 Rob2647
join:2008-08-12
Rochester, MI | Sign me up! If I can. I'm about 1500 feet from the VRAD. 18/1.5 sounds great. Keeps Comcasts 16/2 tier at bay. | |
|
 | ShadezeRO
join:2006-04-24
Fort Lauderdale, FL | Re: Sign me up! It's actually a pretty good package.
I wouldn't mind something like this.
10 seemed a bit too low, but 18/1.5 sounds good to me.
Too bad South FLA wont see this for a while =( | |
|
| | 
knightmb
Everybody Lies
join:2003-12-01
Franklin, TN
 ·AT&T DSL Service
| Re: Sign me up! Speed sounds good, but the whole "still in the lab" thing needs to go away. They just need to run it out somewhere, at least a couple of homes and see what happens.
I hate it when the Marketing people get ahead of the smart people. I'm sure some guy somewhere said "Yeah, gets up to 18 Mbps in the lab but not sure about real work tests yet", but they stop listening after "18 Mbps" as they hurry to get out the word. 
--
Fight NebuAD and the like:
Click Here to pollute their data | |
|
| | | 
yawn
@rr.com | Re: Sign me up! Charter delivered 17mbs to me in 2006 (and I didn't have to share it with the AT&T/NSA spooks) | |
|
| | | | 
Icon
Time Keeper
Premium,VIP,MVM
join:2004-01-07
Crockett, TX | Re: Sign me up! But you did have to share it with the other couple hundred users on that node.  | |
|
| | | | | 
Neyland
join:2003-02-04
USA | Re: Sign me up! As long as you get the advertised speeds when you need it without having to turn off all the TVs and DVRs in your house.... | |
|
XBL2009
------
join:2001-01-03
Chicago, IL | About time AT&T The upload still sucks...18/18 for $65 would be OK though. | |
|
| |
| | 
tad2020
join:2007-07-17
Orange, CA
·AT&T DSL Service
| Re: About time AT&T The fastest speed I can get from AT&T pre-uVerse was 1.5/256. I'm still not even sure if they've installed uVerse for my block or not. I haven't seen anyone else get it and the last time I tried to sign up for AT&T DSL they went through all the motions of installing it, disappeared for 2 weeks, couldn't tell me over the phone what was the status of the order, later tell me I can't get DSL but only after I've gotten the first bill, and they continued to try billing me for a few months afterwards. | |
|
jlachowin
join:2008-05-29
Milwaukee, WI | Standalone? Is it for sure now that U-Verse internet is available as a standalone? I have DirecTV and I don't want Uverse TV, just Uverse phone and this new 18Mbps internet! | |
|
| Rob2647
join:2008-08-12
Rochester, MI | Re: Standalone? You can order just internet and phone. | |
|
|
XBL2009
------
join:2001-01-03
Chicago, IL | Order TV and internet and then after 30 days cancel the TV and you can get a check for $200. At least that's the deal on their site right now. | |
|
| |
| | 
en102
Canadian, eh?
join:2001-01-26
Valencia, CA
 ·RoadRunner Cable
·DSL EXTREME
| Re: Standalone? I'll wait until my 1 year discounted with TWC is up to try it... hopefully by then they'll have VoIP service in place. I am ~10 houses from the VRAD, and they did install 'new' POTS wire all the way to the node 2 years ago after SCE melted AT&T's wire.
--
Canada = Hollywood North | |
|
| | shoan
join:2006-02-27
Benton, AR
| It is true that you can get UVERSE internet without TV if you are in an area that does not have DSL. That is exactly what I have. I am on the 10/1.5 package and I can say that I love it so far. Would gladly give them 10 more dollars to almost double my download speed. It makes watching Netflix online so much better with the 10 MB connection as is. I know for the most part the 18 would be over kill but what the heck I have 10 dollars lying around the washing machine each month from pocket change. | |
|
Done_Posting
Shoot to kill
Premium
join:2003-08-22
Toledo, OH | Wow, this is an awesome deal! And they even throw in the direct connection to the NSA's spy center at no additional cost!!!
Screw AT&T.
- Tate
| |
|
| blips
join:2001-04-17
Addison, IL
| Re: Wow, this is an awesome deal! said by Done_Posting  :And they even throw in the direct connection to the NSA's spy center at no additional cost!!!Screw AT&T. - Tate You owe me 1 LCD monitor (as I spit my coffee all over mine) | |
|
| fiberguy
My views are my own.
Premium
join:2005-05-20
| said by Done_Posting :And they even throw in the direct connection to the NSA's spy center at no additional cost!!!Screw AT&T. - Tate It's SOOOOOO nice that people do remember this little part of the equation, and not let the issue of speed dangling in their face cloud their mind.
As funny as your post was, it's true. People come here daily bitching about things the big corps do, but as soon as they see a new speed tier its "ya!! more speed!" and cream their monitors. (with drool.. minds out of the gutter) .. these are the same people, usually, that say "speak with your wallet" .. and then don't. I'm much happier with Qwest & Comcast, both who didn't sell out to the government at the expense of their customer's rights. | |
|
| |
Rob 23
@windstream.net
| Re: Wow, this is an awesome deal! fiberguy--- Look-up the ceo of AT&T for 1996 to 2002 (the year of the dirty deed). Now look-up the ceo/director of AT&T/comcast for 2002 to 2004 SAME GUY. Now look-up the isp comcast used for internet & voice traffic from 2002 to 2006 YES IT WAS AT&T. Comcast knew all about what the nsa was doing with your voice e-mail web pages and still sent your traffic over the ATT network. | |
|
| | | fiberguy
My views are my own.
Premium
join:2005-05-20
| Re: Wow, this is an awesome deal! This post makes totally NO sense what so ever. Sorry.
In 2002, the CEO of Comcast wasn't who you claimed it to be. There wasn't an ATT/Comcast. Comcast took over in 2002 and it was Comcast.. the Roberts family.
Even then, knowing anything about this situation, it's not like a company can simply unplug from one provider and plug into another - there's something called "contracts".. besides, the calls were monitored at in the offices.. not the upstream provider. So how is this Comcast's fault again?
Again, you need to do some more thorough research on this. 1996 to 2002 wasn't when the dirty deed happened. It was post 9/11. | |
|
| | | |
Rob 23
@windstream.net
| Re: Wow, this is an awesome deal! Fiberguy you really put me to work.Please look at this link. C MICHAEL ARMSTRONG was the AT&T CEO from 1997 to nov.of 2002.look at paragraph 5.Find the new AT&Tcomcast at paragraph 3.Under terms of agreement find AT&T shareowners will own 56% of the new AT&Tcomcast and two paragraphs under that find as part of the agreement ARMSTRONG will serve as chairman. »www.corp.att.com/news/2001/12/19-435 . AND than this link »answers.com/topic/times-topics-c···rmstrong look at end of 1st paragraph under "career" HE was CEO/director of new AT&Tcomcast DID HE KNOW ABOUT NSA ? | |
|
| | | | | fiberguy
My views are my own.
Premium
join:2005-05-20
| Re: Wow, this is an awesome deal! BACKGROUND*
Brian L. Roberts has been President of Comcast Holdings Corp. since 1990 and serves as Chief Executive Officer. Mr. Roberts has been Chief Executive Officer and President of Comcast Corp., since November 2002. He serves as Principal Executive Officer of Comcast Cable Communications LLC, the General Partner of Cable TV Fund 12-B LTD.; Cable TV Fund 12-C LTD.; Cable TV Fund 12-D LTD.; Cable TV Fund 14-A Ltd., and Cable TV Fund 14-B LTD. He serves as Vice President of Sural ...
Brian Roberts has been Chairman since 2004. The unit of AT&T that Comcast purchased was AT&T Broadband, not AT&T Corporation which is really SBC with the new name that was involved in the warrant less wiretapping that is being referred to.
And still, however, you're talking about a transport carrier, not the ILEC carrier that was AT&T Inc. (ie: ATT carrying calls for Comcast isn't really the issue.) | |
|
| | | | | |
Rob 23
@windstream.net
| Re: Wow, this is an awesome deal! IF you read the link the CEO of AT&T (the guy you are upset with) who gave the "OK" to the N S A became the chairman of comcast in NOV>2002. COMCAST used AT&T for its internet & voice traffic (Do you think the chairman forgot about the NSA) The issue is local voice (a part of AT&T broadband) The IP address of a customer web page, e-mail, chat rooms,all info supplied by AT&T broadband,now part of comcast. Thats if any of this NSA thing is "TRUE". | |
|
| | | | | | | fiberguy
My views are my own.
Premium
join:2005-05-20
| Re: Wow, this is an awesome deal! What does a CEO of another company not involved have anything to do with this? The guy you are speaking about is NOT the CEO of the SBC, now ATT (Different company) that is being talked about. I never said I was upset with the guy you are talking about. You're on Mars while I'm on earth. Sorry.. I can't debate something with you when you're either somewhere else off topic, or.. | |
|
| | | | | | |
Rob 23
@windstream.net
| The issue as i understand it (here on MARS)is the nsa intercepting voice,e-mail,web page views,chat-room communications from U.S.citizens. The only NSA room we know about was built by the old AT&T before the merger of AT&Tcomcast (NOV>2002) or the merger of AT&T/SBC (OCT.2005)The NSA rooms will be at international peering points (the NSA is foreign communications surveillance)peering points at AT&T-MCI-SPRINT. SBC-vz-Q-communications surveillance is domestic and is done by the FBI. SBC is in this because they now own part of the old AT&T--VERIZON because they now own MCI. | |
|
| | Done_Posting
Shoot to kill
Premium
join:2003-08-22
Toledo, OH
·buckeye cable
| Right on. I'm glad I'm not the only one who remembers the despicable practices AT&T has gotten away with (I wish I could give Karl a high five every time he mentions it in his blurbs). I will never, EVER willingly use AT&T services of any kind.
On a related note, I remember watching C-SPAN in our our break room at work the day that the telco immunity stuff got approved. I had struck up a conversation with a co-worker regarding the way privacy would soon be a fading memory. He actually got upset with me (raised his voice, got defensive, etc.) and told me that AT&T and the government were doing a "great thing for freedom and the well-being of our nation." According to my esteemed co-worker, I wouldn't be so ticked about the illegal spying if I had nothing to hide...
I shudder to think how quickly ALL of our liberties will evaporate if people like him become the majority.
- Tate
--
Happiness is an OC-768 in your basement... | |
|
| | | 
pspcrazy
Anime Freak
join:2008-02-06
San Diego, CA
·DSL EXTREME
| Re: Wow, this is an awesome deal! I feel that much is true, the people in general need to stand up for their rights or else, if we even joke around using words like Islam, Bomb, President sucks, we may be raided, jailed, etc. Anti Govt. protesters are already suffering the same fate. | |
|
| | | Fishie
join:2003-01-14
Riverside, CA
| said by Done_Posting :I shudder to think how quickly ALL of our liberties will evaporate if people like him become the majority. - Tate Unfortunately, I think this has already happened. When I state these things to people, they usually respond that I am "Un-American" and that I should leave if I don't like it. So much for the "If the going gets tough..." theory. England's people have slept walked into this and I feel that we are next.
I should make this my signature, "We are making you feel more secure...Now drop your pants!" | |
|
| ShadezeRO
join:2006-04-24
Fort Lauderdale, FL
·AT&T Southeast
| said by Done_Posting :And they even throw in the direct connection to the NSA's spy center at no additional cost!!!Screw AT&T. - Tate That post has so much win inside of it. | |
|
| 
bender
Bite my shiny metal ass
Premium
join:2005-03-19
Evanston, IL
clubs: | more than welcome to. if the NSA wants to waste their processing power sifting through my bandwidth go right the hell ahead. I'm not running for public office anytime soon. | |
|
bender
Bite my shiny metal ass
Premium
join:2005-03-19
Evanston, IL
clubs: | no tv? no problem! im 600 ft from the vrad. i'd be more than happy with 18/1.5 i already get a solid 10/1.5 another 8mbps downstream would be great. i'd be more than willing to get rid of my U100 to get this. | |
|
| Madtown
join:2008-04-26
Madera, CA
| Re: no tv? no problem! said by bender :im 600 ft from the vrad. i'd be more than happy with 18/1.5 i already get a solid 10/1.5 another 8mbps downstream would be great. i'd be more than willing to get rid of my U100 to get this. I don't think any webpages will load as fast as 18mbps, just because your connection is that fast doesn't mean the website server is that fast, correct me if I'm wrong. | |
|
| hihi
join:2007-05-06
Port Orange, FL
| said by bender :im 600 ft from the vrad. i'd be more than happy with 18/1.5 i already get a solid 10/1.5 another 8mbps downstream would be great. i'd be more than willing to get rid of my U100 to get this. well too much download speed is unnecessary
u will be better off with something like 10/5 or 18/10
oh wait... 1.5up is as high as u can get
terrible uverse  | |
|
|
Joe12345678
join:2003-07-22
Des Plaines, IL
| How about haveing VDSL2 plans with no tv? takeing over the How about having VDSL2 plans with no tv? taking over the old dsl plans in area?
Like boosting
786 to 1.5 / 512 dsl or 3.0 / 1 on VDSL2
1.5 to 3.0 / 512 dsl or 6.0 / 1 on VDSL2
3.0 to 6.0 / 768 dsl or 15 / 1.5 on VDSL2
6 to dsl line max / line max or 25 / 1.5 or higher on VDSL2.
At least to have speeds more in line with cable. | |
|
Sammer
join:2005-12-22
Canonsburg, PA
| Fiber to the Home "Pair bonding requires a second copper pair at each house, two DSLAM ports assigned to each customer, and a special residential gateway outside the house that can terminate two pairs."
Doesn't sound cheap so when will AT&T realize they should just go to FTTH. | |
|
| alchav
join:2002-05-17
Palm Desert, CA
·Pacific Bell - SBC
|  Re: Fiber to the Home
| |
|
| openbox9
join:2004-01-26
Alexandria, VA
1 edit | Sufficient copper to the home exists in most places that UVerse is being offered. The fiber isn't there, hence the higher deployment cost that VZ is paying versus T. | |
|
percosan
join:2002-03-13
San Francisco, CA | I will believe it when I see it ... I live in San Francisco and would be happy to achieve 1.5Mb in the DOWNSTREAM ... the only thing working in ATT's favor in my house is that I am too lazy to replace my crappy internet (hardly broadband) connection.
-p | |
|
| fiberguy
My views are my own.
Premium
join:2005-05-20 | Re: I will believe it when I see it ... Do you live IN the CITY of SF? I thought they had at least 6mb to every house in the city itself. | |
|
| | percosan
join:2002-03-13
San Francisco, CA
| Re: I will believe it when I see it ... Yes, I live in San Francisco (and not to far from the CO I might add). Have had these geniuses out to my house several times to trouble shoot this ... each time no resolution. They blame the quality of the plant between my house and the CO.
Wish I was not so lazy.
-p | |
|
morbo
Complete Your Transaction
join:2002-01-22
00000
clubs: | good idea from AT&T
smart move by AT&T. give people more speed for a reasonable bump in price. | |
|
ke4pym
join:2004-07-24
Charlotte, NC | Good for them I can't even get them to commit to 1Mbps service to my home. And I live in a major US city. | |
|
| |
| | |
ztmike
Mark for moderation
Premium
join:2001-08-02
Michigan City, IN
·Comcast
1 edit | Wheres my LOLerskates? lol @ 18/1.5
So your paying more for just download speed? The upload speed is the same damn thing as the 10meg tier..
And At&t calls U-Verse "Next Gen" LOL
As much as I hate Comcast, Comcast will wipe the floor from At&t with their new speeds coming from D3.
--
ZZPERFORMANCE | |
|
| |
chronoss2009
join:2008-09-23 | And we all get ripped off still japan - 56USD/month 1GBPS | |
|
|
See 8 replies to this post |
|
kilometers
join:2007-01-24
Sacramento, CA
·SureWest Internet
 ·AT&T U-Verse
| Better to have faster upload. 18/1.5? Nah. I'd rather wait for Comcast's new 22/5 for the 5 meg upload speed. It's supposed to be around the same price too.
I could have sworn that VDSL could do more than 2mbps up. When U-verse was initially released wasn't the RG synced at 3 up before getting reduced down to 2? | |
|
| watts3000
join:2002-01-21
Birmingham, AL | Re: Better to have faster upload. 1.5 upload not good enough I have Charter 16x2 right now so when uverse comes to birmingham I don't plan on switching | |
|
| 
davoice
join:2000-08-12
Saxapahaw, NC
·Comporium
| We use VDSL in our enterprise environments to run long reach ethernet over CAT3 wiring in older buildings. I get 16.8mbps symmetrical at 2500 feet. We have newer equipment that will do 100mbps half duplex at the same distance or longer if the wiring is clean.
»www.smc.com/index.cfm?event=view···pid=1622
}Davoice | |
|
Ima
join:2003-10-23
Little Rock, AR
·AT&T Southwest
| LOL People are never satisfied. All you would hear for months about AT&T and how their speeds absolutely sucked. They offer 10MB lines and then a bump to 18 coming soon. And it still isn't enough.
Some people are never satisfied, and some people simply just love to bitch and hear themselves talk. If you think I'm talking about you, then I probably am.  | |
|
| hihi
join:2007-05-06
Port Orange, FL
| Re: LOL said by Ima :People are never satisfied. All you would hear for months about AT&T and how their speeds absolutely sucked. They offer 10MB lines and then a bump to 18 coming soon. And it still isn't enough. Some people are never satisfied, and some people simply just love to bitch and hear themselves talk. If you think I'm talking about you, then I probably am. I would be happy with 6/1 or 5/1 that's all I need LOL
anymore then that its just for bragging ^_^ | |
|
| bigblair
join:2002-07-08
El Paso, TX
| I had 1Gbps Upload and Download at my old house over POTS. Then I returned to the states and am faced with these dismal speeds. Standard internet service is 100/100 Mbps in Korea and I can't understand why people aren't up in arms about the miserable state of the US networks. AT&T, Comcast, all of the bigboys are just fleecing all of us. | |
|
| Enlightener
join:2006-01-28
Cedar Park, TX
·AT&T U-Verse
| Give me a break. I'm an FTTP customer but it ain't no Fios.
Fios Faster Plus is the same price range only it can do 20/20 instead of 18/1.5.
The fact is FiOS's lowest package is both faster and cheaper then AT&T's fastest package.
And yes I care. I frequently have to upload large files and having much more speed would be really useful. | |
|
dvd536
as Mr. Pink as they come
Premium
join:2001-04-27
Phoenix, AZ | Still nothing. . . On the upload. C'mon A T & T, you know download goes largely unused. throw the subs a bone with a l'il meat on it.
--
When I gez aju zavateh na nalechoo more new yonooz tonigh molinigh - Ken Lee | |
|
heat84
join:2004-03-11
Fort Lauderdale, FL
·Comcast
·AT&T Southeast
| What's the real story? I'm really confused. Some people say the reson AT&T's max up speed is 1.5 is because that's the limit of ADSL2, but other ISP's with ADSL2 have much faster up speeds. So whats the real story? [sarcasm]Is AT&T using the Chinese version of ADSL2?[/sarcasm] | |
|
| hihi
join:2007-05-06
Port Orange, FL | Re: What's the real story? DSL is a poor man's version of Cable
Really crappy IMHO
We're talking speed of 1.5,3.0,and 6.0
But you only see 1.2, 2.4, and 4.8
Really shitty matey really cheesy PPPOE
PPPOE=BS protocol | |
|
|
heat84
join:2004-03-11
Fort Lauderdale, FL | I'm getting full speed up and down. Thats one good thing you can say about AT&T in my area. They over provision the line. | |
|
ryanrands
join:2001-07-07
Houston, TX
·AT&T U-Verse
| FTTN is perfectly acceptable to me @heat84 - There's no technical reason why DSL has to deliver uneven (asynchronous) speeds. The main reason that telcos limit the uplink speed is to discourage business use of the bandwidth (hosting a website, etc). Cablecos provide more uplink as a marketing ploy but then try to block business type traffic (such as the email port 25). Cable has also been more vocal and active about limiting bandwidth to people who use a lot of it. I like the ability to burst when necessary, but I generally also like to get what I pay for, so I'm conflicted about the policy approach of the two services.
@article - I really do wish at&t would provide higher upload speeds. I'm getting just under a meg; I don't need 15 up, but 2-3 would be nice for uploading things to work.
I'm very impressed with at&t's FTTN and FTTH strategy. I read an article last year about at&t and Verizon's deployment. The Verizon rep claimed that their cost to install a new customer was something like $650 compared to at&t's cost of $550 (don't remember the exact numbers but they were about $100 different). I though it was complete bunk at the time and wondered how in the world Verizon could do a FTTH run for anything under $1000. Now with Verizon's $6 billion (BILLION!) write-down for build-out costs in just one year, it's clear that number last year was complete garbage. Fiber is definitely the future, but I 100% agree with at&t's interim strategy. At the rate people are choosing FIOS, Verizon will either have to raise their install or monthly charges or go broke(r).
Telcos and cablecos are in a land grab and undercutting themselves. In the short term I like paying ~$100 for triple play, but in the long-run they are going to need a government bail-out just like the baby bells in the early 90's and I think that ends up costing taxpayers more than if the companies would charge a reasonable price to begin with. In the after-math whoever wins gets to charge more than reasonable amounts because they have so much debt and then a new technology/service comes along and the whole vicious cycle starts all over again.
@percosan - Have them come out and check the number of loopbacks. There's a good chance that there's more than one in your line if you can't get more than 1.5 Mbps and there's not anything wrong with your internal wiring.
@conspiracy theorists - I guess dropping all that acid in the 60's wasn't consequence free, now was it? If you are going to censure a company for collusion with the government to neglect your rights, you probably should just stop spending money. It's a case of not seeing the forest for the trees. | |
|
| nogard666
join:2004-05-03
Lawrence, KS | Re: FTTN is perfectly acceptable to me Honestly, 6/1, 18/1, or my current 6/.5, I really do not care. They all have way too slow UL speeds. How about they reverse it for me and give me 1/18 on a static IP? Then my server would not complain soo much. | |
|
|
|
|
AT&T's New 18Mbps U-Verse Tier
·
·