how-to block ads
reply to Metatron2008
Re: 45 MB internet service
said by Metatron2008:Of course there are distance limitations, but they are negligible compared to xDSL technology. Most cable networks will be able to bump up the speed of their... say... 10 Mbps connections to 20 Mbps for *all* customers in a given city without having to worry about customers being too far away from a node.
Cable definately has distance limitations. So does fiber in theory. Your limitations are all physics based.
And even with the shielded copper you need fiber as well to have good bandwidth as a cable operator.
And if you want to order a 50 Mbps connection, it is available to *all* people in town, not to only those that live within a certain distance to the VRAD.
Of course you can always find the exceptions, such as an apartment building wired with older cable wires and the owner refusing to upgrade it, and stuff like that.... but generally speaking from a technology point of view, cable will have all speeds available to everyone. With U-Verse, (or any xDSL technology) one could be in the center of town, and still be too far from the local VRAD to receive speeds more then say 12 Mbps.
Fiber.... yeah it has distance limitations, but they really don't apply to FIOS installs. If your local area has FIOS available, you will be able to get ALL speeds offered. Yes, your local GPON nodes need to be configured/ready to offer all speeds, but once that has been done you can get all speeds they offer, and not just the "select speeds that fall in your distance".
AT&T gambled on copper, and made huge investments. But they would have been better off not investing in copper at all, and go FTTH from the get-go. They would have had to invest more money up front with higher install costs and higher equipment cost, but in the long run their network would have been future proofed, and they would have been able to move along with the market a lot more easily by making speed adjustments to customers as market demands.
Now they are struggling to get 45/5 up and running, while cable is doing things like 30/10 and 50/25 for probably about the same price.
Merlin, what is this 45/5 going to cost anyways?
"I reject your reality and substitute my own!"
San Jose, CA
·Pacific Bell - SBC
said by maartena:Would it have made any difference to me? Likely not. Based on what Verizon did, I would be no more likely to have AT&T fiber than now. Plus investing all that capital in fiber, at the expense of the copper plant, and I'd probably not even get the 3mb/s that I was getting. As it is, from checking their site for availability, I'd still only qualify for 3mb/s Internet with U-verse.
AT&T gambled on copper, and made huge investments. But they would have been better off not investing in copper at all, and go FTTH from the get-go.
Ironically, it was their implementation of data caps which drove me away.
~Oh Lord, why have you come
~To Konnyu, with the Lion and the Drum
reply to trparky
said by trparky:Right, it would be more cost productive to just scrap all the copper and deploy the fiber. Why spend $2,000 on wheels on a car worth $500?
But the problem with that plan is that it would take a monumental re-engineering of the telephone cable plant in many areas. It would require all new SAI boxes for new splice points, new routes for cables on the polls and under ground, and a ton of new equipment and that means a monumental amount of money that would need to be spent.
For an economic point of view, even that plan sounds bad. Because you'd end up doing it all over again once that has been proven to be obsolete and unable to keep pace. So again, more money needs to be spent to install fiber.
AT&T would need to run fiber and power to the new mini-vrad, reroute copper pairs to new SAI/crosswhaterverboxes. They would have to dig streets, cut gas, power, sewer lines, much like Verizon did when they deployed fiber.
'Monumental' is an understatement, 'biblical proportions' is a more appropriate term not to mention illogical.
reply to Merlin
said by Merlin:I think the need for more upload is ALREADY here. In recent years, half the nation has been setup with some sort of data sharing and/or backup service such as iCloud, DropBox, Mozi, etc, etc. Sharing stuff to "the cloud" is already here and is becoming ever more popular.
What about it? The needs of the figurative tomorrow are not yet here. When they are, AT&T will be ready.
Working from home, being on a VPN, and then being able to "check out" a document from your home, work on it, and then upload it back to the server is already here. But with 3 Mbps, and even 5 Mbps it holds back production if you are working on engineering drawings that are a few hundred meg in size. The engineers I have talked to that do work from home (my old company promoted working from home part-time due to traffic in Los Angeles area) have compared their ISP's, and those on the 25/25 FIOS plan say it works great. Those on other plans with cable and AT&T say the upload is holding them back too much.
Even the stupid things, like sharing HD video taken with your phone to facebook over the home wifi connection.... takes a lot longer then it should. You can say "We here at AT&T thing 5 Mbps is more then plenty", but I don't think they are being realistic when they say that. People have been asking for more upload for many years, and DOCSIS researchers have responded to that demand and cable companies are starting to deploy that now. FIOS has answered the demand as well. AT&T.... not so much. Oh yeah, they will increase it from 3 to 5.
Now, cable seems to be starting to match Verizon in this area, although we must wait and see if TWC here indeed will offer the plans just launched in other areas.
It is not all about the highest download speeds anymore. It is keeping up with upload speeds as well. And I don't see AT&T having an answer for that in the coming years. I think AT&T is still banking on the customers that don't know the difference or don't care about the difference.
"I reject your reality and substitute my own!"
·Time Warner Cable
said by maartena:That's what I've been trying to stress here. The figurative "tomorrow" is already here, AT&T's just too blind to see it.
I think the need for more upload is ALREADY here.
Boycott AT&T uVerse! | Tom's Android Blog | Galaxy Nexus LiquidSmooth by TeamLiquid
reply to etaadmin
said by etaadmin:I can assure you that I do not stop by here in an official capacity nor have I ever said that I was an average Joe.
That is exactly right, AT&T must know and encourage what his employee is doing otherwise he wouldn't be posting here with such confidence and impunity or he is not an at&t employee and his posts are all speculation.
If he is an average Joe employee he wouldn't be talking to 'analysts' at least not at the level that he is implying.
said by etaadmin:It's not my intent to divulge sensitive company plans. Prediction for 2030, AT&T will still be the fastest and largest network provider on planet Earth...just like they are in 2012.
Now if you ask him about that 'new device' that is supposedly to handle the xx profile he won't tell you anything about it but he is willing to tell you about the marvelous internet plans that at&t have for year 2030.
said by etaadmin:AT&T's leadership is not even aware that this site exists. Don't flatter yourself in thinking that anyone has been dispatched to deal with the anti U-verse agenda spewing from these forums.
It doesn't make any sense and what would at&t gain by paying someone to post the things that he have posted here? If this is true I would like to apply for his job.
The only two reasonable explanations are first that he is not an at&t employee and second that at&t is feeling the heat from recent 'cableco announcements' and are trying to avoid a uverse mass exodus by giving them some hope.
skjWelcome to the far side of realityPremium,ModHost:
ISP b2b etc
reply to fltelman
Since this topic has now become a "pissing match" it is time to shut this one down, as it has gotten off topic from the original question--Anyone have details about a new 45mb internet using a 55 mb bonded profile?
I have no idea if AT&T even cares what is posted here. As far as AT&T "leadership" being aware of this site, while we are independent of AT&T, there is an official presence here that has been approved by AT&T in the direct support forum: »AT&T Direct. We are very fortunate to have that Direct forum here, as we have some great techs who monitor and help out in the Direct forum.
Reality is the leading cause of stress among those who are in touch with it.--Jane Wagner