AT&T We only have AT&T in my subdivision. It took me 6 months to get service (not enough ports) when I first moved in. Why not put enough ports in for all homes especially when you are the only provider? Boneheaded decisions like that and not upgrading the network until it's too late. But for people like us we have no choice but to stick with outdated service, or maybe not...
Now it's looking like Charter is going to build out our subdivision. I know I will be switching if they do, please lord! If AT&T had upgraded our area with U-Verse (with TV) I could see myself staying since the U-Verse bundle is a pretty good. AT&T is starting to rethink it's strategies (»AT&T Fails to Sell Aging DSL Markets, May Upgrade) but it maybe too late if they don't get on it quick.
In a year or two, U-Verse won't be serious competition for cable. Charter is already a triple play where each service is $29/month (phone, Internet and video). The Internet speed at that price is 30Mbps. Soon entry-level cable speeds will make U-Verse data look like dialup.
reply to canestim
Uverse is a brand that encompasses different technologies (ADSL2+, VDSL2 and FTTH)
In some areas of Texas at&t is selling ADSL2+ uverse like it was FTTH many people are starting to notice the lie and are switching to cable's DOCSIS3.0 technologies.
At&t is not doing any upgrades is because they know they will never be able to match cable's DOCSIS3.0 in term of speeds, features and most importantly TV picture quality. So the only upgrades that at&t are doing is re-branding their old ADSL as uverse and hope people will not notice.
Is that right? Then how come Fios can?
At&t could easily match and destroy cable speeds. They just dont want to spend the money.
Not over standard copper. Show me a study where a phone line delivers 300+ mbps.
Or are you talking about AT&T doing a complete FTTN/FTTH rollout? Then again, this wouldn't be classified as "easy."