AT&T Complains About Ads Mocking U-Verse Capacity Crunch
Better Business Bureau gives Time Warner Cable a wrist slap....
Fresh off their wireless ad dispute over Verizon's 3G coverage maps
, AT&T's now taking aim at advertisements by Time Warner Cable. According to a complaint with the National Advertising Division of the Better Business Bureau, AT&T isn't happy about a new Time Warner Cable ad campaign running in several of their markets, which suggests that the AT&T network (and AT&T's VDSL-based U-Verse service) isn't up to the task of delivering both HD signals and quality broadband.
Specifically, in a Time Warner Cable commercial dubbed "Bad Strategy," a football player (representing the Internet) is tackled by a bigger player (representing HD). The announcer then proclaims that "those high def TV signals can make mincemeat out of your Internet service - no wonder your Internet can slow down." A radio announcement makes a similar claim that AT&T's network struggles with providing both HD content and broadband services, causing user connections to "slow down significantly."
Time Warner Cable's not entirely wrong, theoretically. As we've explored
far more frequently than AT&T would like, AT&T's decision to milk copper instead of moving to last mile fiber means that distance limitations remain a thorn in AT&T's side. Some U-Verse customer gateways sync at 100Mbps, but at 1,400 feet from the VRAD. 25Mbps sometime works well at distances of 3,000 feet, but issues arise closer to and beyond 5,000 feet. Many users are further than 3,000 feet -- and with AT&T now offering additional HD streams, things had been getting pinched.
As such, AT&T is playing a constant balancing act involving compression and real time balancing of bandwidth versus HD demand. In late 2008, AT&T had to change their TOS
to "manage customer expectations" in terms of getting fully advertised bandwidth and all HD capacity at the same time. According to an e-mail sent to Broadband Reports
by NAD, the agency has recommended that Time Warner Cable stop running the ads, after AT&T evidence suggested no slowdowns:
NAD further noted that AT&T's evidence demonstrated no degradation of Internet speeds for 96.5% of all U-verse customers viewing one HDTV, no degradation of Internet speeds for 92% of its U-verse customers viewing two HDTVs, and no decrease in average streaming speed during the YouTube test for any U-verse customers. TWC provided no testing to demonstrate that there is any impact on Internet Service due to simultaneous HDTV viewing.
One solution for AT&T if they want people to stop picking on their network? Tell your investors to suck it up for the future of the company, and finally upgrade to fiber to the home. As for Time Warner Cable, they really don't have much room to talk when it comes to skimping on next-generation upgrades, as we noted earlier today
. Fortunately for Time Warner Cable, NAD's ad complaint process is is a toothless pseudo-regulatory agency designed by industry to prevent government intrusion into their advertising -- so Time Warner Cable can technically ignore NAD's recommendations if they'd like.
United States the new Argentina I mean why advertise in a harsh competing way that reflects a reality that is basically non-existent when every business slated in the same market segment just cherry picks, penny pinching for top shareholders and swaps/spins off rural regions so all (except the knowledgeable customer) can be happy? It is not as if either AT&T nor Time Warner in most locations have stiff competition nor the FCC has implemented any effective measures to date ensuring a diverse marketplace of choice.
No side in this thread is entirely right but the BBB seems to be more content with sedating the public for the sake of big business by pacifying advertising rather then actually responding to meaningful threats to the individual, just like every other "consumer advocate" NGO and executive agency has been doing.
What I am simply stating is their is too much consolidation and agreement between business, political and so called non-governmental advocates to ever come up with any compromise that benefits that are meaningful for customers.
Both companies are screwed up. AT&T, with their cheapo FTTN, can't brag about being able to bring decent bandwidth to all their customers.
And Time Warner, who somehow thinks customers won't notice that they're not upgrading to DOCSIS 3.0, while other cable providers are.
What have these guys been smoking?
AT&T Sucks ... BAD Well, let me say I am 1430 ft from a VRAD and although the box "syncs" at MAX 25Mb/s, I can only get "authorized" for 18Mb/s because AT&T's old, horrible system could not "find" the 25Mb/s tier which I was able to order. Even the tech to install it was amazed by their stupidity because he said the speed is there.
So, no ... issues don't start at 5000ft or 3000ft from VRAD, they start EVERYWHERE. I told AT&T I'd PAY CASH for fiber run to my home for higher speeds but they just laugh.
My only other choice was ATT DSL or this which became avail. Verizon FIOS is literally ALL AROUND my town (North, south, east and west of my area!) but they say someone signed a deal with the devil (ATT) so they OWN MY AREA forbidding Verizon from giving me the quality service I want to PAY for. This should be ILLEGAL! There should be a law saying they are forced to provide what service the other competitors give OR hand off their "territory" to them!
Re: AT&T Sucks ... BAD
said by cruz1 :Verizon and AT&T to date exclusively deploy their "greenfield" services in their respective incumbent territories. Those borders were set years ago, in many areas when you still "dialed" people with a dial and "hung up" the receiver on a candlestick hanger. Greenfield is the term for their new services, U-Verse and FIOS respectfully, where they are free from regulatory constraints and/or are compelled to sell certain "UNE" services to competitors like Covad, XO, etc.
Verizon FIOS is literally ALL AROUND my town (North, south, east and west of my area!) but they say someone signed a deal with the devil (ATT) so they OWN MY AREA forbidding Verizon from giving me the quality service I want to PAY for. This should be ILLEGAL! There should be a law saying they are forced to provide what service the other competitors give OR hand off their "territory" to them!
While there is no law that prevents them from deploying out of territory as competitive carriers, there has long been rumors that each company signed confidential agreements against deploying greenfield services in each other territory.
Bottom line, you are far more likely to see a cable company or Google type initiative install FTTH before you ever see FIOS in your neighborhood.
I feel like I'm diagonally parked in a parallel universe.
San Antonio, TX
Re: AT&T Sucks ... BAD
said by cruz1 :Go the the U-verse forum on this site and get the contact information for the Tier II team. I guarantee (from personal experience) they will fix whatever problem exists with little run-around.
Oh, and not to mention the sudden throughput drop from my 18Mb (actually about 14Mb) to about 20k (yes, K) several times a DAY which just pisses people off. I try to stream a radio channel at dial up level 32kbs and several times a day it can't keep up. In addition a few times a DAY service just STOPS for about 1-2 min and then seems back to normal.
I think they have BIG problems. I think every time someone changes a channel on their U-Verse TV, MY speeds drop! At least feels that way...
AT&T screwed up, they had the best situation but blew it AT&T had resale deals with DBS. They should have continued those deals and triple played with VDSL which by itself can certainly complete with cable HSI (for now). Both DBS providers are highly rated and offer excellent content.
But instead AT&T tries to milk the Cu so now they do neither video or HSI "well".
You've Got it Backwards TWC IS wrong, theoretically. If there are any cases of performance degradation (and only AT&T could say this for sure), this would be a technical situation. Theoretically, AT&T's network is designed to sustain the advertised speeds.
I really don't think it's a good idea for Cable, which uses shared bandwidth for users per node, to criticize anyone about performance degradation. VDSL degradation should theoretically be constant (unless it's some outside force not related to HDTV signals); Cable gets slow at the times when people actually want to use the internet (and instead of being a hypothetical without actual evidence - there are many users who have experienced slowdown at peak usage times due to shared channel usage).
Instead of suing TWC, AT&T should start running attack ads and put them in their place.
(Well, no, it would be better if they competed on features and price - but since TWC is resorting to BS I don't really have a problem with AT&T doing the same).
Beverly Hills, CA
Re: You've Got it Backwards
said by Sahrin:I guess you do not have U-Verse otherwise you would not have made the above statement. It is a well known fact that if you are on the highest internet service plan that your profile can handle if you have are using your TV with more than 1 HD then your full internet bandwidth is not available. ie 19/2 profile with Max internet service, 25/3 with Max Plus internet or 32/5 with Max Turbo internet service.
TWC IS wrong, theoretically. If there are any cases of performance degradation (and only AT&T could say this for sure), this would be a technical situation. Theoretically, AT&T's network is designed to sustain the advertised speeds.
said by Sahrin:I guess you do not understand how cable nor how DSL or VDSL2 works, both are shared at some point and neither is a dedicated service, Cable is shared @ the nod and U-Verse is shared at the DSLAM which in effect is almost the same as a Node because everyone in your area is hooked up to the same VRAD, so if the Vrad is overloaded it will effect everyone on that Vrad.
I really don't think it's a good idea for Cable, which uses shared bandwidth for users per node, to criticize anyone about performance degradation.
Also if you turn on your TV that does not effect your internet service at all on cable and on U-Verse depending on the internet plan you choose it could impact your service if you are on any of the max plans depending on your profile like stated above.
Re: You've Got it Backwards All of the internet is shared. that's how it was built and will always be. It's just all shared at different parts.
The truth hurts... but enough to make it go away? I am physically less that 600 feet from my VRAD, and 1200 feet as initially installed. After months of PremTechs trying to troubleshoot the frequent drops/skips/freezes on HD and drops on Dolby audio ("incompatible receiver", "interference from CFL's", my microwave, my cordless phones, street lights, my wireless keyboards/mice, my computer speakers, my RG, poor initial install, being told by a PremTech that "the system is not designed to surf the web while watching a TV", and on and on), AT&T finally "resolved" my issues by slicing a box of CAT5 to my HomeRun - effectively making my distance 2000 feet (a so-called "VDSL sweet spot"). Still have the HD issues (not as bad as they were initially, but they do seem to be increasing in frequency once again) and Dolby drops (which AT&T apparently has known about for years), but through it all, my 18Max has been rock-solid.
Are there bandwidth/equipment/firmware/software issues? Yes. Is AT&T aware there are issues. Yes. Is the pot (TWCC) calling the kettle black? YES! Will I stick around for these issues to be fixed? I am not sure how much longer I can/will wait, but I really would like to see the potential that is U-Verse at the very least approached, if not reached. Even if I do decide to leave, TWCC can rest assured that they will never see a dime of mine.
The copper cash cow is dying. Well thank God for Comcast cable because the mighty AT$T is still trying to milk their speedy copper dialup in my neighborhood.
Comcast has spoiled me rotten!
Re: The copper cash cow is dying. Same issue in former bellsouth territory at my mother's house.
Of course there are only around 80 houses coming off of the same box, so its probably not deemed profitable enough to install a DSLAM.
But they will sell her the overpriced dialup!
anybody care to upload ads to youtube could be intresting
| |MrHappy316Wish I had my tankPremium
Why are either talking "CRAP" Seriously ATT sucks and Time Warner Sucks. Neither are upgrading folks to the newer technologies. If anything the towns and cities should be doing commercials on how both of them suck.
| |dvd536as Mr. Pink as they comePremium
T You can't offer next gen services on yesterdays technologies.
if you can't compete, whine and cry about people who can!
When I gez aju zavateh na nalechoo more new yonooz tonigh molinigh - Ken Lee
Re: technology vs. infrastructure DOCSIS3.0 users can be 10x, 20x more farther than you so the coverage area is substantially higher than uverse, they are getting 50 and now 100Mbps down soon they'll be getting 50Mbps up, they have unlimited HD streams, their HD channels are a lot less compressed than uverse and all that using the same coaxial cable.
Is uverse progress?
·Time Warner Cable
| the HD streams are unlimited until they move them from broadcast to switched digital video but that should not be a problem if they are monitering SDV usage at the tech operations center.|
TWC can add more SDV QAMs to the pool or move a channel back to broadcast at&t cant do that they dont have a fixed broadcast architechure in place like cable does.
TWC started out 8 SDV QAMs and now are getting their divisions to add 8 more SDV QAMs to keep up with the HD channel explosion.
If the DOCSIS 3.0 gets congested and SDV has timeout errors they just splice in a new node which takes about a day to do.
TWC austin kept doing node split after node split when they were doing only 8 QAMs for SDV so they should not have as much problems until they get to 125-150HD channels switched at which point they can move more analogs to digital and rearrange and make those freed up spaces SDV QAMs they just did this with 5 analogs in janauary or do node splits again. but the statistics say 250 homes subscribed/passed per node is a good number for SDV as they have found that at all times about 40-50 channels are tuned to in a single node of course locals have to stay broadcast SD and Digital and so does the entire basic tier SD or they are violating FCC rules.
this is strike 2, yes? So first the 3G wireless network gets hammered about capacity
Now, the residential customer network is getting it?
When are Americans going to be swinging at strike 3 from at&t??
master yoda says, "developing pattern I see. mmhmm"
I had U-Verse when it launched, over the fiber to the premise, when I lived in Richardson, TX. I was an at&t employee at the time, so it wasn't something I had to pay for
I resigned and told at&t to eat my shorts. Not one iota of regret either. They're going downhill, faster than an Olympic bobsled team.
With all these capacity issues, I can't help but wonder, what in the world are they spending any money on? Executive retreats? Lobbyists???
Instead, maybe try doing some regular upgrades on equipment & services, to keep pace with demand?
I'd like to say I'd be shocked, but I know it won't be the case. I can see the writing on the wall already ... ten years later, good ol' at&t will still be using the services & equipment I put in place, prior to resignation.
I see things I worked on in 2001, that are still in use ... and I'd be willing to bet the pattern stays consistent.
And I thought it was sad/pathetic when I found the Usenet systems I built hadn't been so much as maintained by anyone in over a decade. Then they were shutdown. At least I know servers I built stayed online without so much as a hiccup for 5000 days.
stuck a feather in his hat, and called it "macaroni"
Next Gen my a$$ At ~3000ft all they were able to give me was 1HD/2SD and 12mbit/s. That is not what you call next generation. 12mbit is standard for Comcast here (D3) and the HD is very subpar if you have seen HD from Dish/DirecTV/Comcast (in good areas).
Dish plus Comcast Internet is my best choice right now.
·Time Warner Cable
Re: Next Gen my a$$ cable has about 5Gbit bandwidth for a node and when they do channel bonding for D3.0 they can easily get 75-120Mbits tiers but they have to moniter the bandwidth distribution so no slow downs occur and cables HD is on dedicated bandwidth frequencies separate from H.S.I. Cable can splice in a node so subscribers dont have slowdowns and At&t has to build a brand new VRAD which takes days and a cable node can be done in a single day at the max. Cable has to also moniter nodes when they go SDV so there is no please try again later messages.
Re: Next Gen my a$$ In the next several years, I can see ATT slowly upgrading FTTH. By setting up u-verse this way, ATT can get there subscriber rates up and move slowly to FTTH. Why are people bashing ATT? I am on the 32/5 profile. For Larger houses, U-Verse is low on bandwidth, but for me its perfect, and functions better then TWC in my area. ATT is laying a good foundation by using the old copper, but they need to move to fiber all the way soon.
Re: Next Gen my a$$ During the Hurricane in Houston last year ATT drove around for days installing generators to all of their VRADs.
While i was lucky enough to not lose power, i was even luckier to find out that my internet and TV were still up and running.
I have nothing, but good things to say about U-Verse.
So... ATT gets butthurt when someone informs the shortcomings of their service?
They're so easily provoked.
Recently Installed I had this installed and after the tech was here for about 2 hours doing her "testing" she informed me I am about 300 feet beyond the limit to get 2 HD channels so I was limited to 1 HD feed.
Not an issue right now as I only have 1 HD TV. However, soon I am going to have 3 and even their best offer of 2 would not suffice. So I do not expect to be a long term customer and I am not in a contract with them so........
Little Rock, AR
Re: Recently Installed Well they bribe more politicians than anyone so they should be allowed to say and do whatever they want.
F the customer we can lie and steal and do what we want.
What you say we are not doing what we say...watch it fellow or we will have our senators call your senators and sue you.