view:

topics flat nest

neill6705

join:2014-08-09 neill6705 Member Nice to see. It's not fiber, but at least they're doing something besides selling off their wireline assets like Verizon.

ilikeme

Premium Member

join:2002-08-27

Stafford, TX ·Toast.net

ilikeme Premium Member Re: Nice to see. They actually appear to be starting to deploy FTTH in some existing neighborhoods here in Houston. I saw some new equipment in the Bellaire area next to VRAD's that looked more like FTTH gear. I will have to do some more investigating in the next week or so to confirm it.

dslwanter

Not changing my username of 17 years.

Premium Member

join:2002-12-16

Mineral Ridge, OH dslwanter to neill6705

Premium Member to neill6705

It would be nice to see them bring U-Verse anything to this area. Nothing but good 'ol DSL around here.

Cthen

Premium Member

join:2004-08-01

Detroit, MI Cthen Premium Member Upload speed? What is the up speed on this? They send me ads in the mail all the time and never mention it there either.

Darknessfall

Premium Member

join:2012-08-17 Darknessfall Premium Member Re: Upload speed? I believe it's 8 Mbps. videomatic3

join:2003-12-12

Pleasanton, CA videomatic3 Member its too bad at&t is still a shitty company

OpTiC

Premium Member

join:2014-03-08

West Covina, CA OpTiC Premium Member Re: its too bad said by videomatic3: at&t is still a shitty company Hey atleast they aren't as bad as Verizon not expanding Fios and making excuses that they couldn't find parts or Frontier saying we don't need more than 6mbps.

tiger72

SexaT duorP

Premium Member

join:2001-03-28

Saint Louis, MO tiger72 Premium Member Re: its too bad No, they're definitely worse. They say "we rolled out 75mbps in St Louis!", yet it's not available to most. The damn uverse box is sitting on an easement on my own property yet U-verse maxes out at my address at 18mbps. 46436203 (banned)

join:2013-01-03 46436203 (banned) Member Re: its too bad That sounds like a mistake. I bet if you called them and spoke to them like an actual human being they'd dispatch a tech to verify distance.

tiger72

SexaT duorP

Premium Member

join:2001-03-28

Saint Louis, MO tiger72 Premium Member Re: its too bad It's definitely a mistake. But it's a recurring one. For about a year ATT said that I couldn't get Uverse at all, even though the box was sitting on my easement. I called in at the time, and it took about 6 months before they updated things. In the meantime I switched from ATT DSL to Charter and have little reason to interact with ATT again.

OpTiC

Premium Member

join:2014-03-08

West Covina, CA OpTiC Premium Member Re: its too bad said by tiger72: It's definitely a mistake. But it's a recurring one. For about a year ATT said that I couldn't get Uverse at all, even though the box was sitting on my easement. I called in at the time, and it took about 6 months before they updated things. In the meantime I switched from ATT DSL to Charter and have little reason to interact with ATT again. Hey you are lucky Frontier is taking over Verizon Fios in LA and they will suck there. In most of Frontier's markets they fail to provide 6mbps.

ATT_EVIL

@rr.com ATT_EVIL to videomatic3

Anon to videomatic3

Having to pay them an extra 30$ not to packet inspect, tells you all you need to know about this company. en103

join:2011-05-02 en103 Member Re: its too bad What's worse... paying the $30 extortion fee, or actually believing that they'll do it. Matt7

join:2001-01-02

Columbus, OH Matt7 Member Expanding. They sure are not doing 17a profiles here in Columbus OH.. My single pair (500 ft from VRAD in an MDU) is still limited to 24/3. tabernak93

join:2015-02-16

Oklahoma City, OK tabernak93 Member so 75 Mbps area = 17a profiles I believe we're on 8a profiles currently. What I've never been able to find a good answer for is how much of a difference the 2 profiles have with respect to distance? I'm at ~4500 ft, whenever these upgrades hit me in a few years will it actually add some capacity and maybe let me bump up a profile or two from my current 18/2? Also, are they adding vectoring with this upgrade?

CBLMorphis

join:2001-02-25

Riverside, CA CBLMorphis Member AT&T Sucks Whats the point of advertising lies for 15 years but can't get basic in my area, and AT&T hasn't done squat in my area, they suck like any other company / business. Sircolby45

join:2010-12-03 Sircolby45 Member Cute...

»www.speedtest.net/result ··· 1899.png That's cute... 46436203 (banned)

join:2013-01-03 46436203 (banned) Member Re: Cute... That upload speed is pathetic.

bockbock

@hcs.net bockbock Anon Re: Cute... 20.8 mbps upload is pathetic? You must be joking. 46436203 (banned)

join:2013-01-03 46436203 (banned) Member Re: Cute... That's a fiber optic connection and its upload speed is lower than a Time Warner Cable cable connection. It's got a 400+ Mbps download speed being crippled by that ridiculously lopsided upload speed.



20 Mbps upload is pathetic.

bockbock

@hcs.net bockbock Anon Re: Cute... Okay, a fiber optic connection has an upload speed of 20 Mbps. I still do not see how 20 Mbps upload is considered "pathetic" in any light. Your general conclusion is that "20 Mbps upload is pathetic", when it is faster than 90% of upload speeds in this country. 46436203 (banned)

join:2013-01-03 46436203 (banned) Member Re: Cute... No, it's still pathetic, regardless of medium.



100/100 was standard in Asia over a decade ago; they'd have 1000/1000 as standard speeds in South Korea, Japan, etc. for many years.



Crippled American fiber optics are not impressive.

bockbock

@hcs.net bockbock to 46436203

Anon to 46436203

said by 46436203: 20 Mbps upload is pathetic. Right. Please do tell me how your cable modem is surpassing 20 mbps upload for under $90 a month. Grande is providing fiber optic service for like less than $50 a month. crk2h

join:2003-03-19

Murfreesboro, TN crk2h Member Re: Cute... I have 120/25 on Cable service for $45 a month. Where I use to live I had fiber and the uploads on their low tiers was higher than 20 Mbps so yeah 400/20 is pretty pathetic Sircolby45

join:2010-12-03 Sircolby45 Member Meh...it does me just fine. Also this is not fiber. It is Docsis 3.0 cable. For $65 a month you will be hard pressed to beat that in the US. smcallah

join:2004-08-05

Home smcallah Member Funny... They don't offer this 75Mbps U-verse in NC, but they are starting to sell GigaPower in NC. Seems weird.

bockbock

@hcs.net bockbock Anon Re: Funny... Well, there you go. GigaPower is a better service anyhow. Fiber > VDSL2 ohreally

join:2014-11-21 ohreally Member A bit slow on the uptake? Over here, BT has been using profile 17a for a few years and offers 80Mbps on a single pair.



Unfortunately they haven't yet decided on pair bonding and their promises of vectoring to eliminate crosstalk issues seem to be stuck in trials for some time.

bockbock

@hcs.net bockbock Anon Re: A bit slow on the uptake? A 17a profile that offers 80 mbps on a single pair? Interesting. Most of the 8a profiles and up use on AT&T pair bonding. I do not know yet if AT&T uses vectoring. Sure thing is when they roll out 30a profiles (100 mbps service), there will be some kind of vectoring technology involved. In the UK, FTTH (xPON technology) is readily available in just about every city/town/village from what I heard. ohreally

join:2014-11-21 1 edit ohreally Member Re: A bit slow on the uptake? Not true as far as FTTH availability. FTTH from BT is actually very rare and their rollout is impressively random.



In my village, one street got FTTH, everyone else (including me) got fibre to the cabinet and VDSL2. I've seen streets where half of the houses got FTTH and the other half got FTTC.



It's FTTC and VDSL2 that is becoming much more common, FTTH is reserved for places where it's either very cheap or very expensive to do (I've seen some very rural places where BT has installed FTTH - an enormous expense to benefit a couple of houses). I think they flip a coin to choose which technology they plan to use.



80Mbit is indeed on a single pair, but crosstalk and line length reduce how likely you are to get it - in practice you'll probably get 65 or 70Mbps if you're within a few hundred metres of the cabinet. I could probably get the full 80 at 350-400m away if vectoring ever happens (my modem reported a theoretical max of 130Mbit when I was the second customer on the cabinet). FTTH users can currently buy a 330Mbit service.



So I live in hope that pair bonding or vectoring happen at some point. I'm not sure that BT's billing/management systems can cope with dry loops though (as they require a phone service even on FTTH)

bockbock

@hcs.net bockbock Anon Re: A bit slow on the uptake? No kidding. I would figure in the UK that FTTH or GPON would be way more common as it would be more feasible due to the smaller geographical area. I wonder if FTTH is widely deployed in the bigger cities like London, Birmingham, Leeds, etc. ? FTTH seems to be the standard over in South Korea, Japan and even Sweden from what I heard. Correct me if I'm wrong. ohreally

join:2014-11-21 2 edits ohreally Member Re: A bit slow on the uptake? Whether an area is urban or not doesn't appear to come into it. If anything, it makes it less likely because FTTH would involve lots of digging up roads and that's a near impossibility in places like London. FTTC doesn't need anywhere near as much - they need to run fibre to the new cabinet, but the rest of the work can be completed easily so it's cheaper and easier.



The county I live in is predominantly rural and doesn't contain any significant cities. It's also the county with the most FTTH availability in the UK - which is still not very much at all.



This also translates into reduced choice. If you have FTTC, you can choose from 20 or more ISPs. If you have FTTP, you might be able to choose from two - and one of these is BT themselves. The reason why is not exactly clear, as it's just as open and available to ISPs as FTTC is (they're on the same broadband latform, just different last mile technologies so it's trivial to support it)- so ISPs just aren't choosing to sell it.



One thing BT has done is to allow you to pay towards the install costs for extending FTTH to your property - but only if FTTC is already available. Unfortunately, the prices and terms are such that no residential user and most businesses would not consider it - a few thousand upfront, and about £100 a month (wholesale rental, so the actual price the ISPs charge will be higher) for 3 years. And that's after they apply a discount so that you aren't paying the full costs for your neighbours to also get the service.



I don't know how it is in other countries though, sorry.

bockbock

@hcs.net bockbock to ohreally

Anon to ohreally

And that is interesting how 80 Mbps is being squeezed on a single pair with no vectoring involved. VDSL2 is capable of a *theoretical* maximum bandwidth of 100/100 if you are close enough to the cabinet/VRAD. Of course, that is over a 30a (30 MHz) profile, which is top-of-the-line for VDSL2. Over here, AT&T and CenturyLink use pair-bonding to carry speeds greater than 40 Mbps. See AT&T's 45/6 and 75/8 teir for that.

HereToHelp

@charter.com HereToHelp Anon try offering something higher than 18 Mbps in my area. Even that is only available to a few people. Let's see $51 for 12 Mbps form at&t "u-verse"( with a 250 GB cap) or $52 for Charter 60 Mbps( no cap ). Oh such a hard choice for me.

caseywor

join:2004-04-19

Mobile, AL 686.1 969.0

·AT&T FTTP

caseywor Member I have an ONT in my closet I live in Orlando in a newly built apartment complex that is fiber fed, and have an ONT in my closet, and still can't get anything over 24Mbps. I wish they would do something with Orlando, I don't even have an option to get Brighthouse in my complex, AT&T fiber is the only thing feeding my complex and we have no choice but Uverse. Chapu

join:2015-03-09 Chapu Member Misleading Map What makes me laugh is looking at the map it looks great. I'd take whatever uverse offering they may have over BrightHouse Rip off, but further analasis will show u a huge exaggeration.



If you click on the map and expand further, the tiny blue dots is where they are really going to offer it. I live in Spring Hill FL, my in laws live in two different parts of Brooksville FL and the best I get is 6mbps per say (vrad maintance is a joke) brooksville 3mbps.



We aren't heavy users per say here so using uverse 75, 45, heck even 24 would be better than what bright house offers. 15mbps is $56 plus $6 modem fee. And the 1mbps upload is what kills me.



And they have no promos what so ever. I had to get earthlink to get it for $30 but for only 6 months.



Just saying. your comment..

