTV and normally only one feed going. I am rarely downloading anything via internet so I have plenty of room down the pipe so to speak. |
|
| said by Nuckfuts:Being on the 32/5 profile I wish they had some kind of programming in the VRAD that allowed more bandwidth to your HD feed when you are not using anything else. I only have one HDTV and normally only one feed going. I am rarely downloading anything via internet so I have plenty of room down the pipe so to speak. I know this will never happen, but it would be freaking awesome if it did.  |
|
NuckfutsPremium
join:2003-10-18
Joliet, IL Reviews:
·AT&T U-Verse
·DIRECTV
| Yes it would. My HD was not too bad when I first got U-Verse but lately especially since the last firmware update has been way more noticeable of the macroblocking-pixelation. I love the DVR and features though so I deal and do not want a dish on my house again and my only other option is comcrap which is exactly what it is out here, crap. |
|
 djrobx
join:2000-05-31
Valencia, CA
kudos:1
 ·Verizon Wireless..
·RoadRunner Cable
·AT&T U-Verse
 ·VOIPo
·PHONE POWER
| reply to somemightsay
said by somemightsay:said by Nuckfuts:Being on the 32/5 profile I wish they had some kind of programming in the VRAD that allowed more bandwidth to your HD feed when you are not using anything else. I only have one HDTV and normally only one feed going. I am rarely downloading anything via internet so I have plenty of room down the pipe so to speak. I know this will never happen, but it would be freaking awesome if it did. The problem is that the TV channels are multicast streams. When you and your neighbor tune into CBS HD at 8pm, you are both joining the same stream. This makes dynamic compression of HD streams pretty much a no-go.
It did sound like AT&T was planning on having a higher quality stream available (some reported testing "3hd and higher quality streams" many months ago before the 32/5 profile rolled out), but I'm not sure what became of it..
--
AT&T U-Hearse
Your funeral. Delivered.
|
|
 TechnogeezAgape in amazement.Premium
join:2007-01-20
1 edit | reply to doublea
said by doublea:I'm no getting the first taste of what the people stuck on the 19 mbps profile were tasting a year ago. The fact that then they could not order the 18mbps service. I'm seeing all of these ads on TV for speeds upto 24mbps. Ads in the mail and so on. Yet there is nothing I can do to get it, and no details on when that may change. (TBQH, all I care for is more upload.) I know that's the way the ISP world goes, we cant all have the same service. But its a bit more frustrating to know someone two blocks away from me can, what makes my house so special :P. It would be in ATT's interest to offer pair bonding to those of us willing to pay the $$ for it. I would be more than willing to wait untill the initial rush of new signups are over, from the people whom it could not reach before. Again who am I to complain, I'm not on a 19 meg profile. I'm not stuck on 784k (like my friend in the next town just 10 miles north of me.) And I'm not stuck on Huges net :P But I do live in a city of 50,000 so I expect more.... Good point. Is anyone getting a discount for being stuck on the 19/2 profile?
Me neither.
--
The farther one travels, the less one knows. |
|
1 edit | reply to Nuckfuts
said by Nuckfuts:No offense taken. Most of my basis Being on the 32/5 profile I wish they had some kind of programming in the VRAD that allowed more bandwidth to your HD feed when you are not using anything else. I only have one HDTV and normally only one feed going. I am rarely downloading anything via internet so I have plenty of room down the pipe so to speak. Because the video is not encoded at the VRAD, "some kind of programming in the VRAD" wouldn't do anything. The VRAD could allocate more bandwidth for each stream but the stream wouldn't use it. How much bandwidth a stream uses is a function of the MPEG4/H.264 CVBR (constrained variable bit rate) encoding.
It would be possible for AT&T to encode every stream at different bitrates or to use SVC encoding (
»en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scalable_Video_Coding) with proprietary profiles. But it would require additional intelligence in the system to select the correct stream (if multiple bitrate streams are available) or selectively drop or not drop packets if SVC encoding was used. Broadcast quality MPEG4/H.264 encoders are really expensive and SVC isn't widely implemented from what I can tell. But it's all theoretically possible.
At the end of the day, I suspect only a minority cares about HD picture quality enough to make it a deal breaker. So far, U-verse is all about going after the low-hanging fruit (the vast number of those of us who hate cable, that like good DVR, that are more price sensitive, want a more consistent Internet speed) at the lowest cost (hence the FTTN architecture). |
|
