AT&T UVerse monopoly

---

@NoFSTV-LinkTV-RT-NoDeal wrote:
And the literature on that wireless AT&T unit says that it only works for voice and not for the internet. So that's not an option. It would have been very nice if AT&T was way more specific about the changes they are making instead of a very misleading letter that they were going to upgrade to fiber optics and that I should call one of their numbers to prevent an interruption in my phone service. There was nothing in the letter to indicate that we had an option of keeping POTS if we didn't go with AT&T UVerse. They could have been more specific, in the letter, like are they doing a FTTN or just Fiber to the Central Office and that we would still have copper to the node and to our house? But they indicate that we have to accept one of their plans..that they could match our internet speed and not charge us more than what we paid before...for the first year...that is...and then the rates will go way up after that..of course. And you have to sign the TOS and a one or two year service agreement. I never had to do that with the current AT&T service. I just paid my monthly bills..simple! And much of what I have read about all of those baby bells that started way back in the 90's ...they did their fiber optics way back then. Wouldn't AT&T have already, many years ago, completed a fiber to the central offices, at least?

---

Yep. Understood. The reason I even brought it up was that it works over Cell / LTE, and the power draw is such that even a small UPS could keep it running for a day .. bigger, longer. That's in addition to the ~four hours of onboard backup power for the device.

Regarding the fiber plant; virtually every office is fiber based. Copper is generally used for service to teh neighborhoods. There are also these critters called "Remote Terminals" or RTs. RTs are connected to the host office by fiber, then distribute over (usually) copper to the neighborhood. RTs expand the footprint for distance-limited services like DSL ((CO-- fiber for a long distance)--->(RT- copper to ~thousands of feet) -->Customer).

"Fiber Everywhere" is amazingly expensive and, for now, has little positive return. Most of the problems are licensing, Federal Regulation, State Regulation, and local rules and politics. When you want to dig and bury fiber to each house things get messy, at least for a while. Even going aerial has issues, because it's more difficult to protect and takes longer to repair / splice.

The current push in the industry is "wireless" (i.e., LTE and beyond). There is far less infrastructure to maintain, and the available bandwidth starts at ~50Mbps and goes up from there (much higher later) .... more than enough for voice, video, high-speed Internet, security systems, etc. and can cover the rural and sparse population areas.

As you mentioned before, the downside is that the consumer devices are no longer powered by batteries in the CO, so the consumer is responsible for providing power to their critical devices. That is one of the reasons I keep my POTS ... it stays up 99.999% of the time or more. I'll miss it when it goes away.

In the meantime, copper continues to evolve, with "vectoring" approximately doubling the available bandwidth on VDSL2 lines. Vectoring is a method to greatly reduce crosstalk, improving signal-to-noise, which permits the greater signaling rate.

---

@NoFSTV-LinkTV-RT-NoDeal wrote:

I got a letter from AT&T UVerse saying that I need to call their numbers within 45 days to prevent an interuption in service to my phone and internet. I have AT&T long distance and a Earthlink ISP for many, many years. It is my understanding that AT&T UVerse will be making hardware changes at either the Central Office (CO) or at my Serving Area Interface (SAI) from DSLAM to either IPSLAM or VDSL2. The letter does not indicate just how far AT&T UVerse will run their fiber optics (FO)...although I suspect I won't get FO all the way to my house (FTTP-Fiber to the Premises). So, in effect, I will still have the potential of having the same copper-wire problems as before...latency, noise, etc...all of which cuts in to my bandwidth/speed. My CO is about 3 miles from me and if they only run fiber to the CO and not to my SAI then there will be the same problems cutting into my bandwidth/speed.

 

I feel that AT&T UVerse is doing something illegal by forcing everyone to subscribe to their service...or go without phone/internet service. Nevermind that AT&T UVerse is backed by powerful political bandits called ALEC and they may claim what they are doing is legal. It is even worse than the practice of "slamming" which is illegal. AT&T UVerse is taking away my ability to call 911 or local law enforcement because, if you read the TOS (terms of service) it says that even if you do go with AT&T UVerse you may not be able to call these emergency services. And if I  don't go with AT&T UVerse then I just don't have the original PSTN (Public Switchig Telephone Network) or POTS (Plain Old Telephone Service) anymore because AT&T UVerse disconnected it and installed their own monopolizing gear. In addition, AT&T UVerse hardware does not supply dc voltage for emergency outages as the PSTN system does...you have to have power from the home with your own backup battery that you are responsible for it working correctly..fully charged...and replacement. The PSTN system is a service utility that is necessary and part of the commons as far as many people are concerned. If you want to read something really scary then read the AT&T UVerse TOS (terms of service)...I get it that many people do not bother...then the spend much time, later, complaining. Read the TOS and then don't sign it.

 

 

---

AT&T is doing NOTHING illegal, they are getting rid of DSL, plain and simple.  If you don't want UVerse, feel free to choose another ISP. As for politics, whatever.  It's called shareholders. 

You need to look up the definition of "monopoly".

---

@NoFSTV-LinkTV-RT-NoDeal wrote:

I got a letter from AT&T UVerse saying that I need to call their numbers within 45 days to prevent an interuption in service to my phone and internet. I have AT&T long distance and a Earthlink ISP for many, many years. It is my understanding that AT&T UVerse will be making hardware changes at either the Central Office (CO) or at my Serving Area Interface (SAI) from DSLAM to either IPSLAM or VDSL2. The letter does not indicate just how far AT&T UVerse will run their fiber optics (FO)...although I suspect I won't get FO all the way to my house (FTTP-Fiber to the Premises). So, in effect, I will still have the potential of having the same copper-wire problems as before...latency, noise, etc...all of which cuts in to my bandwidth/speed. My CO is about 3 miles from me and if they only run fiber to the CO and not to my SAI then there will be the same problems cutting into my bandwidth/speed.

 

I feel that AT&T UVerse is doing something illegal by forcing everyone to subscribe to their service...or go without phone/internet service. Nevermind that AT&T UVerse is backed by powerful political bandits called ALEC and they may claim what they are doing is legal. It is even worse than the practice of "slamming" which is illegal. AT&T UVerse is taking away my ability to call 911 or local law enforcement because, if you read the TOS (terms of service) it says that even if you do go with AT&T UVerse you may not be able to call these emergency services. And if I  don't go with AT&T UVerse then I just don't have the original PSTN (Public Switchig Telephone Network) or POTS (Plain Old Telephone Service) anymore because AT&T UVerse disconnected it and installed their own monopolizing gear. In addition, AT&T UVerse hardware does not supply dc voltage for emergency outages as the PSTN system does...you have to have power from the home with your own backup battery that you are responsible for it working correctly..fully charged...and replacement. The PSTN system is a service utility that is necessary and part of the commons as far as many people are concerned. If you want to read something really scary then read the AT&T UVerse TOS (terms of service)...I get it that many people do not bother...then the spend much time, later, complaining. Read the TOS and then don't sign it.

 

 

---

You can have U-Verse (or DSL) and still have POTS voice (I do, two lines).

You can use any DSL provider in your area, usually including Earthlink; there are Competitive Local Exchange Carriers (CLECs) in all but the most remote areas. AT&T *must* allow them to carry service over their copper between the customer prem and the CO where the CLECs equipment resides. This is Federal regulation, and is a common practice these days.

The CLEC system was set up in response to the Telco monopoly back in the eighties. The company was split into a collection of "Baby Bells," and each area the the Baby Bells operated, they (later) had to permit any other business to operate as a CLEC over their lines. The CLEC has to supply their own CO equipment and personnel, the Telco has to give them access and operation space.

U-verse cannot "share" fiber and, as far as I know, is not required to. If there is no copper to a prem, then the customer can elect to have copper run, at their own expense, back to the Incumbent Lcal Exchange Carrier (ILEC) terminal.

Another option, and easier to run for a long time from a UPS is a wireless (cellular / LTE) ATA. IT's basically a puck that talks to the tower and delivers POTS signaling service to the home; it'll operate with any old-style, TOUCH-TONE phone.

Here's the link: http://www.att.com/esupport/article.jsp?sid=KB413140&cv=820,902&title=AT%26T+Wireless+Home+Phone#fbid=tXOwpSXoGI2

So, as you can see, there are many solutions to your perceived problem, check 'em out.

Yes they manipulate you and lie about the U-verse service must switch to. Our case no fiberoptic lines were ever installed in our neighborhood. We were told that phone and TV would be coming in a few months but to step on up to Uverse internet and get speeds up to 18. By signing we were never informed that separating our phone service and internet service billing would make the wire pro service that we continued to pay for void .This way ATT would not have to take any responsibility for its Uverse service. We have the same DSL with new doubled Uverse price and really really super slowed down  internet 1 year later. I am shocked that they can get away with this.