I have AT&T U-Verse in Indianapolis. I recently bought a Samsung 37B650 and although it has a fantastic picture, I have a "handshake" problem with the HDMI cable from the U-Verse box to the TV. Between me and two U-Verse technicians, we have tried three HDMI cables. Sometimes the TV comes on and sometimes I have to reset the box. Once it's on, I have no problem. This only happens with my new Samsung B650 and never with my year-old Samsung A650. I guess I may have to go to component cables rather than HDMI.

The AT&T tech said this is a common problem with certain 2009 models. Have any of you experienced this problem?

U-verse to launch in Corpus Christi, TX

Posted by Jeffrey Nukom on Jun 26th, 2009

AT&T’s U-verse will launch in Corpus Christi on Monday, June 29, giving residents an IPTV solution for television viewing. U-verse currently provides at least 100 HD channels in all markets, and remote scheduling via mobile phone or PC.

“Cable has been the only game in town for too long, and we’re excited to change that today in Corpus Christi,” said Chris Penrose, vice president and general manager, AT&T South Texas.

Coincidentally, Texas was the first state where U-verse was offered back in 2005. The service offers pure internet protocol-based television (IPTV) through its fiber-optic and copper network. The package includes U-verse High Speed, U-verse Voice (IP-managed), and U-verse TV.

http://www.hd-report.com/2009/06/26/u-verse-to-launch-in-corpus-christi-tx/

After reading this thread and others (FiOS, DTV, Dish)...I am wondering if the older comments still hold...

Picture quality of Uverse is not as good as FiOS, DTV, and Dish. People who have subscribed or have any experience with this can you comment on if it has gotten better than when you subscribed. Or people who have done side by side comparisons.

Thanks.

I had Dish, the SD picture with Uverse is much better, the HD is the same to a little better. I have a friend with FIOS, he says my U-Verse is better, I don't know, that's what I'm told. I have no experience with Direct TV.

I think the picture quality is good, to very good. The price and the Whole Home DVR make it the best choice for me.

Sometimes the TV comes on and sometimes I have to reset the box. Once it's on, I have no problem. This only happens with my new Samsung B650 and never with my year-old Samsung A650. I guess I may have to go to component cables rather than HDMI.

[quote]The AT&T tech said this is a common problem with certain 2009 models. Have any of you experienced this problem?
Yes. My neighbor was forced to switch back to Comcast because of HDCP link issues (the blue screen with the lock icon, and picture flickering) on two of his televisions. One is a Sharp and the other is a Samsung.

I sometimes have this problem with a 22" Samsung in one of my bedrooms if the TV is turned on less than one or more than two seconds before hitting the power button on the U-verse remote. It's extremely picky.

It's definitely something AT&T needs to look at. Hopefully the latest update, when and if it is ever rolled out (they've been promising it for over a year) will feature fixes in this area. The existing software is two years old now and may not be fully compatible with newer televisions.

To the extent they ever did in the first place, yeah, with the exception that cable HD quality has gotten notably worse.
The OP didn't ask about cable. The question was comparing U-Verse to DirecTV, Dish Network, and Verizon FiOS.

And, as I said, the comparison is about the same now as it's been for quite some time. For HD image quality, FiOS is the best without question, DirecTV and Dish follow with DirecTV being slightly better, and U-Verse is in last place by a noticeable margin.

I have AT&T U-Verse in Indianapolis. I recently bought a Samsung 37B650 and although it has a fantastic picture, I have a "handshake" problem with the HDMI cable from the U-Verse box to the TV. Between me and two U-Verse technicians, we have tried three HDMI cables. Sometimes the TV comes on and sometimes I have to reset the box. Once it's on, I have no problem. This only happens with my new Samsung B650 and never with my year-old Samsung A650. I guess I may have to go to component cables rather than HDMI.

The AT&T tech said this is a common problem with certain 2009 models. Have any of you experienced this problem?

the only problem ive had with mine is the sound will randomly go out and if i disconnect and reconnect the hdmi it stays on. its pretty annoying but happens infrequently.

I just had Uverse installed a few days ago. I previously had Charter with an S.Atlantic DVR via HDMI. I'm also using the same HDMI cable with the ATT box. I have a 52 XBR4, which I owned for close to 2 years now and I'm active in the calibration thread so I'm very familiar with the TV's PQ settings.

The good. The install took a long time but went very well. The tech was able use the coax cables already in the house (built in 1994). I'm also getting wireless Internet (previously had SBC DSL) and I'm also getting the regular phone through the gateway. All of the services have integrated seamlessly and works as advertised. I have way more channels then I did before, channels Charter couldn't get such as NASA, NFL & many others. The DVR is much more advanced.

The bad. I guess I only have one gripe. The picture quality is much worse then Charter. The HD looks like I'm watching a first gen LCD TV now. The blacks are crushed, the colors look like they're much lower bit then before and the backgrounds lack detail. As I mentioned previously, I'm extremely familiar with the TV's PQ adjustments and I've tried everything with the TV settings to improve it. I can mitigate some of this through calibrating the TV but ultimately there's not much I can do. The signal appears to be strong, it works solid, doesn't' break up or anything, the Internet is great as is the phone.

When I had Charter the HD looked so sharp and clear. The backgrounds looked real and there was so much depth to the colors it looked like real life, as if I could climb right into the TV. Now the PQ has a quality almost as if I'm watching something on You-Tube. It's not quite that bad but that's the best way I can describe the difference. Before, the HDTV was like I was looking out the window at my house, now it just looks like I'm watching a cheap LCD TV. :confused:

The thing is, I don't want to go back to Charter because they only had 15 HD channels worth mentioning and their prices have gotten too high lately. I really love having NFL Network now, I wanted that for so long, I like NASA and all the other HD channels we get now. However, I hate and I mean hate the PQ I have. I know what my TV is capable of in terms of PQ and this is definitely not even close. I'm really split here, part of me wants that PQ back but I don't want to pay Charter more and have essentially only 15 HD channels. Another minor complaint is with Charter you could get free HD On Demand for SHO, STARZ, etc. Now I have no HD On Demand unless it's PPV and the SD on demand is so bad, I can't even watch it, especially if it's in widescreen, then I have black bars on all four sides. It looks like a joke and forget about zoom.

I can't get DISH or DTV because I'm on the bottom of a large hill and I don't get a good signal. Unless they've changed the satellite location because I tried to get DISH but that was 10 years ago, maybe now I could get a signal but for some reason, I doubt it. So for a long time it was Charter or nothing. I was so excited to get Uverse but it's been bittersweet. Now I have all those channels I wanted for so long but the PQ looks like I went back in time.

The bad. I guess I only have one gripe. The picture quality is much worse then Charter. The HD looks like I'm watching a first gen LCD TV now. The blacks are crushed, the colors look like they're much lower bit then before and the backgrounds lack detail. As I mentioned previously, I'm extremely familiar with the TV's PQ adjustments and I've tried everything with the TV settings to improve it. I can mitigate some of this through calibrating the TV but ultimately there's not much I can do. The signal appears to be strong, it works solid, doesn't' break up or anything, the Internet is great as is the phone.


Most of us aren't having the PQ problems you're describing, and it's particularly weird to hear talk of a cable company with better HD PQ than U-Verse, since most cable systems are abysmal in this regard. The one thing I'd mention is regarding the black crush issue. There's a known issue with some of the U-Verse DVRs and what they output over HDMI for blacks. See this thread (http://utalk.att.com/utalk/board/message?board.id=Uverse_TV_Equipment&thread.id=18758) over at U-talk for some U-Verse calibration specifics.

i'd really like to switch over from comcast, but my address/number is still showing up as unavailable on the u-verse site even though my friend on the other side of the neighborhood is listed as eligible (on the site and via door to door salesmen). weird. this is in suburban atlanta (Decatur). if anyone in this vicinity has u-verse i'd love a PM about your impressions of the service in our area.

Most of us aren't having the PQ problems you're describing, and it's particularly weird to hear talk of a cable company with better HD PQ than U-Verse, since most cable systems are abysmal in this regard. The one thing I'd mention is regarding the black crush issue. There's a known issue with some of the U-Verse DVRs and what they output over HDMI for blacks. See this thread (http://utalk.att.com/utalk/board/message?board.id=Uverse_TV_Equipment&thread.id=18758) over at U-talk for some U-Verse calibration specifics.THANK YOU! Wow, you were right about the HDMI issue. My TV wasn't automatically detecting the RGB settings from the Uverse DVR. When I went into the RGB setting and manually locked it on FULL the detail in the blacks showed up! So before if someone had a dark business suit on, all you would see is a black outline, it almost looked like a cartoon. Now with the RGB set properly, I can see the suit's collar and the fabric in the lighter areas. Plus the colors look more natural as well, they were off before but I couldn't quite figure out why or fix it with the regular settings.

I still think the HD picture was sharper and more detailed with Charter but this definitely makes things more livable with Uverse. I'll post results again later when I tweak the settings somemore. Thanks again for taking the time to post that!

Looks like Grand Rapids, MI got the new Uverse update. My guide is different and I had to reset the sound preferences.

TV2 client version: 1.6.25075.1
UI: 4.4.4

I am using HDMI for video and optical for audio and get 5.1 sound. You only get 2.0 sound from HDMI.

My uverse system downloaded the major update really early this morning. Total DVR control from all receivers now...which is really nice. I was hoping for maybe a fix for the audio dropouts on toslink, or having the audio on hdmi output something more than two channel pcm.

What I got was no change on the hdmi, and now the toslink doesn't output 5.1 any longer either...just two channel pcm like the hdmi. Anyone else get that update?

My uverse system downloaded the major update really early this morning. Total DVR control from all receivers now...which is really nice. I was hoping for maybe a fix for the audio dropouts on toslink, or having the audio on hdmi output something more than two channel pcm.

What I got was no change on the hdmi, and now the toslink doesn't output 5.1 any longer either...just two channel pcm like the hdmi. Anyone else get that update?

Don't have it yet in ATL (Dunwoody, specifically), but reports on U-Talk are that there's a fix for all the audio problems that comes a few days after Phase 2 rolls out, so with any luck you'll get the fix within a week.

Don't have it yet in ATL (Dunwoody, specifically), but reports on U-Talk are that there's a fix for all the audio problems that comes a few days after Phase 2 rolls out, so with any luck you'll get the fix within a week.



That would be real nice. It would be nicer if they would put a notice about that on the uverse information channel that we all have. I just watched the whole sequence...not a word. Oh well...I'll wait a few days and see what happens

The other main forum for Uverse reports that the second fix definitely enables 5.1 via HDMI. NO word on toslink though, as I guess everyone is so excited about HDMI.

My uverse system downloaded the major update really early this morning. Total DVR control from all receivers now...which is really nice. I was hoping for maybe a fix for the audio dropouts on toslink, or having the audio on hdmi output something more than two channel pcm.

What I got was no change on the hdmi, and now the toslink doesn't output 5.1 any longer either...just two channel pcm like the hdmi. Anyone else get that update?
We also received the update two nights ago in Reno, Nevada. I noticed that I was only getting 2.0 via toslink. A quick trip to the options menu showed that it had been reset to "stereo". I changed the option to 5.1, and all is good. The dropouts (which for me was a slight popping coming from the subs on occasion) seems to be gone so far. Time will tell ...

I too had to reset my audio options after the update.

We also received the update two nights ago in Reno, Nevada. I noticed that I was only getting 2.0 via toslink. A quick trip to the options menu showed that it had been reset to "stereo". I changed the option to 5.1, and all is good. The dropouts (which for me was a slight popping coming from the subs on occasion) seems to be gone so far. Time will tell ...


My options menu has no sound option to set it to stereo or 5.1. Under system options I have

Aspect Ratio
System sound effects ( which only gives me the choice to play sound effects or mute sound effects)

On screen language

closed captioning

and system information

My options menu has no sound option to set it to stereo or 5.1. Under system options I have

Aspect Ratio
System sound effects ( which only gives me the choice to play sound effects or mute sound effects)

On screen language

closed captioning

and system information

I do not see the option to change mine either.

I do not see the option to change mine either.
On mine (a Cisco box) under options there is sound selection, and under sound, there is a separate digital audio selection where you can pick either stereo or 5.1. Perhaps you do not have the Cisco box? In any event, I would think there's somewhere in your menu system to enable/disable 5.1 sound.

On mine (a Cisco box) under options there is sound selection, and under sound, there is a separate digital audio selection where you can pick either stereo or 5.1. Perhaps you do not have the Cisco box? In any event, I would think there's somewhere in your menu system to enable/disable 5.1 sound.


I have motorola boxes, and I guarantee you that right now, after the first major firmware update from two nights ago, there is not now, nor has there ever been anything in the menu system to enable or disable 5.1 sound.


From what I have read on line..there should be a second firmware update coming that will add those features and enable the proper 5.1 sound.

I have motorola boxes, and I guarantee you that right now, after the first major firmware update from two nights ago, there is not now, nor has there ever been anything in the menu system to enable or disable 5.1 sound.


From what I have read on line..there should be a second firmware update coming that will add those features and enable the proper 5.1 sound.

Correct, the Motorolas do not have any setting for sound output currently.

Correct, the Motorolas do not have any setting for sound output currently.

I'm using a Motorola and I have the option. It is under Options - Audio/Language Options - Digital Audio Output.

I'm using a Motorola and I have the option. It is under Options - Audio/Language Options - Digital Audio Output.


That must be a part of a firmware update that I have not received yet. I don't have that .

Correct, the Motorolas do not have any setting for sound output currently.
That's not correct. It's also the first assertion I've seen of any Cisco/Motorola division with regard to this update.
I'm using a Motorola and I have the option. It is under Options - Audio/Language Options - Digital Audio Output.
Yes, that's it.
That must be a part of a firmware update that I have not received yet. I don't have that .
It's part of the hotfix that follows the firmware update. Some people get them at the same time, others take a day or two. Not everyone even has the firmware update yet. I'm sure the hotfix has the same kind of regional deployment as the main firmware update, so you might have to wait a bit.

I'm using a Motorola and I have the option. It is under Options - Audio/Language Options - Digital Audio Output.

Neither do I

It's part of the hotfix that follows the firmware update. Some people get them at the same time, others take a day or two. Not everyone even has the firmware update yet. I'm sure the hotfix has the same kind of regional deployment as the main firmware update, so you might have to wait a bit.

The second firmware update downloaded last night, and now I have the option to set my sound output to stereo or surround. So it is a two stage update...the first download adds some nice new features with the DVR control from all receivers, and the second seems to finally resolve the surround sound issues that have been so bothersome.

Got the sound fix update on a motorola this afternoon. There was a system notice informing me of the changes from the first update. Then I still needed to restart to get the audio options menu to appear.

Got the update this morning here in Deer Park (Houston Suburb). Still no option for audio as has been the case since day one with Motorola box. Hopefully the 2nd wave will clear this up. Right now I have no Surround audio through optical or HDMI.

Got the update this morning here in Deer Park (Houston Suburb). Still no option for audio as has been the case since day one with Motorola box. Hopefully the 2nd wave will clear this up. Right now I have no Surround audio through optical or HDMI.


That mirrors what I experienced. That second update, which came two days after the first, fixed the toslink output. It adds a sound selection option in the options menu ...switch it from stereo..which is the default, to surround...and voila.. I now have perfect Dolby Digital surround sound through my toslink.

I got the second update and now have the 5.1, My receiver use to say pcm now says dolby d. 5.1

Has anyone else had problems with closed captioning since the update?

The text size is now larger, and the translucent boxes are gone. It's hideous and totally blocks a significant percentage of the screen. Is this a bug or a "feature"?

That's not correct. It's also the first assertion I've seen of any Cisco/Motorola division with regard to this update.

Yes, that's it.

It's part of the hotfix that follows the firmware update. Some people get them at the same time, others take a day or two. Not everyone even has the firmware update yet. I'm sure the hotfix has the same kind of regional deployment as the main firmware update, so you might have to wait a bit.

Actually it is correct, my Motorola boxes have no options for audio settings. Seems that firmwares vary by region, there is no universal firmware.

Actually it is correct, my Motorola boxes have no options for audio settings.
No, it is not correct. Anecdotal evidence does not a fact make. You simply have not received the hotfix yet. Stop spreading misinformation. As other users with Motorola boxes have pointed out, they have, in fact, received the fix.

There is no Motorola/Cisco division. There is no variability to the firmware and its features.

The audio option is a second, hotfix update that comes after the firmware update, anywhere from during the update process to a few days later. This has been well-discussed around the web at places like Utalk, Engadget, Ars, and Uverse-users. It is not based on the hardware manufacturer or any regional difference in the firmware offering different features in different markets.

I now have the audio options update but I have not tried it in my theater(only place to check for 5.1). Hopefully it fixed the toslink back to how it was before the updates began. Is there confirmation that HDMI now allows 5.1 or was this just rumor?

No, it is not correct. Anecdotal evidence does not a fact make. You simply have not received the hotfix yet. Stop spreading misinformation. As other users with Motorola boxes have pointed out, they have, in fact, received the fix.

There is no Motorola/Cisco division. There is no variability to the firmware and its features.

The audio option is a second, hotfix update that comes after the firmware update, anywhere from during the update process to a few days later. This has been well-discussed around the web at places like Utalk, Engadget, Ars, and Uverse-users. It is not based on the hardware manufacturer or any regional difference in the firmware offering different features in different markets.
I wouldn't attack Aurora project, he has helped most of us on this forum.He is the most knowledgeable as well.

July 9th, 2009, 6:29 pm • posted by Tamara Chuang, a.k.a. The Gadgetres

Readers: This is part of an ongoing series of updates on what happened to the AT&T U-verse rollout in Orange County. So keep checking back! (at the blog)

Finding out exactly why AT&T’s U-verse TV and speedy Internet service hit a roadblock in several Orange County cities may be more difficult than moving to a town that offers the service.

After AT&T said earlier this week that it stopped pursuing permits in seven Orange County cities – Cypress, Dana Point, Irvine, Lake Forest, Newport Beach, San Clemente and Tustin – because it kept getting rejected, I decided to check with each city to find out what gives. Next stop: Irvine.

The city had me go through Craig Reem, its director of public affairs and communications. Via e-mail.

Irvine happens to be one of the cities that has already let some U-verse through. Some new neighborhoods even got the superior “Fiber to the Home” treatment, which allows AT&T to offer TV and Internet over fiber-optic technology all the way to a person’s house (most U-verse users have what I call “Fiber to the Sidewalk,” which is cheaper for AT&T since it runs fiber to a box on the sidewalk and copper wires to the user’s home).

But availability of the alternative TV service in Irvine is spotty.

Reem cited the same reason for U-verse stagnation that I’ve heard from other cities: The city wants those big boxes built underground. But it appears the city is willing to be somewhat flexible — it already has “more than 200 boxes in the public right-of-way in the city of Irvine,” Reem said.

“The city’s preference is that the equipment be placed underground; however, AT&T has not yet made that determination. AT&T and the city are engaged in discussions regarding options for implementation,” Reem said.

Yes, we’re going in circles here.

Cities are saying they haven’t rejected AT&T. They’re waiting to hear AT&T response to their requirements.

But AT&T is telling me that it’s repeatedly explained its case with the cities as to why the equipment needs to be above ground (to maintain and protect the electronics inside), why it doesn’t interfere with Americans with Disabilities Act requirements (AT&T isn’t putting these in the middle of sidewalks) and why it is California Environmental Quality Act friendly (U-verse is in 220 communities in California who didn’t have a problem).

Hence, an exasperated AT&T has walked away.

Obviously, there’s some disconnect between the two. And unfortunately for consumers seeking a TV alternative, this means no more new U-verse expansion in those cities.

Reem does add that if Irvine residents want their opinions heard, they can comment during any public-comment portion of weekly City Council meetings, or make an appointment to talk to Mayor Sukhee Kang, who provides a “Meet the Mayor” one-on-one meeting from 9 a.m. to 1 p.m. Wednesdays. Irvine residents can call 949.724-6233 to make an appointment.

More on the U-verse impasse
• Dana Point still waiting on AT&T U-verse
• Permit hassles stymie AT&T U-verse in Newport Beach
• Update: What happened to U-verse and FiOS in Cypress
• AT&T U-verse comes to a halt in Irvine, 6 other O.C. cities

http://gadgetress.freedomblogging.com/2009/07/09/irvine-and-att-u-verse-tv-remain-at-impasse/17443/

I wouldn't attack Aurora project
It's plainly not an attack.
He is the most knowledgeable as well.
Clearly not about the programming of the boxes. People come here for accurate information, and if that's not being provided, it needs to be corrected.

Incorrect information (and the defense of it after contrary evidence is presented) is incorrect, whether or not the person providing it is usually knowledgeable and accurate. I don't even look at the user names of the posters. Wrong is wrong. Defending someone's factually incorrect post because they're a valuable contributor makes no sense.

There is not a different firmware release for different boxes. There are not different features for Motorola vs. Cisco boxes. Simple as that.

it's plainly not an attack.

Clearly not about the programming of the boxes. People come here for accurate information, and if that's not being provided, it needs to be corrected.

Incorrect information (and the defense of it after contrary evidence is presented) is incorrect, whether or not the person providing it is usually knowledgeable and accurate. I don't even look at the user names of the posters. Wrong is wrong. Defending someone's factually incorrect post because they're a valuable contributor makes no sense.

There is not a different firmware release for different boxes. There are not different features for motorola vs. Cisco boxes. Simple as that.
sez you.

sez you.
Says everyone except whoever it is you're fawning over, says every forum where this issue has been discussed, and says every owner of Motorola boxes all across the country who has received the audio hotfix that supposedly doesn't exist for Motorola users.

Says AT&T itself, even, in their versioning releases and their demo videos of the new firmware, which--gasp--use Motorola hardware, like the majority of U-verse subscribers. There is no substantial difference in the hardware features of Cisco and Motorola boxes--only different component suppliers. They both use the same Microsoft software and the same AT&T IPTV provisioning.

This is an utterly ridiculous response on what should have been a trivial misstatement. It's not clear what you stand to gain, or how your responses could possibly help anyone trying to find an answer. All you're doing at this point is compounding the problem by continuing to highlight how false the original assertion was.

sez you.

Actually multiple people using the Motorola box have stated they received the audio option in the second firmware update which is consistent with what I and others who have the Cisco box experienced.

AP then went on to say he did not have it so the firmware must be regional, This statement seems illogical to me as I don't see how AT&T would have regional based firmware unless these regions had older hardware and that would have to be homogeneous. So while he has given very good information in the past I am inclined to think he just has not received the second update yet in this case. Until I hear other people stating the same thing I don't think you can just take one person's experience as anything other than anecdotal no matter who they are.

I now have the audio options update but I have not tried it in my theater(only place to check for 5.1). Hopefully it fixed the toslink back to how it was before the updates began. Is there confirmation that HDMI now allows 5.1 or was this just rumor?

Yes I would like confirmation also, anyone actually got 5.1 over HDMI on their audio system or is it still 2 ch?

I now have the audio options update but I have not tried it in my theater(only place to check for 5.1). Hopefully it fixed the toslink back to how it was before the updates began. Is there confirmation that HDMI now allows 5.1 or was this just rumor?

Yes I would like confirmation also, anyone actually got 5.1 over HDMI on their audio system or is it still 2 ch?

I posted immediately when mine started working properly. Here's a pic of my HTIB receiver during the Tonight Show. You'll have to trust me that my SAT input comes from a motorola Uverse box.

http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2640/3719505356_5c3e640258_b.jpg

Thank you Posty.

Says everyone except whoever it is you're fawning over, says every forum where this issue has been discussed, and says every owner of Motorola boxes all across the country who has received the audio hotfix that supposedly doesn't exist for Motorola users.

Says AT&T itself, even, in their versioning releases and their demo videos of the new firmware, which--gasp--use Motorola hardware, like the majority of U-verse subscribers. There is no substantial difference in the hardware features of Cisco and Motorola boxes--only different component suppliers. They both use the same Microsoft software and the same AT&T IPTV provisioning.

This is an utterly ridiculous response on what should have been a trivial misstatement. It's not clear what you stand to gain, or how your responses could possibly help anyone trying to find an answer. All you're doing at this point is compounding the problem by continuing to highlight how false the original assertion was.

Preach it brother..........................

I'm in San Diego and have the new upgrade. I went into audio options and chose the digital surround mode. Dolby Digital 5.1 is showing up on my Pioneer VSX 1018. I'm connected with HDMI.

But now I get crazy audio dropouts. If I let it go it eventually comes back in. If I switch the Pioneer input back and forth to the Uverse HDMI it comes back in. I changed the Uverse audio option back to just stereo and no dropout problems.

Any fix for this with HDMI? If I switch to component cables and optical toslink would that be better for digital 5.1 sound?

The digital 5.1 sounds good with HDMI when it works, but the dropouts are out of control!

Thanks Posty. I have now confirmed this as well. No more optical cable for Uverse.

I'm in San Diego and have the new upgrade. I went into audio options and chose the digital surround mode. Dolby Digital 5.1 is showing up on my Pioneer VSX 1018. I'm connected with HDMI.

But now I get crazy audio dropouts. If I let it go it eventually comes back in. If I switch the Pioneer input back and forth to the Uverse HDMI it comes back in. I changed the Uverse audio option back to just stereo and no dropout problems.

Any fix for this with HDMI? If I switch to component cables and optical toslink would that be better for digital 5.1 sound?

The digital 5.1 sounds good with HDMI when it works, but the dropouts are out of control!

I am still using the optical cable, I have hdmi hooked up to my onkyo 606, I will try and let you know. the toslink cable works great for 5.1

Just had my first day with U-Verse after previously having Comcast, and I am pretty disappointed with the HD quality on my Panny PX80U. I'm no videophile, but the HD is clearly more blotchy, particularly with movement. Also the picture is generally darker than it was with Comcast. The dark colors are completely crushed.

I've been watching the Tour De France for the past week on Comcast and all of the gorgeous French scenery that I was watching whizz by is now blurry and blotchy with U-Verse. More still pictures look fine, but movement is really bad. Are there any particular adjustments I can make to improve things? Should I call ATT, or should I just slink back to the dreaded Comcast?

Just had my first day with U-Verse after previously having Comcast, and I am pretty disappointed with the HD quality on my Panny PX80U. I'm no videophile, but the HD is clearly more blotchy, particularly with movement. Also the picture is generally darker than it was with Comcast.

I've been watching the Tour De France for the past week on Comcast and all of the gorgeous French scenery that I was watching whizz by is now blurry and blotchy with U-Verse. More still pictures look fine, but movement is really bad. Are there any particular adjustments I can make to improve things? Should I call ATT, or should I just slink back to the dreaded Comcast?

Click the Menu button on your remote and scroll to the right over options. Go down to System Options and then Aspect Ratio and make sure you have it on 1080i.

Click the Menu button on your remote and scroll to the right over options. Go down to System Options and then Aspect Ratio and make sure you have it on 1080i.

Yes, I've tried both 720p and 1080i. It makes no difference.

Yes, I've tried both 720p and 1080i. It makes no difference.
Check out this post (http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showthread.php?p=16759102&highlight=utalk#post16759102) for a link to help about your issue with blacks. You really do need to recalibrate your TV for U-Verse.

Check out this post (http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showthread.php?p=16759102&highlight=utalk#post16759102) for a link to help about your issue with blacks. You really do need to recalibrate your TV for U-Verse.

Thanks for the info. My TV (panasonic 50PX-80U) doesn't seem to have an RGB mode setting, so I had to use component cables. After I got them hooked up instantly the color looked better. So this is definitely an issue with the RGB color modes not matching between the U-verse box and my TV.

As for the all around crappy picture, the ATT guy happened to be in my hood today so I had him come by and look at it and he agreed that it looked bad. Really bad, at least Versus HD. After much time and tinkering outside, he couldn't fix it and said they'll have someone out again tomorrow to tinker more.

Readers: This is part of an ongoing series of updates on what happened to the AT&T U-verse rollout in Orange County. The company recently said that it was halting new activity in seven O.C. cities. So keep checking back for updates! (see link end of article)

Efforts to offer Tustin residents AT&T’s U-verse TV service remain in limbo as the city and AT&T sort out their differences. But limbo could become eternity because the city believes it’s waiting for AT&T’s responses to ordinance requests, while AT&T has decided to stop its pursuit of 93 permits after more than a year of effort. Tustin, like five other cities I’ve interviewed, offered one primary reason it wasn’t keen on the project: The city wants the boxes built underground.

But underground isn’t the only issue for Tustin and below-ground utility boxes aren’t mandatory. Some of these utility cabinets have already been built above ground, including one in front of C. E. Utt Middle School on Browning Avenue. The city has other issues it wants resolved before greenlighting the rest of the project, said Elizabeth Binsack, Tustin’s communicty development director, who invited me to view the presentation given to AT&T about AT&T and given to the Planning Commission and City Council.

“I gotta tell you, the sites we looked at in our walk, some were conflicting with line of sight, some were in the spot of trees and fire hydrants. I don’t think they looked at those sites at all. We did,” Binsack said.

Other issues:
AT&T's application to install 93 U-verse TV utility cabinets around the city included locations like underneath this tree. City officials stand with a mock U-verse utility box. Photo courtesy of Tustin.

AT&T's plan to install 93 utility cabinets in Tustin included underneath this tree. City officials stand next to mock AT&T box. Photo from city of Tustin.

1. AT&T’s unwillingness to move these boxes to less obtrusive areas, such as the back of the park instead of smack dab in the middle, or off the edge of the sidewalk and into the landscaping (see photo on right and below). ”We haven’t heard back from AT&T,” she said.

2. U-verse isn’t as advanced as Verizon FiOS, which instead of offering fiber optic technology to the middle of a neighborhood, builds the fiber all the way to the house. (”What if we end up with 93 boxes that are obselete?” Binsack wondered.)

3. Safety, not for the box, but the public. ”Forgetting the issue of safety (of the box), but personal safety. In Houston, a U-verse box blew up. It melted the guy’s garage,” she said, handing me the articles to prove it.

At this point, AT&T seems to shrug its head and sigh in disbelief. H. Gordon Diamond, with AT&T’s public affairs, said the company has gone over and over again with each city offering answers to questions.

It has repeatedly explained why boxes can’t be underground (to protect and easily access the electronics inside — I’ll address this more in a later post). The boxes also need to be near electricity and, similar to DSL Internet coverage, near AT&T’s hub.

And as Diamond has previously pointed out, U-verse has been installed in 220 cities in California. AT&T worked with each city to address safety concerns, maintenance obligations, city ordinances and all other issues.

As for the exploding boxes, these were rare instances. Defective batteries caused the explosion. AT&T has removed all of those and hasn’t had an incident since. This also never affected any properties in California. (See Light Reading’s “AT&T Investigates DSLAM Explosion” and “AT&T Begins Massive Battery Replacement.“)

Next, I’ll explore a city that welcomed AT&T U-verse inside its boundaries, plus a look at why AT&T can’t and won’t build its U-verse utility boxes underground.

http://gadgetress.freedomblogging.com/2009/07/13/tustins-turn-why-att-u-verse-isnt-happening-here-yet/17511/

Anyone able to drop AT&T landline service while keeping Uverse data only?

I've had the landline for years but there's no point in keeping it for $25 a month when I use the cell phone most of the time.

ATT was back out today. I'm not sure why they bothered. They swapped my box, fiddled with the line, then declared that the picture was as it should be, or at least as good as it gets. When I pointed out the horrible artificats on several channels he tried to blame it on the channel/camera. When I said the channel was perfect on my Comcast box which I offered to hook up and show him, he said some channels just look like that on U-verse, some better, some worse than Comcast. He sure got the worse part right.

I really do despise Comcast, and I love ATT's technology, but there's no point in having an HDTV and HD service that looks like SD or worse... so back to Comcast I go.

Good luck to all.

Anyone else hooked up to Uverse with HDMI only and getting audio dropouts when using the 5.1 surround option?

Should I hook up an optical cable for the 5.1 sound and still use my HDMI cable for video? I have a Pioneer VSX 1018 if anyone knows the steps for utilizing this type of hook up?

Thanks!!!

Anyone else hooked up to Uverse with HDMI only and getting audio dropouts when using the 5.1 surround option?

Should I hook up an optical cable for the 5.1 sound and still use my HDMI cable for video? I have a Pioneer VSX 1018 if anyone knows the steps for utilizing this type of hook up?

Thanks!!!

I finally had a chance to switch over to HDMI for audio..and it works just fine. Dolby 5.1 audio with no dropouts. The toslink is also working great. I have been using the HDMI for video since I got Uverse in 2007, and the toslink for audio, until last night when I switched the audio as well.

I finally had a chance to switch over to HDMI for audio..and it works just fine. Dolby 5.1 audio with no dropouts. The toslink is also working great. I have been using the HDMI for video since I got Uverse in 2007, and the toslink for audio, until last night when I switched the audio as well.

Any idea on how I can correct the audio dropouts I'm getting with HDMI? I've rebooted the UVERSE box and have toggled between the stereo and surround sound options for digital audio output. When I switch it to stereo no dropouts at all, but on surround sound dropouts occur all the time :mad:

Any idea on how I can correct the audio dropouts I'm getting with HDMI? I've rebooted the UVERSE box and have toggled between the stereo and surround sound options for digital audio output. When I switch it to stereo no dropouts at all, but on surround sound dropouts occur all the time :mad:



Have you tried swapping out your HDMI cable for a different one? That may not be the problem but you should probably swap it to rule that out.

Any idea on how I can correct the audio dropouts I'm getting with HDMI? I've rebooted the UVERSE box and have toggled between the stereo and surround sound options for digital audio output. When I switch it to stereo no dropouts at all, but on surround sound dropouts occur all the time :mad:

Suggestions:
- Try another HDMI cable (like strindl mention)
- Try the other HDMI inputs on the VSX 1018
- Try the other Uverse box from another room (if available)

Any idea on how I can correct the audio dropouts I'm getting with HDMI? I've rebooted the UVERSE box and have toggled between the stereo and surround sound options for digital audio output. When I switch it to stereo no dropouts at all, but on surround sound dropouts occur all the time :mad:

I switched mine for toslink to hdmi and it works great with mt onkyo 606. no audio dropouts in 5 hrs. of viewing.I use monoprice HDMI cables.

Talked to AT&T today about Uverse 450 for next Friday. I'll be deciding Monday. Things that I'm still unsure of are:
1. Picture resolution- any 1080P now or in the future?
2. Any talk of Dolby True HD/DTS MA?
3. What's the current best sound available (I have a seven channel Home Theater)-
equipment/locale dependent?
4. Would you use Digital Video Essentials HD Blu-Ray temporarily through the Uverse
inputs or the recommended HDNET screen for calibration?
5. Is wireless 802.11N?
6. Will a wifi printer and a wifi Palm Pre work ok?
7. How will the TV experience compare to my Directv HD DVR in sound and picture?
8. How will the internet experience compare to my AT&T Yahoo DSL (750k)?
9. How will the digital phone service compare to the analog?
10. How can you take advantage of a high end home theater PC with this equipment?
11. I currently have everything connected with HDMI.

I hope I'm jumping into a maturing technowledgy.

Picture resolution- any 1080P now or in the future?At some point they may offer 1080p for PPV HD movies, but that's it, just like other multichannel providers. No broadcast channels are 1080p; only Blu-ray, a few video games and very limited HD PPV from Dish & DirecTV.

Any talk of Dolby True HD/DTS MA?None. But the same applies to the other multichannel providers.

What's the current best sound availableDD 5.1

equipment/locale dependent?No.
Would you use Digital Video Essentials HD Blu-Ray temporarily through the Uverse
inputs or the recommended HDNET screen for calibration?HDNet would be the choice. Cailbrate another display input for Blu-ray.

How will the TV experience compare to my Directv HD DVR in sound and picture?U-verse HD image quality is not as good as DirecTV. Audio will be the same.

How can you take advantage of a high end home theater PC with this equipment?Other than potentially doing analog HD capture with a Hauppauge card, they are not really compatible.

I currently have everything connected with HDMI.U-verse has had issues with HDMI for digital audio. You may need to use optical or coax digital audio instead.

I hope I'm jumping into a maturing technowledgy.Not really. IPTV is relatively new, and still in the earlier stages of development. I've not heard too many complaints about digital phone or high speed Internet, but the strong consensus is that HD is definitely lacking compared to most other HD providers.

U-verse has had issues with HDMI for digital audio. You may need to use optical or coax digital audio instead.




They seem to have finally fixed that with the latest firmware updates. My hdmi DD 5.1 audio is working great with Uverse and from what I read on various forums, most others are also enjoying glitch free 5.1 audio over their HDMI connections with Uverse.

It was annoying that it took them almost two years to fix it...and never informed their customers , or even their own tech people it seems, that the problem existed.

5. Is wireless 802.11N?
6. Will a wifi printer and a wifi Palm Pre work ok?
7. How will the TV experience compare to my Directv HD DVR in sound and picture?
8. How will the internet experience compare to my AT&T Yahoo DSL (750k)?


5. No. Wifi is B/G dunno about A. You can put a router behind the RG.
6. Should work fine.
7. Sound will be equal. HD picture isnt as good. SD picture is probably better.
8. Should be the same except for latency. Latency for uverse internet has a 20ms lag at the first hop. Not so great for gaming but still useable.

AT&T U-verse TV Adds ShortsHD and New International Channels

ShortsHD Makes U.S. Debut on AT&T U-verse; Brings U-verse TV Lineup to 110 HD Channels in Every U-verse TV Market

DALLAS, July 20 /PRNewswire-FirstCall/ -- AT&T* today announced several additions to the AT&T U-verse(SM) TV channel lineup, including international programming options for Italian and Arabic viewers and ShortsHD, the short movie channel, which makes its U.S. debut on U-verse TV.

"We continue to expand our U-verse TV channel lineup to include more of the content that our customers want," said Dan York, executive vice president of content and programming, AT&T Converged Services. "U-verse TV is about going above and beyond a standard channel lineup to give you more diverse programming options. These new channels help us with important strategic content initiatives and are great additions for our U-verse TV customers."

The new channels that are now available for U-verse TV customers include:

* ShortsHD, which showcases short movies in a range of genres, including comedy, action, horror, drama and more. AT&T is the first U.S. provider to offer ShortsHD, which is available in the HD Premium Tier for an additional $5 a month on channel 1789.
* Arabic Radio & Television, an Arabic channel featuring live sporting events, dramas, news, variety, entertainment, movies, and programming on national events, festivals and religious celebrations from around the Arab world. Available a la carte for an additional $13 a month on channel 3732.
* RAITALIA, an Italian channel which promotes the culture of Italy through a unique blend of festivals, concerts, Italian movies, soccer games, children's programming, game shows, documentaries and news. Available a la carte for an additional $13 a month on channel 3802.

With ShortsHD and other recent channel additions, U-verse TV customers enjoy access to an extensive HD channel lineup with 110 or more HD channels -- exceeding the HD channel lineups offered by the local cable providers in every U-verse TV market.

U-verse TV customers can also choose from a wide variety of in-language programming options, including packages for Spanish, Filipino, Japanese, French, Polish, Russian, Vietnamese, Korean and South Asian viewers.

AT&T U-verse TV is the only 100 percent Internet Protocol-based television (IPTV) service offered by a national service provider, making AT&T U-verse one of the most dynamic and feature-rich services available today. AT&T U-verse TV ranked "Highest in Residential Television Service Satisfaction in the North Central, South, and West Regions," according to the J.D. Power and Associates 2008 Residential Television Service Provider Satisfaction Study(SM).

For additional information on AT&T U-verse -- or to find out if it's available in your area -- visit http://uverse.att.com. Customers can get more information about U-verse TV programming and television events by visiting http://uconnect.att.com.

*AT&T products and services are provided or offered by subsidiaries and affiliates of AT&T Inc. under the AT&T brand and not by AT&T Inc.

About AT&T

AT&T Inc. (NYSE: T) is a premier communications holding company. Its subsidiaries and affiliates - AT&T operating companies - are the providers of AT&T services in the United States and around the world. With a powerful array of network resources that includes the nation's fastest 3G network, AT&T is a leading provider of wireless, Wi-Fi, high speed Internet and voice services. AT&T offers the best wireless coverage worldwide, offering the most wireless phones that work in the most countries. It also offers advanced TV services under the AT&T U-verse(SM) and AT&T | DIRECTV(SM) brands. The company's suite of IP-based business communications services is one of the most advanced in the world. In domestic markets, AT&T's Yellow Pages and YELLOWPAGES.COM organizations are known for their leadership in directory publishing and advertising sales. In 2009, AT&T again ranked No. 1 in the telecommunications industry on FORTUNE(R) magazine's list of the World's Most Admired Companies.

Additional information about AT&T Inc. and the products and services provided by AT&T subsidiaries and affiliates is available at http://www.att.com. This AT&T news release and other announcements are available at http://www.att.com/newsroom and as part of an RSS feed at www.att.com/rss. Or follow our news on Twitter at @ATTNews. Find us on Facebook at www.Facebook.com/ATT to discover more about our consumer and wireless services.

AT&T U-verse services are provided by AT&T local telephone companies. Geographic and service restrictions apply to AT&T U-verse. Call or go to www.uverse.att.com to see if you qualify. Customizing options require AT&T U-verse High Speed Internet Service. Wireless phone with Internet access required and standard data charges may apply. Full Total Home DVR functionality requires a receiver for each additional TV at $7 per month each. HD Service. A monthly $10 HD Technology Fee applies for access to HD service. Subscription to an AT&T U-verse programming package and an HDTV required. HD channel availability varies by package selected. HD Premium Tier available for an additional $5 per month and requires subscription to HD service for $10 per month.

AT&T received the highest numerical score among television service providers in the South, North Central and West regions in the proprietary J.D. Power and Associates 2008 Residential Television Service Satisfaction Study(SM). Study based on 18,938 total responses from measuring providers in the South (13), North Central (11) and West (10) regions and measures consumer satisfaction with television service. Proprietary study results are based on experiences and perceptions of consumers surveyed in July 2008. Your experiences may vary. Visit jdpower.com.

SOURCE AT&T Inc.

http://news.prnewswire.com/DisplayReleaseContent.aspx?ACCT=104&STORY=/www/story/07-20-2009/0005062646&EDATE=

Just out of curiosity, is there any practical limit to the number of channels that U-Verse can carry? I'm guessing it would be upstream in the plant that converts them to IP streams, not a limit on the customer end.

Just out of curiosity, is there any practical limit to the number of channels that U-Verse can carry? I'm guessing it would be upstream in the plant that converts them to IP streams, not a limit on the customer end.
I don't want anymore channels. just want to be able to have more than 2hd 2sd at same time.

I don't want anymore channels. just want to be able to have more than 2hd 2sd at same time.

I would also like to be able to watch something on DVR without the thing always stuttering.it doesn't do it on the TV the dvr is directly connected to, but does it on all the other TV's. wife and I tried to watch deadliest catch last night and it stuttered or froze 39 times in a hour show.Does anyone else have this problem? We have always had it, but it was unwatchable last night.I call customer service and they want you to reset the boxes. I am about to go back to dish, will I be able to keep the internet and phone?.

I would also like to be able to watch something on DVR without the thing always stuttering.it doesn't do it on the TV the dvr is directly connected to, but does it on all the other TV's. wife and I tried to watch deadliest catch last night and it stuttered or froze 39 times in a hour show.Does anyone else have this problem? We have always had it, but it was unwatchable last night.I call customer service and they want you to reset the boxes. I am about to go back to dish, will I be able to keep the internet and phone?.

I've never encountered that problem. I have two additional receivers as well as the DVR, and regularly watch recorded shows on them. No stutters, no freezing. Something is wrong with your setup. How are your receivers hooked up? Do they use coax or ethernet?

I've never encountered that problem. I have two additional receivers as well as the DVR, and regularly watch recorded shows on them. No stutters, no freezing. Something is wrong with your setup. How are your receivers hooked up? Do they use coax or ethernet?

All 5 receivers are coax, the installer used my existing dish coax,which is very high quality rg6.

Also no problems we watch recorded shows on three other TV STBs with no problems. All my STBs except the DVR are RG6.

Also no problems we watch recorded shows on three other TV STBs with no problems. All my STBs except the DVR are RG6.

you think I should try hooking the DVR up with Cat 5?

you think I should try hooking the DVR up with Cat 5?

I have the same problem as you with one of my receivers connected via cat5, so it's not necessarily a coax issue. I was having a number of other issues with my dvr, most of which seem to be better since the new update. I haven't had a chance to mess around with it in a while. There was really only one time out of the handful I've used this feature where playing a recorded show on another dvr was so bad it was unwatchable. Usually it's just a stutter here, a stutter there.

you think I should try hooking the DVR up with Cat 5?


My dvr and one of my receivers is hooked up with cat 5e ethernet, and the remaining receiver with RG6 coax left from a Direct TV installation years ago. No problems with either. If I had a choice I would go with the ethernet but my coax works fine as well.

AT&T’s official list of Orange County cities getting U-verse TV
July 21st, 2009, 8:13 am posted by Tamara Chuang, a.k.a. The Gadgetress (excerpt)

Keep in mind, service may not be available in all the cities yet, but AT&T is working on building the service there.

1. Aliso Viejo
2. Anaheim
3. Brea
4. Buena Park
5. Costa Mesa
6. Fountain Valley
7. Fullerton
8. Garden Grove
9. La Habra
10. La Palma
11. Laguna Hills
12. Laguna Niguel
13. Mission Viejo
14. Orange
15. Placentia
16. Rancho Santa Margarita
17. San Juan Capistrano
18. Santa Ana
19. Stanton
20. Villa Park
21. Westminster
22. Yorba Linda

http://gadgetress.freedomblogging.com/2009/07/21/atts-official-list-of-orange-county-cities-getting-u-verse-tv/17669/

you think I should try hooking the DVR up with Cat 5?

If it is easy to do why not try it. My RG sits right next to my family room TV and the DVR STB is there. So short run for me made no sense to use coax.

If it is easy to do why not try it. My RG sits right next to my family room TV and the DVR STB is there. So short run for me made no sense to use coax.

I am so fed up with this uverse crap. We have to constantly reset the boxes, constant stuttering.I know what happened, whoever did my install didn't do it right. I call customer service and all i get is a non-english speaking person who wants to walk me through the steps of resetting my box. I tell them I want to speak to someon else, they give me the run around. I love the faster internet, but it is not worth this crap tv. Dish network was so much better, better HD picture. When they did my install. I told them I wanted it with network cable, and the lazy installer said they don't do that if the house is already cable wired. When I first tried the dvr and had the stuttering, the person I spoke to in tier 2 support assured me that it was not due to my install. So they took money off my bill and I figured it would get better, but it has only gotten worse. Sorry for venting.

I am going to try the network cable. I am going to connect it to the DVR only. I don't have enough to do all 5 boxes. I will see if this works. It is kind of a long run.

I am so fed up with this uverse crap. We have to constantly reset the boxes, constant stuttering.I know what happened, whoever did my install didn't do it right. I call customer service and all i get is a non-english speaking person who wants to walk me through the steps of resetting my box. I tell them I want to speak to someon else, they give me the run around. I love the faster internet, but it is not worth this crap tv. Dish network was so much better, better HD picture. When they did my install. I told them I wanted it with network cable, and the lazy installer said they don't do that if the house is already cable wired. When I first tried the dvr and had the stuttering, the person I spoke to in tier 2 support assured me that it was not due to my install. So they took money off my bill and I figured it would get better, but it has only gotten worse. Sorry for venting.


Your experience with uverse is not typical. There is something wrong. I have no idea if it has anything to do with the cabling or install or not, but I have had uverse since 8/2007 and I have never experienced the stutter or freeze up problems that you mention. As I mentioned I have a mix of coax and ethernet cabling on my receivers. No problems with any of them.

My only beef with uverse was the annoying problem with the digital audio on both HDMI and toslink. They finally fixed that with some firmware updates a few weeks back.

You are just not talking to the right people when you contact tech support. In my experience, the tier one is only good for the most basic troubles. They have always been polite and tried to help...and I have never had to wait on hold for any length of time to speak with a real person. They can't help you with anything complicated though. I contrast that with my Time Warner experience where you could never get a live person without a 40 minute wait on hold. And then they were no help at all.

I was getting long dropouts (up to 10 mins or so) randomly throughout the day until a guy came out about a month ago. He replaced the coax from the box outside to my RG with Cat5 or 5e or whatever. Working fine now. He said there were tons of errors causing the issues.

Firm's revenue falls slightly compared to last year

By Georg Szalai

July 23, 2009, 12:26 PM ET
NEW YORK -- AT&T continued to sign up customers to its U-verse TV service at a healthy pace in the second quarter, but the telecom giant added fewer subscribers than in the previous quarter for what seems to be the first time since the service's launch.

The weakened growth is a sign that the recession, the challenged U.S. housing market and/or seasonality are having some impact on the fast-growing service that has competed more aggressively with cable operators during the past year.

In its quarterly earnings report Thursday, AT&T reported a net increase of 248,000 users for U-verse to bring its total subscriber base to 1.6 million. Sanford Bernstein analyst Craig Moffett called the figures "a touch light." He had forecast a gain of 278,000 for the period.

U-verse has added more than 1 million TV subs with accelerating momentum during the past year.

For cable operators, the second quarter traditionally is the weakest in terms of sub momentum because of seasonal circumstances, such as the moves of students and snowbirds. For the recently ended second quarter, several cable firms, such as Comcast and Time Warner, have flagged particular weakness tied to the challenges of the U.S. housing market and economy.

AT&T management said this year that it still wants to hit its U-verse deployment target of 30 million. But it will do so in 2011 rather than next year to conserve cash in a tough credit market.

Overall, AT&T on Thursday posted a second-quarter profit of $3.2 billion, compared with nearly $3.8 billion in the year-ago period. Revenue fell from $30.87 billion to $30.73 billion but exceeded the average analyst expectation.

The results also underlined the telecom firm's increasing reliance on the success of the Apple iPhone. AT&T reported more than 2.4 million iPhone activations in the latest quarter. More than a third of the iPhone customers were new to AT&T.

http://www.hollywoodreporter.com/hr/content_display/news/e3i017491d566a1666195433482fb5e4f0e

City of Cypress is the latest annoyed by VRAD cabinets...
09:10AM Thursday Jul 23 2009 by Karl Bode

Cypress, California is one of only a few neighborhoods where AT&T U-Verse and Verizon FiOS even get close to directly competing, but according to the Orange County Register, deployment of both services is on hold for very different reasons. Verizon has been slowing down FiOS builds in the state because they say the economy's slow (and because they want to increase uptake in already deployed areas). But U-Verse is seeing a slowdown because once again, city officials are annoyed by the VRAD cabinets AT&T needs to plunk down in neighborhoods in order to offer VDSL and IPTV. The cabinets have been an ongoing point of contention between AT&T and cities, who in some cases are getting AT&T to foot the bill for landscaping to hide the cabinets.

http://www.dslreports.com/shownews/UVerse-Cabinet-Debate-Slows-Orange-County-Deployment-103575?nocomment=1

also from DSL Reports:

Review by nicklulli
UPDATED: a few minutes ago
Fair warning: reviewer joined this week


[From] Jacksonville,Duval,FL
[Contract] $200 per month
[From order to live] about 3 days
[Positives] "Internet speeds faster, more reliable...much more HD offerings, and TV service looks nice"
[Negatives] "Distance limitations for some customers limit internet speed/HD feeds"
[Bottom Line] "AT&T Uverse is the best TV, internet, and phone service in Jacksonville"

Beginning in December 2008, I first found out about AT&T Uverse services in Jacksonville.

Being an AT&T Mobility customer since 1999, it was thrilling to hear they were now offering TV, internet, and VoIP in Jacksonville.

Our cable provider, Comcast, lacks a reliable network in Jacksonville. File downloads would be close to 100KB/S...and calling them only resulted in the customer being blamed for any issues. Also, their TV service had a high amount of artifacts and lacked much availability. Basically, for years they were the only company to provide EVERYTHING.

So, at the beginning of this year I became Uverse obsessed. I was constantly on the lookout for VRADs, DSLAMs, and cross connect cabinets. Finally, they began to dig up the road (Hodges Blvd) that my neighborhood is off of. Fiber optic cabling could be seen being laid next to one of the new lanes. I was excited.

A VRAD and cross connect cabinet popped up about 2500 feet of driving distance from my home. Then, in May, one of my friends who lives about 2500 feet driving distance on the other side of this equipment was able to sign up for Uverse. However, the online system did not and still doesn't let any of her neighbors or mine get Uverse. In fact, we are the only two customers currently on Uverse as we know it. I've driven around trying to find other 2Wire rgs pop up, and can't find any. Also, my friend's mother is a former employee of AT&T and she has a lot of insider information.

So, I took the initiative and contacted one of the AT&T upper support guys that frequent this website, David. He was able to enable my address to receive service.

A tech first arrived at my home on June 2, 2009. Coincidentally, my friend and I were driving from her house to my house and we actually pulled behind the tech as he was leaving the cross connect cabinet. He pulled in to my house just before us. This technician dug around our pedestal and made sure all of the copper inside it was okay. Then, he opened our NID (which hasn't been used since we terminated POTS/ADSL service in 2003) and tested it for loop length. Our actual length from the VRAD wire-wise was 3000 feet according to him. According to tier 2 based in Texas, the length is 3300 feet but can vary either direction. So, in all, we are far away, at to top it off, our copper is circa 1995. That means we have narrow, 26 gauge copper wiring to the house.

I was informed by this technician that our length might require us to drop down to the 19mbps profile. We have two HDTVs and one SDTV. The availability of only one HD stream wasn't a big issue, as I am the only one that cares about something being in HD. My biggest disappointment was that this mean I could not get Max18 internet.

So, the next day is June 3, 2009. Our official install. Our tech arrived at around 8:30am, at the beginning of the window for him to arrive. This was good, as the quicker my internet was back up, the better. I design websites and do video production for the web and downtime would be bad. I've heard the installs can take forever, but it didn't seem long for the install at all. He re-checked our NID was able to pick up a usable signal (our max sync at the time was 26mbps) and began to work. He basically went into the attic, removed any "stuff" such as splitters, etc. He used an adapter and routed a telephone to coax cable into the Comcast box next to the NID which controls the home coax network. After doing this, all coax outlets then were being fed by Uverse and essentially the Comcast cable that came out of the ground was "unplugged" from the system. I felt like laughing at Comcast later that day when they begged me to stay with them. They offered free this and that, and I just wasn't going to do it.

Our install tech pulled cable from one room and put it into another. The rest of the house was already fine with the coax being pushed to it. All of the outlets and ends were changed, and service was good to go. Our RG was placed on the opposite side of the house as NID.

So our service looked good. It was my first DVR through a TV service and it was awesome. I also loved that The Weather Channel HD was available, as Comcast doesn't carry it, nor do they carry many HD channels. My download now are close to 1.3MB/s, thanks to having 12mbps internet.

We had a few problems. We'd have occasional pixellations and audio drop outs while watching an HD channel. Of course, our long loop length is to blame for any issues we had or will have in the future (more about the "future" further down). After having service for a month and a half, I decided to see if we could fix the pixellation problem. Was it a deal killer? No. On Comcast I had to stare at artifacts and a not so vivid picture. To me, this was "minor." The pixellation would occur maybe once every program for a second. Anywho, I decided to contact Matt May from Uverse tier 2 tech support. His name on DSL Reports is "mmay149q." The Matts and Davids in this world are few and far between, and we need more! Matt contacted me back almost immediately, and was able to setup a phone call in which we could discuss the issue further. After hearing the problems, looking at some of our RG stats, and reviewing his notes, he decided we should switch our homerun to cat5. This means we should switch the connection between our NID and RG to cat5 from coax. Again, our loop length is to blame and any sort of of issue with coax combined with the loop length was causing us to lose packets from the IPTV stream. Cat5 was expected to improve our system.

Our cat5 switcharoo occurred on July 23, 2009. Our tech called me on July 22 and told me what he was told by dispatch and that he only lived two miles away and could be here even earlier than 8. He got here at about 7:30am, and immediately got to work. He opened our NID and hooked up the cat5 and ran it through the attic to the RG room.

This only took about an hour, he was very professional and reliable. Our service, as of this evening, is not having any pixellation or audio dropouts.

Matt gave me a follow up call and email after our cat5 switch. He told me he won't be able to get accurate stats of the errors until 24-48 hours after the switch as it will register our unplugging and replugging back in from this morning. He is also helping me with a minor email issue between the AT&T mail server and Apple Mail. All in all, the service is going a bit better.

Kudos to Matt, David, and the techs involved in my install. If you can get Uverse in your area, I'd take it over the cableco any day.

Okay, so more about the "future." Yesterday, AT&T pulled up conduits from the ground in the front of my neighborhood for what looks like fiber. There is also large wheeled spools of fiber optic cabling just down the road from me in a construction area. At this point, it is unknown what the fiber could be for. It could also be for copper, who knows. But there are now multiple markings and flags put out.

http://www.dslreports.com/comment/2911/74656

Well, I ran network cable from router to main DVR only. everything else is still cable, and guess what. the stuttering has stopped. I had 3 episodes of deadliest catch that all had severe stuttering and after hooking up the network cable it stopped. I will give it a couple more days and see if that was the issue. Now here is my question, why does that change make the difference?

Well, I ran network cable from router to main DVR only. everything else is still cable, and guess what. the stuttering has stopped. I had 3 episodes of deadliest catch that all had severe stuttering and after hooking up the network cable it stopped. I will give it a couple more days and see if that was the issue. Now here is my question, why does that change make the difference?

When they did the install did they replace all of the RG6 cable ends and connections? If not they should have on both ends and they should be compression not crimp ends. I think a lot of problems come from installers who may be running behind and take shortcuts figuring if something does not work they can come back and fix it. Also probably make sure that wherever the RG line is being split that they are using the right bandwidth splitter.

Well, I ran network cable from router to main DVR only. everything else is still cable, and guess what. the stuttering has stopped. I had 3 episodes of deadliest catch that all had severe stuttering and after hooking up the network cable it stopped. I will give it a couple more days and see if that was the issue. Now here is my question, why does that change make the difference?

Just wonder what STB model number is this happening on?

Just wonder what STB model number is this happening on?

It is the motorola box, I am not sure of the model.

Well, I ran network cable from router to main DVR only. everything else is still cable, and guess what. the stuttering has stopped. I had 3 episodes of deadliest catch that all had severe stuttering and after hooking up the network cable it stopped. I will give it a couple more days and see if that was the issue. Now here is my question, why does that change make the difference?

Seems I got infected:confused: recorded the last day of the Tour de France and when I went to watch from my bedroom the recording was stuttering (stopping/starting) to the point it was unwatchable. I ended up watching it in the family room on the STB with the DVR no problem there. No one else reporting this in the house and I did not notice this on any other programs. Weird

Seems I got infected:confused: recorded the last day of the Tour de France and when I went to watch from my bedroom the recording was stuttering (stopping/starting) to the point it was unwatchable. I ended up watching it in the family room on the STB with the DVR no problem there. No one else reporting this in the house and I did not notice this on any other programs. Weird

Just curiuos if the problem is a certain STB model. Motorola VIP1200 or VIP1216 or VIP1225 or other?

Att was out today. moved my gateway away from my electrical panel. It was sitting 2 ft. away, Which was bad. He also ran cat5 for all the boxes, but he swore there was no difference between coax and cat 5, and that coax was better because it was triple shielded or something. he was cool about it though. I hope that finally fixes everything. We shall see.

well 2 days and no problems. I got my fingers crossed

Just out of curiosity, is there any practical limit to the number of channels that U-Verse can carry? I'm guessing it would be upstream in the plant that converts them to IP streams, not a limit on the customer end.

No, there is no limit on the number of channels this system can carry. The only data pushed to your house from the dslam is whatever you are currently watching.

Hey guys, I have a few questions for you.

Uverse is in my neighborhood finally! Sadly, they are not willing to hook up to me yet (I live in a low rise condo development, but the single family homes on either side are available :rolleyes:) Anyway, I am hoping a multiyear contract for the Uverse100 service with 33 units will be enough to talk them into getting us wired. We have a similar deal with TWC now for their "basic" digital service where individual unit owners are free to pay for any service above and beyond the basic service. Hopefully AT&T would be willing to negotiate a similar deal for a slight discount.

Anyway on to the questions:

1) My internet speed is going to go from 18MB downspeed to 6MB downspeed. This is a bit of a misleading number because when the rest of the complex gets home I don't get near that number on TWC.. is the Uverse internet speed going to be affected by a lot of people on the network like cable is? Does anyone use Uverse with the Netflix on demand? If so how many bars to you get?

2) How is the PQ on Uverse. I have a few friends with Uverse and it doesn't look good.. but their TVs calibration is absolutely horrible so I don't know if the problem is their set or Uverse.

Thanks for the help guys. Speed HD, NFL Network and ESPN U HD will be mine soon I hope.

How is the PQ on Uverse. I have a few friends with Uverse and it doesn't look good.. but their TVs calibration is absolutely horrible so I don't know if the problem is their set or Uverse.In general, forum feedback rates U-verse HD image quality less than most other providers.

In general, forum feedback rates U-verse HD image quality less than most other providers.

I really think that depends on what quality you're getting from cable. Comcast in Atlanta was not giving me very good HD, so I find that U-verse is at least as good as what I had on Comcast, and significantly better for some channels.

Is this service limited on HD streams?

Is this service limited on HD streams?

Yes, 2.

Trying to watch channel 4 KDFW and picture is frozen. But by pressing the guide, PIP (at the lower left corner) show that the channel is playing. Uverse is connected via HDMI to a Panasonic 58PZ800u. Anyone having this issue or know whats up with this, all other channels are playing fine.

Yes, 2.

3 HD streams will be coming soon. It will only be available to customers who's system is within range to support a 32mb profile.

3 HD streams will be coming soon. It will only be available to customers who's system is within range to support a 32mb profile.

I hope so, we now have 4 hd. t.v.'s in my house. we need more hd.

Biggest showstopper for AT&T in the future, IMO. As more and more homes buy HDTVs to replace older sets, this will become a huge issue for customer retention. Once you get used to HD you don't want to watch the SD equivalent.

Does Uverse STB (VIP1216) have a Zoom feature?

Does Uverse STB (VIP1216) have a Zoom feature?

Yes. You can enable it by using the enter button (in the number pad area).

Yes. You can enable it by using the enter button (in the number pad area).

Thanks

Review by Ganthet posted on dlsreports.com
Fair warning: reviewer joined this week
[From] Kansas City,Clay,MO
[Contract] $110 per month
[From order to live] about 14 days
[Positives] "Consistent Speed. Nice VOIP features"
[Negatives] "Frustrating install process"
[Bottom Line] "Do plenty of research about your area before ordering. Once installed it is a good service"

I’ll warn everyone this is a long and detailed review. Here is my current package:

U-Verse Internet: Max 12Mb/1.5Mb

U-verse voice unlimited

U-verse TV: U100 no DVR

I've been watching U-verse since it was first announced as "Project Lightspeed" several years ago. U-verse has been available in my neighborhood for some time, but after reading about some of the nightmares in other areas I decided to wait for a bit and let AT&T get over some of its growing pains.

When they upped the "Max" tier from 10Mb to 12 recently I felt the time had come to take the plunge. I could get the Max 12 tier and VOIP for roughly the same price I was paying for POTS and 6Mb ADSL. I was not interested in TV as I am very happy with my satellite provider. However I did order the basic TV package as that got me the free install. The $50 rebate I got for ordering online paid for the TV's first and only month. I ordered online and requested a Saturday install so I didn't have to miss any work.

The first hiccup came during the online ordering (a bad omen). I wanted to port my existing AT&T POTS line to VOIP, but was told by the website it wasn't possible. I got on the online chat and was told that happens and that the quickest resolution would be to process the order with a new number and call the U-Verse Sales team a few days later. It was a slight annoyance, but when I called there was no issue. Then the next day I get a call from AT&T telling me my order is on hold because my POTS number has a block on it and can't be ported. I had to call a different number and remove the block. Fortunately I did not lose my install time and to AT&T's credit every time I spoke with the Sales team they confirmed my order details and install time. They also tried to up-sell my TV package every time, but that's almost to be expected.

The day of the install all started well. The tech was right on time. My house has Cat5e wired from a central location to all rooms and the NID so the install was a snap for the tech. I did have to help him with my 110 punch block for the voice, but otherwise the install was painless. The internet was up quickly and at the full speed I ordered. I only got minimal instruction on the TV. Apparently non-DVR users are of some lower class and don't get much instruction. I was told "There's not much to it since there's no DVR". He showed me the on-screen guide then handed me the remote and paper channel guide. That completed the TV portion. The VOIP was a bit frustrating. I was told by the tech that they don't do number porting on the weekends. He was able to get me outbound calling, but I was told inbound would have to wait until Monday. I wish I had been told that before ordering. The entire install lasted about 2.5 hours. Overall the install tech did a good job and was very pleasant to work with.

Problems started about 2hrs after he left. I was happily enjoying my new bandwidth when suddenly everything stopped. No internet, VOIP or TV. The RG had a red light. I called AT&T on my cell and was told by the tech that this occasionally happens on an install day and that it would sort itself out by the morning. With little faith I accepted his response and went to bed. I was unsurprised when I awoke the next morning and had no service. I called back -rather frustrated - to check on the issue. I got the usual scripted apologies and was told they'd get a tech back to the house - the next day. Now I was just flat-out angry. I explained that was unacceptable and demanded my situation be escalated. I got a supervisor, who actually seemed to care. He did some investigation and determined that when they'd canceled my DSL account the previous day they'd also canceled my U-Verse account. He accepted the blame and got some help and within 30 minutes everything was restored. I was again reminded that the VOIP wouldn't be up until tomorrow.

The next day (2-days after install) about mid-day I called home from work to see if my phone was working. Big surprise - it wasn't! I called AT&T again got the apology and was told there was some kind of hold on the order. The guy on the phone got the port finished in less than 30 minutes. OK - now everything is working! I got home that night and checked the RG to make sure it wall all still green and realized I didn't get my battery backup (UPS) since I ordered VOIP. I began furiously kicking myself because I knew this would require a call to AT&T

The next day I called and got one more scripted apology. I was hoping they could just ship it to me and let me install myself. (I am an IT Manager by trade and have over 12 years of experience with enterprise IT systems). No dice. They needed to send a tech. The slap in the face was that the window for "repair" was 4 hrs, but the window for install was only 2! Now I had just about had it. I'd previously had ADSL for 6 years and needed to call for issues only twice! I blew my top and requested I be connected to their retention department because I was on the verge of canceling. I'm sure I sounded like an irate jerk to the retention rep who listened to my lengthy tale of woe. Afterwards she acknowledged I had a rough time and offered a $100 credit for my trouble. She said there was no way to allow me to self install - regardless of my IT credentials - and got me a tech scheduled. The tech arrived a few days later, installed the UPS in about 6 minutes, and at long last my install was done - 9 days after it began.

Since then the service has been rock solid. The internet speed has remained consistent across test sites and real-world usage. My wife and I have been playing with the VOIP features. I won't really review the TV as we've only casually looked at. I will say that again AT&T frustrated because I found out that I am on a "Low Profile" connection meaning that because of my distance from the VRAD I cannot get the full bandwidth possible. As a result I can only receive 1 HD and 3 SD feeds at a time, which is inadequate for me.

In the final analysis AT&T did recover from every misstep, but there were far too many and the recovery required too much prodding for me. I think the product itself is excellent and I plan on keeping the internet and VOIP. I just think AT&T needs to work on making the install process smoother. I would recommend the product to anyone, but I'd also warn them to do as much research as possible before installing.

I will also say that all the reading I did in the forums at DSL reports had me well prepared for my install. Many thanks to all the posters. I will try to pay it forward.

http://www.dslreports.com/comment/2911/74821

Guys - does U-Verse offer a "limited basic"-type tier, with just the locals?

If they do (or with any SD-only package, for that matter), do you get the HD locals included for no extra cost?

Guys - does U-Verse offer a "limited basic"-type tier, with just the locals?

If they do (or with any SD-only package, for that matter), do you get the HD locals included for no extra cost?

Nope. If they did I would have it since they are the only provider that can give me both the CT and NY stations in HD. Their cheapest package is $49 and HD would cost you another $10.
https://uverse1.att.com/un/lsBuildOwnOrder.do

Thanks.

Guys - does U-Verse offer a "limited basic"-type tier, with just the locals?

If they do (or with any SD-only package, for that matter), do you get the HD locals included for no extra cost?

Not sure if it's available everywhere, but here in Northern California they offer Ubasic. Ubasic consists of one regular non-dvr stb, and local channels only. $95 installation fee, $19 monthly, no HD included.

Not sure if it's available everywhere, but here in Northern California they offer Ubasic. Ubasic consists of one regular non-dvr stb, and local channels only. $95 installation fee, $19 monthly, no HD included.

I wonder if that was a requirement for them to get authority to start the service there, because they don't offer it here.

Sorry for the noob question or if this has been answer already.
How many activity are allow with Uverse?
With three tvs in the house, was having 4 shows being recorded, but was only allow to watch on one tv and not the other two, why? Does Uverse only allow 5 things at once?
Also notice I can't watch another HD channel when one HD is being recorded. I thought Uverse suppose to receive 2HD, am I wrong on this?

I wonder if that was a requirement for them to get authority to start the service there, because they don't offer it here.I've never actually asked them about it, but they don't have any evidence of it existing in the booklets I get in the mail or online here, either (whereas with Comcast, they do mention it online under the packages for the area).

Anyway, the important part of my question was the part about the local HD's being included with an SD package, and that was definitely answered - so, thanks again.

Sorry for the noob question or if this has been answer already.
How many activity are allow with Uverse?
With three tvs in the house, was having 4 shows being recorded, but was only allow to watch on one tv and not the other two, why? Does Uverse only allow 5 things at once?
Also notice I can't watch another HD channel when one HD is being recorded. I thought Uverse suppose to receive 2HD, am I wrong on this?

Up to 2HD. Depending on bandwidth available, from what I understand (and why I am hesitant to go with U-verse).

Been living with U-verse for about a week now. I was a 4+ year subscriber to Verizon's FiOS before I moved.

First off, my video gear is pretty good, IMO. Pioneer Elite Pro-151HD 60" 1080p plasma that I have calibrated with a colorimeter and software. Second, I was very happy with FiOS HD picture quality. Very little artifacting, I considered it reference quality for HD programming.

With all that said, I can't say I'm very impressed with what I see from U-verse, specifically on HD channels. There is quite a bit of blocking, and the color seems very inconsistent. It looks like an HD feed with about 4MB worth of bandwidth.

I have the U450 package with 6MB of internet. I have 4 boxes, but only two are active at any given time.

Any ideas on how to get better picture quality? I have copper to my prem, I'm about 2000 ft from the node. All of my boxes are connected via Cat5e, no coax at all in my house. Please don't say "try component video cables" ;)

Should I expect better PQ when we get 3HD streams?

Don't know if this info helps:

Broadband Link
Connection Speed:
• Incoming: 25216 kbps
• Outgoing: 2048 kbps

First off, my video gear is pretty good, IMO. Pioneer Elite Pro-151HD 60" 1080p plasma that I have calibrated with a colorimeter and software.
Calibrated on what input, before or after connecting a U-verse receiver? "Calibrated" doesn't mean anything by itself.
Second, I was very happy with FiOS HD picture quality. Very little artifacting, I considered it reference quality for HD programming.
That's because it is. FiOS is the only service capable of delivering full-bandwidth signals as received from content distributors.
It looks like an HD feed with about 4MB worth of bandwidth.
6Mb. 4MB would be nearly double what most FiOS channels are provided at.
Any ideas on how to get better picture quality? I have copper to my prem, I'm about 2000 ft from the node. All of my boxes are connected via Cat5e, no coax at all in my house. Please don't say "try component video cables"
It is what it is. Component video cables are the only option if your blocking and color problems are caused by HDMI. The improvement is immediately noticeable on affected hardware.
Should I expect better PQ when we get 3HD streams?
No. All they're doing is increasing the sync rate to handle another 6Mb stream.

AT&T Files Program-Access Complaint Against Cablevision

Telco: Cablevision Engaged in Anticompetitive Practices Over MSG HD

By MCN Staff -- Multichannel News, 8/13/2009 8:28:57 PM EDT

AT&T filed a complaint Aug. 13 with the FCC, charging that Cablevision has engaged in anticompetitive practices over access to high-definition programming on its Madison Square Garden network.

The filing follows a similar program-access complaint lodged in July by Verizon, which said Cablevision "intentionally and unlawfully" refused to make available sports programming featuring the New York Knicks and New York Rangers -- which it owns -- as well as the New York Islanders, New Jersey Devils and Buffalo Sabers.

According to Reuters, AT&T noted that, based on FCC rules, cable operators such as Cablevision, can't prevent other video providers from offering a competing service to customers. The company's Connecticut customers currently receive Madison Square Garden programming.

Cablevision, in a statement, said: "AT&T is late to the game and doesn't want to play by the rules. Their customers already receive every single game offered on MSG and MSG Plus. Now they want the FCC to force MSG to hand over its HD programming, which is a product of many years of technological development and investment. The idea that a phone company more than 15 times our size needs a regulatory bailout is absurd."

http://www.multichannel.com/article/327590-AT_T_Files_Program_Access_Complaint_Against_Cablevision.php

Calibrated on what input, before or after connecting a U-verse receiver? "Calibrated" doesn't mean anything by itself.

Calibrated on the U-verse input. But, unless the U-verse box is going to spit out primary and secondary 75% color fields, there's only so much you can do. Besides, my main problem is with the artifacting.

That's because it is. FiOS is the only service capable of delivering full-bandwidth signals as received from content distributors.

That's a shame. I was led to believe U-verse would have similar quality.



6Mb. 4MB would be nearly double what most FiOS channels are provided at.

Sorry about the typo.

It is what it is. Component video cables are the only option if your blocking and color problems are caused by HDMI. The improvement is immediately noticeable on affected hardware.

So you're saying there is an acknowledged problem with the HDMI output of the Motorola box which causes artifacting? If the component boxes are simply rolling off the high frequency response to mask the blocking, that doesn't sound like a viable option to me.

No. All they're doing is increasing the sync rate to handle another 6Mb stream.

Bummer. So there is really no near-term solution from AT&T's side?

Verizon rebuilt their infrastructure to provide truly state of the art, nearly limitless bandwidth with fiber to the premises (FTTP). When newer, faster switches and wave division multiplexers become available, Fios can increase bandwidth significantly without replacing fiber lines.

AT&T on the other hand tried to do things on the cheap. They designed a system that squeezes the last ounce of performance out of legacy thin copper wires. U-Verse will go from 2 HD-Lite streams to 3 even worse looking HD-Lite streams by cranking up the compression. The results are not pretty.

AT&T's strategy was penny wise, pound foolish. They have lower capital expenditures up front. However, the bulk of the cost of a system rebuild is not copper thin wire or fiber optic cable, it is the labor cost to do the project in the first place. U-Verse is built in such a way that it almost guarantees that AT&T will have to tear out lines and completely rebuild their network again in 5 - 12 years. Verizon on the other hand can simply replace switching equipment at the node and place more capable modems in consumers' homes as needed. Verizon already has laid fiber that can fulfill foreseeable bandwidth demands for the next 20 or 30 years.:cool:

Let me see if I've got this straight: U-verse ain't got it together, yet. Does that about sum it up?

Let me see if I've got this straight: U-verse ain't got it together, yet. Does that about sum it up?

Yeah.

AT&T on the other hand tried to do things on the cheap.
No, they went for mass availability over massive capital investment with limited gains.

The major issue with the deployment is getting the infrastructure in place nationwide. Communities and homeowners can upgrade their final links on their own time and foot their own bills.

Once you have a mature deployment, it's simply a matter of offering multiple sync profiles depending on what individual customers can support. AT&T's buildout is accordingly much faster. There's no superior approach.

One gets mediocre, cable-competing quality out to lots of people fast, allowing for incremental improvements and the other gets excellent quality out to a small number of people. It's only good if you fall into a service area.
U-Verse will go from 2 HD-Lite streams to 3 even worse looking HD-Lite streams by cranking up the compression.
No, according to them, they're moving to 3 streams by increasing the sync rate to 32Mb, up from 25, and covering the 6Mb needed for a third HD stream.
AT&T's strategy was penny wise, pound foolish. They have lower capital expenditures up front. However, the bulk of the cost of a system rebuild is not copper thin wire or fiber optic cable, it is the labor cost to do the project in the first place. U-Verse is built in such a way that it almost guarantees that AT&T will have to tear out lines and completely rebuild their network again in 5 - 12 years.
Nonsense. AT&T's labor charges on capital deployment are next to nothing. They're not out laying new copper--they're using existing connections as they are, fiber or copper. AT&T doesn't have to tear anything out on their network. The copper is on private homeowner property. AT&T chose not to foot that bill with the hope of recouping it from customer billing.
Verizon already has laid fiber that can fulfill foreseeable bandwidth demands for the next 20 or 30 years.:cool:
They both have. Verizon has just made sure that each home is fiber through the whole path, at astronomical prices, hence its slow rollout.

Since focus testing shows that mediocre HD is acceptable to most customers, AT&T's strategy is working fine, especially compared to cable services, which could easily improve their service by switching to packet-based networks delivered on their existing physical plant. They're instead scrambling to squeeze more channels out of their broadcast wires.

Satellite is the service that actually has no long-term prospects in its current form: it can't do what Verizon and AT&T (and what Comcast and TW should be doing) because of the nature of the technology. That's why they push price hard--they just throw up some new satellites from time to time, no digging involved.

We're at the beginning of a long string of many changes. One day, all the terrestrial services will resemble FiOS and be available everywhere. There are just different strategies for getting there.

What if you have your STB hooked up with both cable and Cat 5E. would that make any difference?

They both have. Verizon has just made sure that each home is fiber through the whole path, at astronomical prices, hence its slow rollout.

Slow rollout? FiOS has 2.5 million television subscribers and is adding 300,000 new subscribers per quarter. U-Verse has 1.5 million subscribers and is adding about 250,000 per quarter.

Verizon is on pace to be the fifth largest terrestrial television provider by the end of the year, and should exceed its goal of 4 million subscribers through 2010 by a substantial margin.

AT&T's buildout is accordingly much faster.Wrong. Look at the numbers. AT&T is noticeably slower in it's rollout than Verizon FiOS.

One gets mediocre, cable-competing quality out to lots of people fast, allowing for incremental improvements and the other gets excellent quality out to a small number of people.?

I've seen U-verse, and in my area Comcast is substantially better. Many Comcast service areas are using a very simular infrastructure with very similar HD image quality to what I have. Of course, there are a good number of exceptions where Comcast is worse than what U-verse offers.

So again, we advise people to compare and decide what works best for themselves.

AT&T enters TV market in Memphis area

By James Dowd (Contact), Memphis Commercial Appeal
Sunday, August 16, 2009

More than a year after state officials cleared the way for cable television competition, viewers in the Memphis area can now decide if they want to make the switch.

Beginning Monday, AT&T enters the local market with its U-verse package, which is set to compete with Comcast and satellite providers DirecTV and Dish Network.

The offering arrives in Memphis following the passage of the Competitive Cable and Video Services Act, which was signed into law by Gov. Phil Bredesen in May 2008. U-verse has been available in Nashville since December.

As part of its franchise application, AT&T promised to offer U-verse to subscribers in Arlington, Bartlett, Collierville, Covington, Dyersburg, Germantown, Lakeland, Memphis, Piperton and Ripley. The plan is projected to be available in those areas within two years.

"The launch of AT&T U-verse reflects our commitment to make the significant investments to bring Tennessee consumers a new era of true video competition," said Gregg Morton, AT&T Tennessee president.

Despite the potential for a further segmented market, local cable officials say they aren't too concerned about the new kid in town.

"We have competed successfully against satellite TV and other competitors for many years," said Trevor Yant, vice president and general manager of Comcast of Memphis. "AT&T will become another player in the market with the services they choose to offer."

Unlike traditional cable services, AT&T's digital cable service is delivered via an Internet Protocol network and offers a variety of packages featuring more than 100 HD channels.

To prepare, the company is investing $400 million on fiber optic upgrades and Internet-based technologies.

Prices range from $49 per month for 130 channels to $109 per month for 390 channels. Each plan includes the cost of an AT&T receiver, but excludes taxes and other applicable fees.

Additional television receivers are necessary for each set that will be receiving the signals and will cost $7. For another flat $10 monthly fee, subscribers receive full HD broadcasts on all sets connected to the receivers.

Customers will not be required to sign contracts for the service and may cancel at any time.

Installation, which may be scheduled on weekdays and weekends, typically takes four to seven hours to complete.

To date, AT&T officials estimate that U-verse has attracted some 1.6 million customers and is available in 105 markets in 19 states. The company touts itself as the only provider to offer a 100 percent IP-based television service.

"The response has been overwhelmingly positive," said Bryan Klamer, general manager-Home Solutions for AT&T Tennessee. "For the first quarter of 2009 alone, we added nearly a quarter-million customers."

In addition to the television plan, Klamer said customers may opt to bundle the service with AT&T digital voice and Internet packages.

"So far, about 70 percent of subscribers have bundled with Internet or voice services," Klamer said.

U-verse will be available in much of the Memphis market at the launch, with more neighborhoods and outlying communities added in the coming months, Klamer said. Customers interested in the service will need to call or visit AT&T outlets to determine specific coverage areas.

For more information, call (800) 288-2020 or go online to uverse.att.com.

http://www.commercialappeal.com/news/2009/aug/16/att-enters-television-market/

Wrong. Look at the numbers. AT&T is noticeably slower in it's rollout than Verizon FiOS.

None of this matters, because Verizon FIOS is only going to be available in Verizon's markets, and U-Verse is only going to be available in AT&T's markets.

But U-Verse will be, be design, inferior to FIOS no matter how you compare them.

None of this matters, because Verizon FIOS is only going to be available in Verizon's markets, and U-Verse is only going to be available in AT&T's markets.?

I'm not comparing the two services, except in speed of rollout, and if you go back and read the post I quoted, you'll see what I was referencing.

But U-Verse will be, be design, inferior to FIOS no matter how you compare them.Agree.

None of this matters, because Verizon FIOS is only going to be available in Verizon's markets, and U-Verse is only going to be available in AT&T's markets.

But U-Verse will be, be design, inferior to FIOS no matter how you compare them.

Thats a darn shame, I'm in AT&T area and want the best video quality!
Wish there was a choice.

The only way to ultimately affect what quality they offer is by speaking with our dollars "in areas where we have a choice of course". I think right now the providers are mainly focused on HD quantity versus quality.

Slow rollout? FiOS has 2.5 million television subscribers and is adding 300,000 new subscribers per quarter. U-Verse has 1.5 million subscribers and is adding about 250,000 per quarter.
Not relative to expenditure--Verizon is indeed building at a faster pace, but at an astronomical cost. They've chosen to invest in that, and it's a good idea, but that's not a technical issue. It's a financial decision.
Wrong. Look at the numbers. AT&T is noticeably slower in it's rollout than Verizon FiOS.
No, sorry. Look at the numbers, indeed. If you look at the average costs and time per unit, AT&T is much faster and much cheaper. I never said that AT&T was covering more users in toto than Verizon--only that AT&T adds individual customers for a fraction of the time and money that Verizon is investing.

That Verizon is massively outspending AT&T in this area is simply not a matter of technology, but simply of money. If their publicly-reported investment amounts were reversed, Verizon would have 1/5 the customers it does now and AT&T would have nearly 6 times more.

Verizon remains a significantly slower and more expensive install approach.
I've seen U-verse, and in my area Comcast is substantially better. Many Comcast service areas are using a very simular infrastructure with very similar HD image quality to what I have. Of course, there are a good number of exceptions where Comcast is worse than what U-verse offers.
Which is precisely why I said cable-competing. If cable is better in some areas, worse in others, and roughly the same in most, the on balance it's a wash.
So again, we advise people to compare and decide what works best for themselves.
I never said any differently.

The audio drops out or becomes choppy, VERY OFTEN now that this hotfix for 5.1 has come out.

1. Brand and model AV receiver :: Sony STR-DG720

2. Approx age of AV Receiver :: Year old

3. Type of connection :: HDMI from Set top box direct to receiver

I have a Sony STR-DG720 Receiver that has 3 HDMI in's.
Twice today, using HDMI for the video/audio, the audio was very choppy.
Went back to Optical for a short term audio fix. Motorola box.

Are my only 2 options to run Video via HDMI to TV / optical to receiver or run component?

August 18th, 2009, 7:40 am posted by Tamara Chuang, a.k.a. The Gadgetress

Readers: This is part of an ongoing series of updates on what happened to the AT&T U-verse rollout in Orange County. The company said in July 2009 that it was halting further expansion in seven O.C. cities. I’m talking to each city so keep checking back for updates! This story, in particular, is the long promised update on why AT&T can’t build its U-verse TV technology underground, as every city prefers.

When AT&T said it would stop pursuing expansion of its highly anticipated U-verse TV and Internet service in seven Orange County cities (Cypress, Dana Point, Irvine, Lake Forest, Newport Beach, San Clemente and Tustin), readers blamed the cities. Why would a city not want to offer residents another TV option?
Closeup

U-verse box in Brea http://gadgetress.freedomblogging.com/files/2009/08/uverseimg_3943-200x150.jpg

Most of the cities responded, saying, no, they haven’t rejected AT&T U-verse. Rather, they’re waiting for their laundry list of requirements to be fulfilled or at least answers to their multiple questions. Cities want AT&T to build the large U-verse utility boxes underground. Otherwise, cities believe they’ll be deluged with ugliness complaints or spray-can wielding vandals.

AT&T tells me it has responded to all concerns among the cities. Multiple times.

“Over the past two years, we’ve met with cities repeatedly and answered the same questions on the same issues,” said an exasperated H. Gordon Diamond, with AT&T’s public affairs, after reading some of the responses from the cities.

Cities have nitpicked AT&T, some asking for the company to pre-engineer each location (which takes 50 hours a pop, says Diamond), others putting requiring a list of “standard” conditions be met. While some cities say they just care more than those cities, AT&T says this is holding up progress and keeping an alternative TV service out of reach of residents.

So, let’s look at AT&T’s response to the biggest issue: AT&T says it can’t build these utility cabinets underground.

And why not?

Diamond gave me the same explanation AT&T offers the cities via a 1-page handout. http://gadgetress.freedomblogging.com/files/2009/07/undergrounding-facts.pdfRead the document yourself: “AT&T’s undergrounding facts.” http://gadgetress.freedomblogging.com/files/2009/08/att-uversecab0001.jpg To see if they jibe with the industry, I’ve run the responses past Steve Woo, a former AT&T engineer who now works for a firm that constructs utility cabinets for AT&T, Verizon and others. Woo supports AT&T’s belief that utility boxes are best built above ground because of lower cost and easier maintenance.

AT&T offers reasons for above-ground U-verse TV technology.

Expensive. To protect electronics from moisture and extreme temperature changes, AT&T would need to invest in a special Controlled Environment Vault (CEV), which aren’t cheap.

Woo says: CEVs are $40,000 to $60,000 each, depending on size. This doesn’t include the equipment or installation.

Space. An underground structure is nine to 20 feet deep, plus additional space is needed for a technician to access it. So, not only does AT&T need to find enough room underground, the space can’t interfere with existing underground utilities like water, power or the sewer system. By comparison, an above-ground U-verse cabinet was designed to fit within the sidewalk area and within the right-of-way of other utilities.

Woo says: Underground cabinets can also be designed to fit the width of a sidewalk and minimize the impact to other underground utilities. The entrance can be placed in the parkway adjacent to the sidewalk.

Access. Electronics inside need to be accessed for maintenance or repair, sometimes immediately. Underground structures aren’t easy to access.

Woo says: Workers must climb down a ladder to get inside. When replacement batteries weigh more than 100 pounds, maintenance and upgrades can be tricky.

What does a Controlled Environment Vault look like? http://gadgetress.freedomblogging.com/files/2010/08/cev0001.gifImage from EmersonNetworkPower.com

Added expense. If AT&T were required to put U-verse cabinets underground, the company would also need build room to house backup power, lighting, gas testing, ventilation, cooling, alarms and emergency water pumping and waterproofing.

Woo says: While underground vaults are guaranteed to be waterproof, they can fail due to improper installation, leading conduits and broken sprinkler lines. However, above-ground cabinets also need protect the electronics from extreme weather conditions. Some have multiple fans, which can be noisy for residential neighbors. Above-ground cabinets require the same controls to provide cooling and ventilation, alarms and power backup systems. But as mentioned, above ground is easier to upgrade. Upgrading below-ground vaults would be cost prohibitive.

Not completely underground. An underground vault still needs at least one above-ground structure in order to access the vault.

Woo says: The above ground “hatch” which houses the air-conditioning equipment and is about 36-inches high.

AT&T has, and some cities have verified, worked to make sure the cabinets are screened or ‘beautified’ with shrubs and other greenery. It also pays the cities the same cable franchise fees as the local cable TV providers.

While the seven cities in Orange County may not be getting U-verse TV service anytime soon, the company is still expanding service in these cities: Aliso Viejo, Anaheim, Brea, Buena Park, Costa Mesa, Fountain Valley, Fullerton, Garden Grove, La Habra, La Palma, Laguna Hills, Laguna Niguel, Mission Viejo, Orange, Placentia, Rancho Santa Margarita, San Juan Capistrano, Santa Ana, Stanton, Villa Park, Westminster, and Yorba Linda. (I keep an updated list of U-verse cities HERE.)

“We’re in 220 communities now. We know what’s standard or not,” Diamond said.

24 Comments
*
sammyj says:
August 20, 2009 at 9:03 am

I know in my neighborhood in Newport the above ground boxes would never work. The picture shows it in a parkway and we don’t have those in several parts of Newport, it’s house or front lawn, sidewalk, curb, street. There is barely 4′ between my garage door and the street, to put a box on my block would cause the sidewalk to be blocked or they’d have to eliminate an on-street parking spot - not likely in Balboa. Undergrounding is also difficult and costly because of the high water table. I just watched them underground our utility poles and it wasn’t pretty - and we were assessed (a lot) for that. I can’t imagine wanting to do that for free with the hope of maybe getting customers.

*
Tom from Laguna Hills says:
August 19, 2009 at 2:51 pm

ATT tried to install Uverse at my home yesterday after constantly hounding us to try it. It might be good or bad but they have not updated the wiring since it was installed in my tract in early 70’s and the signal quality is not able to support Uverse. I found out yesterday that I am the second home on my street to try uverse and neither worked.

*
IRL says:
August 19, 2009 at 1:56 pm

AT&T went for a business model of copper to houses using existing wiring. It was based on idea that they could take their TV in cheaply then skirt local ords that require new services be buried. Now they are saying “we’re a utility!” and shouldn’t be bound by ordinances for cities. Well it looks like they got caught with bad business model. If the gas company could deliver natual gas easier above ground should they be exempt too? Poor AT&T should buck up and do it right! Did I say poor AT&T? … isn’t that like saying jumbo shrimp?

*
Kurt says:
August 18, 2009 at 2:26 pm

I’ve had U-verse for 2 months now and my experience has been great. I was fortunate that I moved to Santa Ana where the service is available. The HD lineup is huge compared to what I had with cable and the Internet is faster. Its good to have a choice.

*
No Way No How says:
August 18, 2009 at 1:55 pm

I already have two eyesores on my right of way courtesy of AT&T, an antiquated utility pole and an often graffitied main box. They wanted to add the above ground uverse box that has a loud fan by the way right outside our master bedroom window, I contacted the city attorney’s office and let them know what would happen if they allowed a third bit of property value reducing blight outside my home. AT& T has to now build it across the street where there is nothing to disturb but a garage along the alley. It’s 2009, build it underground like other areas of the country have been doing since the 70s or don’t do it at all. While I have to endure their slow DSL, I will not subsribe to their glitchy excuse for TV service. Directv works just fine and at least they have decent customer service.

*
Dont hold your breath says:
August 18, 2009 at 12:16 pm

Fifteen years ago, when I asked Pac Bell (Now AT&T) why I couldn’t get DSL, their response was that in Mission Viejo, I was too far from the CO (Central Office), but they were going to be putting in underground mini-CO vaults so I’d be able to have DSL within three years.
Still no vaults, still no DSL, and no U-Verse.
So I’m stuck with COX cable.

*
Trash Guy says:
August 18, 2009 at 12:13 pm

I’ve had AT&T U-verse in my home in Orange for about a year and I am not satisfied. I get CONSTANT picture freeze and Internet connection interruption. AT&T has replaced the wiring and the residential portal, but the problems continue. The last AT&T technician recommended I just get used to it. I was not amused.

*
Harvey J. Cohen says:
August 18, 2009 at 11:31 am

I believe most Orange County cities who deny ATT UVerse do so because of being lobbied by other interests such as Time Warner or Comcast Cable. City Mangements is, most likely, receiving free cable
as well as some bucks added to their campaign war chest therefore creating BS obstacles which add sufficent cost to keep AT&T from moving forward. Suggest they allow the people to make the decision rather than an autocratic decision behind closed doors at special meetings. Just an opinion!!

*
grox says:
August 18, 2009 at 11:24 am

u-verse is a joke. they made an appt. to come install it at my place. then told me i would have to wait 30 days. since i use their dsl now, i would have to disconnect it, wait 30 days without an isp, then they would install the uverse. that is a horrible way to try to transition customers over. u have to cancel the dsl before the appointment can be set for Uverse. that is NOT an option for me, no thanks. when is that picture of the box from? 1970?

*
judy says:
August 18, 2009 at 11:22 am

We have been happy with U-Verse. If we do (infrequently) have a problem, the phone technical service people are great. We had the freezing problem, too, which was solved by replacing our old cables. We love being able to record up to 4 channels at one time (especially when the new TV season starts). With shows now running 62-64 minutes, Direct-TV would go crazy with the overlap.

*
KO says:
August 18, 2009 at 10:44 am

I work for a utility and fully understand how these cities work. They constantly have their hand out and are excellent at placing barriers not to just AT&T, but any business that wants to grow and prosper. This is a shadowy form of corruption, under the guise of “protecting their citizens”. It is truly unfortunate that a superior system isn’t allowed to compete with the entrenched cable company. These cities should be doing everything they can to get AT&T in the door.

o
regularguy7 says:
August 19, 2009 at 11:09 am

Current state law gives the telecom providers all the power when it comes to rolling out services. Cities no longer franchise these companies, the state does.
There are some legitimate concerns with putting boxes above ground but most of the time, cities can do little to stop this practice. Portraying these huge companies as underdogs against the dastardly cities is the funniest part of KO’s post.

*
Remmy700p says:
August 18, 2009 at 10:36 am

We have had U-Verse for about a year here in Riverside. It had some glitches at the beginning (new technology and all…), but the signal, picture quality, online programming access, et al is EXCELLENT!

The VRAD box (the subject of so much city complaining) is right across the street from me. It looks just like any other city/utility box strewn across the neighborhood. Any city rep complaining about the box is blowing smoke. They’re just trying to either 1. protect their cozy, financial backscratch relationship with the entrenched cable companies, or 2. extort more $$$ from the new players like AT&T.

*
TimP says:
August 18, 2009 at 10:30 am

I gave them a try, but after going through 2 HD-DVRs in less than two months, I switched back to DirecTV. U-verse was nice when it worked, but he hardware problems weren’t worth the benefit.

o
Remmy700p says:
August 18, 2009 at 10:36 am

Wow. You gave an entirely new technology platform 60 days. Patience isn’t a virtue, huh???

+
SEAN IN NEWPORT BEACH says:
August 18, 2009 at 2:37 pm

60 DAYS! Wow patience gets thrown out the door IMHO long, long before that when dealing with cable, telephone or satellite

*
Dennis says:
August 18, 2009 at 9:48 am

They can not even get the cell service right for God’s sake. I would not even begin to trust them for TV service. They tell me I am located right between 2 cell towers within a mile and a half from me and I can not even get a signal in my own home, I live off of Warner and Bolsa Chica in H.B. Every time I contact them about it I just get the run around, nobody has any answers as to why this persists. I have had their reps. tell me they get many complaints about this from the area but yet they choose not to address the problem. Keep your cable or sat. service folks, you will be glad you did.

o
aceofspades says:
August 18, 2009 at 10:33 am

I agree Dennis, ATT cell service is dismal. I have Verizon for personal, and ATT for business… miserable coverage.

Now, U-Verse… more red tape from these cosmetically happy cities. These residents (many of them) pay almost 1%/ year for Melloroos, and have to have further limitations imposed? Is Cox cable gifting things to the city boards? I think so. If you live in an association (much of Irvine), you usually can’t have satallite, if you face east/ north, no Satallite… if you live in IAC appartments, no satallite… who does that leave? Cox cable…. so of course they are the biggest opponent of the ATT service. I have heard good things about U-Verse, I hope they get this crappola settled up soon.

*
Jonathan says:
August 18, 2009 at 9:44 am

Here’s my comment about these boxes being graffiti magnets…any wall, electric box, telephone box, or tree is a target. These cities are just trying to make it difficult and the only way for people to get this service is to go to council meetings, submit a petition and demand that AT&T be allowed to roll out the system. They will bend, plus in addition putting in these boxes it will enable them to upgrade existing telephone systems making it better for its customers. Putting these boxes underground is just not practical. There are many above ground boxes that will just be replaced with the newer boxes as I understand it. In the area around my house boxes were replaced and upgraded (never lost any phone or tv service during this time because I had cable and Vonage–so maybe people had some problems). So maybe the cities should put in as part of the agreement to maintain the boxes (duh, they already do) and paint them when vandals violate them (again, they do). So what’s the problem?

o
jim says:
August 18, 2009 at 11:32 am

You have it 100% right about the excuse about above ground boxes only being objectionable because of possible graffiti. They could also be driven into by a drunk in an out of control car, or some fool walking a baby in a stroller could run off the sidewalk into the side of the box.

All crap reasons. If they want the service, this sort of crap will vanish, plain and simple.

*
LEXUSRY says:
August 18, 2009 at 8:44 am

BEFORE YOU GUYS COMPLAINING ABOUT GETTING ATT U-VERSE, LET ME GIVE YOU THE PROBLEM THAT WE HAVE SINCE SIGNING UP FOR AT-T U-VERSE. BATTERY FOR REMOTE CONTROL HAVE TO BE CHANGE CONSTANTLY. IT LAST ABOUT 2 MONTHS COMPARES TO MY UNIVERSE REMOTE CONTROL THAT LAST MORE THAN A YEAR. THEY REPLACE 7 DVD BOX IN LESS THAN 1 YEARS. I STILL HAVE PROBLEMS WITH THE BOX SUCH AS SWITCH CHANNELS AND THE PICTURE FREEZE, RECORD TV SHOWS START AND END AT THE WRONG TIME, HAVE TO RESET THE BOX DAILY WHEN IT DOES NOT RESPOND.

o
Tamara Chuang, a.k.a. The Gadgetress says:
August 18, 2009 at 8:49 am

Yikes! There may be advice from other U-verse users at the U-verse forum board: utalk.att.com/utalk.http://utalk.att.com/utalk/

o
acrimony says:
August 18, 2009 at 8:51 am

…where to start…
Maybe command of the English language?
Oh, the key to the left (izquierdo) of the ‘A’ key is how you can turn Caps Lock off.

o
Jonathan says:
August 18, 2009 at 9:29 am

I have 3 remotes with U-Verse and have had the service since January 2009 (we watch our main TV 3 to 5 hours per day)…I have NOT replaced a battery yet in my remotes so unless you are watching TV more than 16 hours a day then that would be the problem. Second, I had picture freeze and some other problems but they were from the connections being used from my old cable companies equipment, it started to occur after the addition of more channels and my box was not receiving the upgrades properly. Once the cabling was replaced and connections upgraded I have not had a problem. Also consider that if you are recording more than one program (4 is the max), watch on more than one TV, use computers, watch in HD you will get some lag…remember it is a computer box you are using not an antenna on the roof or cable or sattelite. Also, you may have a problem being on the edge of the service area, actually away from the switch box which may also contribute (unlikely because they would not install a system with a weak signal–it happend to me when they first rolled it out).

So, check your wiring, watch less TV to conserve your remote battery, call their customer service and have them fix the problem and get the card of the technician who did the work so they can continue to trouble shoot. They have trucks all over my area and have had them dispatch a truck at the end of the day so it’s not like cable where you have to wait 2 weeks.

Good luck.

http://gadgetress.freedomblogging.com/2009/08/18/att-explains-why-it-cant-build-tv-service-underground/17521/

August 19th, 2009, 9:02 am · 7 Comments · posted by Tamara Chuang, a.k.a. The Gadgetress

Readers: This is part of an ongoing series of updates on what happened to the AT&T U-verse rollout in Orange County. The company said in July 2009 that it was halting further expansion in seven O.C. cities. This story, in particular, focuses on one city that is cooperating with AT&T.

For those wondering whether AT&T’s U-verse TV service is heading to Mission Viejo, the short answer is yes.

But when can a Mission Viejo resident order the service? Here’s the long answer.

The city of Mission Viejo approved the last of 35 permits from AT&T in January, according to Joe Ames, the city’s associate civil engineer. These give AT&T the right of way to install above-ground utility boxes near residents in order to pipe in TV service using new fiber-optic cables and existing copper wires.

But, apparently, there’s quite a bit of lag between getting a permit and offering service. There are bids to be made, construction to be done.

“To our knowledge, only three have been installed. And to my knowledge, none are functioning in the city limits,” Ames said, adding that some residents however may be able to get service from neighboring cities.

Ames does know that the 35 permits don’t come close to covering everyone in Mission Viejo. Originally, AT&T told the city it needed at least 107 new cabinets, according to May 2008 Orange County Register story.http://www.ocregister.com/articles/city-public-existing-2047531-internet-ordinance

“My understanding is that (AT&T) would be submitting more applications in the future,” he said.

You’d think that AT&T would step on it when it comes to Mission Viejo, a city the telecom company sued in March 2008 in order to make sure it would be able to offer TV service in the future.
Mission Viejo settlement

Click to read settlement http://gadgetress.freedomblogging.com/files/2009/08/missionviejosettlement-agreement.pdf

Bill Curley, the city attorney for Mission Viejo, said that the lawsuit was more of a clarification of city ordinance and not some acrimonious legal spat.

At the time, Mission Viejo was updating its city ordinance and one section could have been interpreted that all new utility services must be built underground. If you’ve been following the U-verse story, you’d know that AT&T says it cannot build the boxes underground. The main reason: It’s too expensive to build a waterproof, accessible structure underground to house all the electronics required for TV service.
New ordinance

Click to read new ordinance http://gadgetress.freedomblogging.com/files/2009/08/mission-viejo-excavation-ordinance.pdf

“Their (AT&T’s) estimation, and I can’t disagree, is that having every box underground goes against the law,” Curley said. ”…They were saying we have concerns and we think we have rights and we want to make sure that you, the city, don’t proceed too far along as to violate our rights. We put our heads together to make sure it worked for everybody, not just AT&T.”

This led to discussions and working together to reword the new ordinance.

“Staff has told me that it’s been very positive and (AT&T was) very cooperative. I haven’t heard any complaints from the staff or the telecom providers,” Curley said. “I’m going with the Silence is Golden.”

So, readers, it looks like it’s up to AT&T to begin construction and begin offering the service. If anyone out there in Mission Viejo can order service or already has it, please share your experience with the rest of us. To check and see if AT&T U-verse is available at your address, visit the U-verse site at: https://uverse1.att.com/un/launchAMSS.do

7 Comments

*
Melanie says:
August 21, 2009 at 8:23 am

Thanks for the good information, Gadgetress! It is much appreciated.

*
JDI1960 says:
August 19, 2009 at 6:10 pm

Our household is totally in favor of anything in south OC that pushes the Cox monopoly out (or at least gives them something to work to keep). We especially need more internet providers - satellite would be good. For TV, satellite (Directv) is the highest quality option and within a few dollars of cable prices.

*
Tustin Guy says:
August 19, 2009 at 12:41 pm

U-verse isn’t bad but they have severe limitations because they use existing 2-wire copper phone lines to connect a home from the fiber box. And if the existing wires are old, the signal is at the mercy of their poor quality. I’m in North Tustin and about 2500 ft from a box. Our phone lines are maybe 40 years old and we’ve had regular phone signal issues for years. (ATT doesn’t want to spend the money to replace the lines at the poles.)

I can’t get the 2 HD channels U-verse offer some people and my signal often freezes even though I’ve had 3 or 4 different techs come out to help. (And you can only pause your live TV show from the single main DVR box - a big pain if you’re in the kitchen and want to pause something.

Why do I stay with them? Not really sure, now that I think of it. But I need to stay with ATT because of my email address so I’m inclined not to switch everything to faster cable. In a few months, I may go back to Directv which was pretty flawless and keep ATT for phone and internet.

*
Caldad says:
August 19, 2009 at 11:40 am

Tamara, the Mission Viejo issue wasn’t about an amicable “clarification,” as apparently characterized to you by city staff. That should be evident from the litigation. You should review the video of the city council meetings before accepting the post-facto revisionism offered by the City. Furthermore, there has already been conflict between a homeowner’s association and AT&T (or its contractor) during installation of one of the first boxes.

*
OCBlauski says:
August 19, 2009 at 10:57 am

That’s one of the best things about MV; the fact that there aren’t a bunchof ugly utility lines and boxes everywhere. It looks very uncluttered.

*
Caldad says:
August 19, 2009 at 9:47 am

Tamara, you’re welcome for the MV story.

o
Tamara Chuang, a.k.a. The Gadgetress says:
August 19, 2009 at 10:18 am

Hi Caldad… I’d actually been working on the Mission Viejo story for a while. Just got around to posting it. But thanks for your comment. Good to know that residents are paying attention to what’s happening. I should say add that the lawsuit wasn’t about Mission Viejo getting sued because it wouldn’t let AT&T TV service in its boundaries. Rather, it was a clarification of city ordinance that would help utilities like AT&T build above-ground structures. No other cities I’ve spoken to so far have an outright policy against above-ground structures. Many just prefer underground structures and, as AT&T has claimed, don’t make it easy for a utility company to expand above ground.

http://gadgetress.freedomblogging.com/2009/08/19/att-u-verse-tv-good-to-go-in-mission-viejo/19061/

We are currently testing wireless adapters for stb's in the northern California area. These will not be implemented for full installs, but will be used for difficult wire runs, or in rooms with no existing wiring. Installation time is expected to drop considerably.

http://www.ruckuswireless.com/products/mediaflex-home-products/7000-series

By THE ASSOCIATED PRESS
Published: August 24, 2009

AT&T Inc. has started offering its first bundle discount for customers who combine its U-Verse TV service with wireless and broadband.

AT&T said Monday that customers who sign up for U-Verse TV and a cell phone plan for at least 450 minutes per month, or for U-Verse phone service, will get $30 per month off broadband for six months.

more
http://www.nytimes.com/aponline/2009/08/24/business/AP-US-TEC-TechBit-ATT-U-Verse.html

I was all signed up to get U-verse, but after reading so many messages in this thread in which people said that HD picture quality was inferior to what they had gotten before, I decided to cancel the installation.

No, sorry. Look at the numbers, indeed. If you look at the average costs and time per unit, AT&T is much faster and much cheaper. I never said that AT&T was covering more users in toto than Verizon--only that AT&T adds individual customers for a fraction of the time and money that Verizon is investing.

That Verizon is massively outspending AT&T in this area is simply not a matter of technology, but simply of money. If their publicly-reported investment amounts were reversed, Verizon would have 1/5 the customers it does now and AT&T would have nearly 6 times more.

Verizon remains a significantly slower and more expensive install approach.?

You are playing with semantics. The only industry relevant way to measure buildout or rollout speed is by the number of residences passed with available service or actual subscribers.

pbarach,

You really should judge for yourself. I've seen D* (the current benchmark behind OTA) and Uverse HD side by side in the store and could tell absolutely no difference at all, in spite of many reports to the contrary. I suspect many are just repeating what they've read elsewhere without ever seeing it. Uverse compression is higher and their data rate is lower than D*. But I could see no visible difference. Uverse SD is far superior to D*, if that's important to you. Cable HD and SD are absolutely awful in my market, which is why I currently have D*.

There are many factors going into the decision to get Uverse, including HD/SD quality, number of HD channels, number of HD streams you need, whole-house DVR, price, reliability, sports packages, contracts, etc. Each system has advantages and disadvantages you'll have to weigh. In my case I will likely switch from D* to Uverse when it becomes available in my area since Uverse is superior considering the factors most important to me.

I suspect many are just repeating what they've read elsewhere without ever seeing it.Not necessary here at AVS. Numerous reports I've read are from sources that I know are creditable.

Cable HD and SD are absolutely awful in my market, which is why I currently have D*.

I have cable with generally excellent HD quality, so I didn't want to lose that by switching to Uverse even though it offered more HD channels. I haven't seen any stores that compare different video options here (Cleveland), so I suspect your area is better in that respect.

You are playing with semantics. The only industry relevant way to measure buildout or rollout speed is by the number of residences passed with available service or actual subscribers.
Nonsense.

The only way to compare two services' technological approach is to compare them on a per-unit basis. As has previously been covered, AT&T's approach is significantly faster and less expensive. That's not playing with semantics.

Measurements of actual subscribers are contaminated with business concerns. If method 1 installations cost $1000 and take four hours, and method 2 costs $500 and takes two hours, that's "industry relevant". Method 2 requires half the labor/financial resources of method 1--it's faster and cheaper. What's not relevant in a technological discussion is that company A spends $10 million and company B spends $1 million, and therefore company A can overcome the disadvantage by throwing more money at it.

Company A would have 10,000 subscribers using method 1. Company B would have 2000 subscribers using method 2. Method 2 is still faster and cheaper, resulting in more subscribers for each dollar spent. That's not semantics, that's just reality, even if they have fewer total subscribers because their business unit is smaller.

The number of subscribers doesn't tell you anything about the technological consequences or the per-unit costs of a given method, which was the subject of discussion.

Nonsense.

The only way to compare two services' technological approach is to compare them on a per-unit basis. As has previously been covered, AT&T's approach is significantly faster and less expensive. That's not playing with semantics.
Now you're changing the subject.

No one was discussing technical approaches or capitol expense. It doesn't matter if AT&T can rollout new availability faster, they are not actually doing it. AT&T is slower passing new residences and slower adding new subs than Verizon FiOS.

I was all signed up to get U-verse, but after reading so many messages in this thread in which people said that HD picture quality was inferior to what they had gotten before, I decided to cancel the installation.

There's no contract, why not see it with your own eyes?

pbarach,

You really should judge for yourself. I've seen D* (the current benchmark behind OTA) and Uverse HD side by side in the store and could tell absolutely no difference at all, in spite of many reports to the contrary. I suspect many are just repeating what they've read elsewhere without ever seeing it. Uverse compression is higher and their data rate is lower than D*. But I could see no visible difference. Uverse SD is far superior to D*, if that's important to you. Cable HD and SD are absolutely awful in my market, which is why I currently have D*.

There are many factors going into the decision to get Uverse, including HD/SD quality, number of HD channels, number of HD streams you need, whole-house DVR, price, reliability, sports packages, contracts, etc. Each system has advantages and disadvantages you'll have to weigh. In my case I will likely switch from D* to Uverse when it becomes available in my area since Uverse is superior considering the factors most important to me.

Much agreed- (though FIOS is the current benchmark behind OTA, with D* falling in after that...).

In any case, I've heard 99% bad reviews, but most are repetitive and share no specifics. I'll have it installed, see what I think on my equipment- weigh the other factors like gaining 100 new HD channels over cable (for less money) and go from there.

There's no good reason not to.

In any case, I've heard 99% bad reviews, but most are repetitive and share no specifics.

What kind of specifics would you like? I'm not bad-mouthing AT&T, or even U-verse as a product in general.

My simple point is the fact that there is an unacceptable amount of video compression that manifests itself as blockiness and lack of sharpness on all HD channels. This is in direct comparison to the FiOS service I had for 4+ years. My entire U-verse setup is over Cat5e, and I use only HDMI.

The other problem I've been having, I've not reported yet. The amount of picture/audio breakup I experience while watching recorded shows is sometimes very frustrating. In a 30 minute broadcast, I can easily get 10+ freezes/starts/stops/picture break-ups. I do not know if this originates from the hard drive, central office source, some problem from the node to my home, or within my LAN (not likely). I do know that this same problem has been reported to me by friends and co-workers.

What makes all of this frustrating, is that I never experienced this with FiOS. Superb picture, and I don't recall any glitches of this nature.

U-verse has several benefits: I like the way the boxes are IP-based. They have a small form factor, and are quite. The user interface is good, faster than FiOS, and the ability to watch any recorded show from any box is a big plus.

Overall picture quality is still my most important criteria. In this area, U-verse falls flat, at the current time.

What kind of specifics would you like? I'm not bad-mouthing AT&T, or even U-verse as a product in general.

My simple point is the fact that there is an unacceptable amount of video compression that manifests itself as blockiness and lack of sharpness on all HD channels. This is in direct comparison to the FiOS service I had for 4+ years. My entire U-verse setup is over Cat5e, and I use only HDMI.

The other problem I've been having, I've not reported yet. The amount of picture/audio breakup I experience while watching recorded shows is sometimes very frustrating. In a 30 minute broadcast, I can easily get 10+ freezes/starts/stops/picture break-ups. I do not know if this originates from the hard drive, central office source, some problem from the node to my home, or within my LAN (not likely). I do know that this same problem has been reported to me by friends and co-workers.

What makes all of this frustrating, is that I never experienced this with FiOS. Superb picture, and I don't recall any glitches of this nature.

U-verse has several benefits: I like the way the boxes are IP-based. They have a small form factor, and are quite. The user interface is good, faster than FiOS, and the ability to watch any recorded show from any box is a big plus.

Overall picture quality is still my most important criteria. In this area, U-verse falls flat, at the current time.

But I would not place the blame for all of these problems on UV or the technology, you may have issues at your location. While I will agree that the HD picture is less sharp than what I have seen on OTA or cable my comparison would rate Blu-ray=5, OTA=4, UV=3.5. Now this is probably due to lower bandwidth and compression.

However, I don't experience all of the other issues you mention and for me I had a lot more problems with freezing, pixelation and service disruption on cable and OTA. This was mainly due to the fact I live in S. FL and we have a lot of weather issues. Also the SD quality of UV is way ahead of the analog I was getting on cable.

So in my particular case my move from cable to UV had been a plus. I doubt very many people will have to make a decision between FIOS and UV as they are generally not offered in the same area so the main comparison is going to be between cable and D* and for me UV was the best option.

Sam S, if you are comfortable with it, would you mind sharing what city/state you live in? I'm just curious where Fios and Uverse are both available. (Sorry if you've mentioned that somewhere in this thread already.)

I'm in the Cleveland area and had an AT&T rep come by the house about three days ago, stating that they have just finished the installation for my neighborhood and offered pretty decent incentives to try Uverse out. The most important incentive, for me anyway, is the 30 day trial - if I don't like the service it goes right back, nothing out of pocket on my end. And I'll be keeping my existing service until I make the decision because we signed up for a really great package price that still has about 8 months left on it.

The installation is set for tomorrow. Hopefully everything will go smoothly; I have to be honest, after reading some of the issues people have had with the installation and the Uverse service itself I almost called to cancel. But hey, try it for 30 days and see what I think right?

I'll post some impressions early next week in case someone here is interested, as Uverse is fairly new to many areas around Cleveland. Right now we have cable and internet through the Evil Empire (read: Time Warner) and I'll see if I can give decent comparisons between the two.

Also, thanks to everyone on this forum for the gobs of information, including what to watch out for during the installation to make sure no corners are cut. AVS Forum has had my back more than once!

While I will agree that the HD picture is less sharp than what I have seen on OTA or cable.....
Thanks for the thoughtful reply.

What kind of specifics would you like? I'm not bad-mouthing AT&T, or even U-verse as a product in general.

My simple point is the fact that there is an unacceptable amount of video compression that manifests itself as blockiness and lack of sharpness on all HD channels. This is in direct comparison to the FiOS service I had for 4+ years. My entire U-verse setup is over Cat5e, and I use only HDMI.

The other problem I've been having, I've not reported yet. The amount of picture/audio breakup I experience while watching recorded shows is sometimes very frustrating. In a 30 minute broadcast, I can easily get 10+ freezes/starts/stops/picture break-ups. I do not know if this originates from the hard drive, central office source, some problem from the node to my home, or within my LAN (not likely). I do know that this same problem has been reported to me by friends and co-workers.

What makes all of this frustrating, is that I never experienced this with FiOS. Superb picture, and I don't recall any glitches of this nature.

U-verse has several benefits: I like the way the boxes are IP-based. They have a small form factor, and are quite. The user interface is good, faster than FiOS, and the ability to watch any recorded show from any box is a big plus.

Overall picture quality is still my most important criteria. In this area, U-verse falls flat, at the current time.

Thanks for your account- those are the types of specifics I was looking for. Most reviews are simply: "the HD PQ isn't very good I don't think".

Now, is FIOS the only thing you're comparing it to? FIOS (after OTA) is hands down the best HD PQ you can get right now (if you're in a covered area), and DirecTV, Dish Network, and most Cable providers all fall flat in comparison to FIOS.

Since I can't, and never will (likely) have FIOS in my area, I can only compare it with Satellite and Cable- which aren't particularily fantastic themselves.

Picture/audio breakup however is completely unnacceptable and it's not something I'd tolerate on a frequent basis. If I called and complained about that, and they were unable to resolve the issue, it would be cancelled same-day.

Regardless, I still urge those who have the option to take a look for themselves and evaluate on their own equipment rather than assume it looks terrible (though it may very well be) and never know first-hand.

Besides, ordering U-verse, examining PQ, complaining about PQ and cancelling service is what will get their attention if changes need to be made. No? ;)

All that said, they seem to either be a bit backed up, or just slow in general (it is new in my area). I called on the 21st to get the process started, and my install date is 9/30. I guess 4hr installs fill up a calendar quick.

Much agreed- (though FIOS is the current benchmark behind OTA, with D* falling in after that...).True. I was limiting it to signals I might actually see in my lifetime ;)

Sam S, if you are comfortable with it, would you mind sharing what city/state you live in? I'm just curious where Fios and Uverse are both available. (Sorry if you've mentioned that somewhere in this thread already.)

I'm in Dallas TX, but the suburbs are split up for FiOS/U-verse availablity. Sometimes it's a close as which side of the street you're on. It's either one or the other, you cannot pick.

Now, is FIOS the only thing you're comparing it to? FIOS (after OTA) is hands down the best HD PQ you can get right now (if you're in a covered area), and DirecTV, Dish Network, and most Cable providers all fall flat in comparison to FIOS.


I have reason to believe that technically, FiOS is better than OTA. In major metropolitan areas, the FiOS video central office gets the local channel HD feed straight from the stations via fiber. I understand this signal gets to Verizon before it has to undergo additional compression to squeeze the sub-channels within the 19Mpbs per channel bandwidth contraints. It's been a while since I compared FiOS to OTA, but I recall less compression than OTA sometimes has.

FWIW, my U-verse install (4 boxes, all new Cat5e runs) took 11 hours. No glitches or serious delays, the installation simply takes a long time.

Now you're changing the subject.

No one was discussing technical approaches or capitol expense. It doesn't matter if AT&T can rollout new availability faster, they are not actually doing it. AT&T is slower passing new residences and slower adding new subs than Verizon FiOS.

That is not correct, ATT is moving much faster than verizon on rollout. Verizon is passing about 3million/year since they started fios. They currently have passed about 13M units. ATT started a year or so after verizon started and now have passed more 18M units. By the time verizon is finished with their initial rollout of about 18M units, ATT will have passed about 30M units.

As for quarterly adds go, ATT and verizon have had comparable quarterly subscriber adds.

For return on investment it appears ATT has a far better model than verizon as they are getting about the same numbers of customers for about 1/3 the cost of fios.

Yes fios is a better network, but is far more expensive as well.

And after 3 years of having u-verse, it still beats TW hands down.

I have reason to believe that technically, FiOS is better than OTA. In major metropolitan areas, the FiOS video central office gets the local channel HD feed straight from the stations via fiber. I understand this signal gets to Verizon before it has to undergo additional compression to squeeze the sub-channels within the 19Mpbs per channel bandwidth contraints. It's been a while since I compared FiOS to OTA, but I recall less compression than OTA sometimes has.

FWIW, my U-verse install (4 boxes, all new Cat5e runs) took 11 hours. No glitches or serious delays, the installation simply takes a long time.

I don't doubt that for a second- many areas of the country don't get great OTA, or at least not as good as it used to be.

Still, like I said, saying U-verse's HD PQ is inferior to FIOS (if you're correct, has over triple the bitrate in some cases?) doesn't prove much, and doesn't help anyone gauge PQ in comparison to various cable offerings around the US.

If FIOS didn't look vastly superior to U-verse in an obvious way, that would be surprising.

Has anyone done side by side comparisons with sat/cable in home and taken screen shots to show the PQ differences?

I don't doubt that for a second- many areas of the country don't get great OTA, or at least not as good as it used to be.

Still, like I said, saying U-verse's HD PQ is inferior to FIOS (if you're correct, has over triple the bitrate in some cases?) doesn't prove much, and doesn't help anyone gauge PQ in comparison to various cable offerings around the US.

If FIOS didn't look vastly superior to U-verse in an obvious way, that would be surprising.

Has anyone done side by side comparisons with sat/cable in home and taken screen shots to show the PQ differences?

Triple the bitrate would be misleading as fios is using mpeg2 and uverse is using mpeg4. Mpeg4 is twice as efficient as mpeg2.

For HD image quality, U-verse is on a par with Dish Network at this time.

Ken, do you know how this statement holds up at this point in time?

Triple the bitrate would be misleading as fios is using mpeg2 and uverse is using mpeg4. Mpeg4 is twice as efficient as mpeg2.

True, didn't think about that. At least 50% higher "bitrate" would be ballpark then?

Ken, do you know how this statement holds up at this point in time?



True, didn't think about that. At least 50% higher "bitrate" would be ballpark then?

Probably less than 50%. A 6meg mpeg4 stream would about equal as 12meg mpeg2 stream. I would think most mpeg2 streams out of fios are 20 or less. OF course it is difficult to make a comparison on bitrates as both have quite different optimizations.

Uverse is not on par with dish hd. I had both.

Uverse is not on par with dish hd. I had both.

A lot's changed in 9 months then with U-verse HD PQ?

A lot's changed in 9 months then with U-verse HD PQ?

a lot of artifacts. I guess it is from the compression. SD is as good as dish though.

A lot's changed in 9 months then with U-verse HD PQ?Nope. It's always been less than Dish.

Has anyone done side by side comparisons with sat/cable in home....Yes, lots of people here.


....and taken screen shots to show the PQ differences?Screen shots are useless. Screen captures are a different story, but not always possible.

Nope. It's always been less than Dish.

Oh really? :confused:

For HD image quality, U-verse is on a par with Dish Network at this time.

That was November of last year.

Screen shots are useless. Screen captures are a different story, but not always possible.

Sure they can be useful- if you A/B U-verse and another service on the same channel, TV, HDMI, same settings- you should be able to see PQ difference in still shots.

I understand there are artifacts in motion that won't be seen within a frame- but there should be apparent detail differences.

Oh really? :confused:Yes, Dish has always had better HD image quality than U-Verse. Always.

Yes, Dish has always had better HD image quality than U-Verse. Always.

You're still ignoring your own quote. Something doesn't add up.

For HD image quality, U-verse is on a par with Dish Network at this time.

You're still ignoring your own quote. Something doesn't add up.

Let me correct myself. I've never seen U-verse as good or better than Dish. Others have seen U-verse they believe was as good as Dish in direct A/B comparisons.

Let me correct myself. I've never seen U-verse as good or better than Dish. Others have seen U-verse they believe was as good as Dish in direct A/B comparisons.

Fair enough, thanks.

My install was moved up from the 30th to the 2nd, so I'll find out soon enough. Hopefully it lasts more than a day- but if the PQ is all it's been raved to be, it may not last long enough for the installers to leave.

Well, I had Uverse installed last Saturday and was very pleased... at first. The install tech was a nice guy, the process took about 3 hours or so (for 3 TVs and internet, no phone), and right away I noticed I was getting 5.1 DD from my HDMI connection. I thought I was in the clear, and enjoyed the slick guide and on demand features that certainly trumped Time Warner's offerings.

Then I started to get the audio dropouts that so many have complained about, and so far no matter what I've tried I haven't been able to make them go away. (This thread (http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showthread.php?t=1134904) is dedicated to the audio dropout issue.)

As for the HD picture quality, at first I thought that it looked great. However, I started to notice that the picture was extremely dark, and all shadow detail was just compressed into a big black blob. Then I read in this thread (http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showthread.php?t=1138881&highlight=) that this may be an issue with AT&T's compression methods.

Well, I have to be honest, the first day I had this up and running I was telling everyone how neat it was. But now, if I can't find a way to resolve these two major issues (to me anyway) I'm going to have to cancel the service before my 30-day trial is over. If anyone has any ideas I would be very grateful!

I am having the same problem as a few others on this thread in terms of my HD Profile. According to AT&T tech support I am 3,175 feet from the station which is 175 feet to far for me to get the 2 HD, 2 SD profile. When I view my statistics for Max Download they look fairly decent (~30440 kbs).

When I was talking to tech support, I asked if he could try to switch me to the 2 HD profile. He had me on the phone for a little while and then stated that when he tried the system came back with a message saying that I have exceeded my maximum bandwidth.

What do you guys think, should I be able to run the 2 HD profile? I am running 2 TV's and Internet (6 mbs down).

I'm to assume that weather conditions are irrelevant as it pertains to service integrity? No dropouts like satellite or (rare) cable occurrences?

I'm to assume that weather conditions are irrelevant as it pertains to service integrity?

Weather, probably slightly more reliability than DBS, but other things can happen.

You could have problems if a fiber cable is affected (accidental cut), one of the VRAD's has a problem, or if your telephone wiring is bad or cut....

Any number of things could happen, but I'd say U-verse would be in the general category of cable when it comes to reliability.

I can't comment on DBS but living in S. Fl I had major issues with cable and OTA due to weather. So far this summer I have had 0 problems with UV. In fact this is one of the reasons I chose it, after Wilma my cable was down for a week but my phone and DSL was up the whole time. Overall in that situation I think DBS was in better shape because people could remove their dish before the storm and things were back working once they put it back up after.

Welp, eveything's installed here. Brought into my condo unit via coax, main unit downstairs is coax, and the one upstairs for the PJ is cat5 from the gateway.

First impressions are that it's not terrible, but not great either. The interface is fantastic (I think, coming from MOXI), it looks great in HD, is very snappy, and seems to work well.

Picture quality is decent- not as bad as it's hyped, but really not that great. The slightly dark image and crushed blacks is what I'm finding to be the worst. The low compression artifacts or lack of detail I'm already used to with HDTV (even OTA) in comparison to Blu-ray, so it's really not a big deal. I've had no picture dropouts, stutters, or other inconsistencies of that sort with the video. Watching Conan last night, it felt not quite right- I figured it would be a good test since it's something my eyes "know" pretty well. His black suit was just that, black. Which is nice due to the deep black level on the Kuro, but there was no detail, nothing. No creases, no buttons, no shadow detail at all.

Sports seem to fare better since there isn't much dark detail. ESPN looked fine, as did NHL and other sports I came across. NFL Network looked horrendous for some reason last night, very blotchy smeary almost like a web stream would look. It also happened to be the first HD channel I turned on with U-verse and about flipped! It must have just been that game, because the next game later that night looked like an NBC broadcast, and was much, much better.

Audio seemed ok at first, DD5.1 over optical was how I was setup with my previous cable box and worked fine, until I started getting subtle audio dropouts (fraction of a second silence). Channel switches once in a great while produced a "pop". I switched to DD5.1 over HDMI and popping seems to be gone, and dropouts are much fewer and far between.

The good news is that I've over tripled my HD channel selection, and gone from 4 HD premiums to over 40- and I'm *saving* money over cable. Now, I'm not a fan of quantity over quality- but in 2009 you would think this would be standard. I would take half the HD channels for double the bitrate though.

Overall, it seems like a better package for the money than cable (Charter here) and it's 40-45 measly HD channels. It's going to depend on whether I can tweak the PQ to my liking enough to stick with it- or move on to Dish. The brightness can be bumped, but that black crush can never be recovered.

Weather, probably slightly more reliability than DBS, but other things can happen.

You could have problems if a fiber cable is affected (accidental cut), one of the VRAD's has a problem, or if your telephone wiring is bad or cut....

Any number of things could happen, but I'd say U-verse would be in the general category of cable when it comes to reliability.


About 10 years there was an independant report released that showed the average Pacbell line was down 14 Mins in it's lifetime. The next closest is cable at 14 days so as far as reliability goes were way ahead. The problems with Uverse alot of the time is simple equipment failure. I was out on a trouble ticket last week and the customer complained about missing her Uverse. She had many freezes and finally switched to ATT /Directv. The problem which I found vworking on her dialtone was 2 cent connector of which 100s haves failed causing poor data sync due to a bad run. Very frustrating to the customer and tech as well. It was missed by the Uverse tech because he had replaced it. Most uverse techs/installers have 3 to less than 1 year of service. Experience is everything. I caught but Ive been in the field for 29 years. Big difference. Still it's a great product that is getting better.

I am having the same problem as a few others on this thread in terms of my HD Profile. According to AT&T tech support I am 3,175 feet from the station which is 175 feet to far for me to get the 2 HD, 2 SD profile. When I view my statistics for Max Download they look fairly decent (~30440 kbs).

When I was talking to tech support, I asked if he could try to switch me to the 2 HD profile. He had me on the phone for a little while and then stated that when he tried the system came back with a message saying that I have exceeded my maximum bandwidth.

What do you guys think, should I be able to run the 2 HD profile? I am running 2 TV's and Internet (6 mbs down).

Huh. Mine runs fine at 3200ft I have the 2&2 and no issue at 25.6 megs. Your max is 30. In Town I've seen them run fine at 3500ft. Do you have standard or uverse dsl?

The brightness can be bumped, but that black crush can never be recovered.Actually, there may be a fix for the blacks. Check out the 7th post or so in THIS (http://utalk.att.com/utalk/board/message?board.id=Uverse_TV_Equipment&thread.id=18758)thread. If that doesn't work for you, component may look better.

Actually, there may be a fix for the blacks. Check out the 7th post or so in THIS (http://utalk.att.com/utalk/board/message?board.id=Uverse_TV_Equipment&thread.id=18758)thread. If that doesn't work for you, component may look better.

Thanks, mdavej. In short if you have a panel or projector that allows you to set black level try both settings and recalibrate. O=0-255 or the data levels of color and 7.5= 16-235 or video rate. You must recal contrast and brightness. Another I've found as the cause of crushed blacks is the dynamic contrast enhancement on various displays. As the dynamic iris on projectors or back light modulates it crushes the blacks in some cases. Dynamic gamma is needed in this case. Incorrect gamma can also cause loss of low level detail.

Actually, there may be a fix for the blacks. Check out the 7th post or so in THIS (http://utalk.att.com/utalk/board/message?board.id=Uverse_TV_Equipment&thread.id=18758)thread. If that doesn't work for you, component may look better.

Thanks, mdavej. In short if you have a panel or projector that allows you to set black level try both settings and recalibrate. O=0-255 or the data levels of color and 7.5= 16-235 or video rate. You must recal contrast and brightness. Another I've found as the cause of crushed blacks is the dynamic contrast enhancement on various displays. As the dynamic iris on projectors or back light modulates it crushes the blacks in some cases. Dynamic gamma is needed in this case. Incorrect gamma can also cause loss of low level detail.

The thread linked is your typical "how to calibrate your display" spiel. I have a 5020 Kuro running D-Nice's settings. I hardly doubt my brightness/contrast needs adjustment seeing as the same reference settings look amazing and spot-on for Blu-ray and previous cable HD.

Are you saying U-verse outputs a darker image and just needs a brightness bump? It seemed like the ISF tech in the previously linked thread had tried calibrating but only found crushed blacks (no info there).

I will give component a try, and see if it's any different.

I also hooked up the HDMI to an InFocus SP7210, throwing a pretty bright 9-ft wide image. Surprisingly it looked pretty good (compression wise). Even playing with different gamma presets, I couldn't get any black detail to come out.

Thanks for the tips guys.

Actually, there may be a fix for the blacks. Check out the 7th post or so in THIS (http://utalk.att.com/utalk/board/message?board.id=Uverse_TV_Equipment&thread.id=18758)thread. If that doesn't work for you, component may look better.

Thanks, mdavej. In short if you have a panel or projector that allows you to set black level try both settings and recalibrate. O=0-255 or the data levels of color and 7.5= 16-235 or video rate. You must recal contrast and brightness. Another I've found as the cause of crushed blacks is the dynamic contrast enhancement on various displays. As the dynamic iris on projectors or back light modulates it crushes the blacks in some cases. Dynamic gamma is needed in this case. Incorrect gamma can also cause loss of low level detail.

About 10 years there was an independant report released that showed the average Pacbell line was down 14 Mins in it's lifetime. The next closest is cable at 14 days so as far as reliability goes were way ahead.

Just keep a regular pots line, avoid Uverse voice and it'll be fine!

The thread linked is your typical "how to calibrate your display" spiel. I have a 5020 Kuro running D-Nice's settings. I hardly doubt my brightness/contrast needs adjustment seeing as the same reference settings look amazing and spot-on for Blu-ray and previous cable HD.

Are you saying U-verse outputs a darker image and just needs a brightness bump? It seemed like the ISF tech in the previously linked thread had tried calibrating but only found crushed blacks (no info there).

I will give component a try, and see if it's any different.

I also hooked up the HDMI to an InFocus SP7210, throwing a pretty bright 9-ft wide image. Surprisingly it looked pretty good (compression wise). Even playing with different gamma presets, I couldn't get any black detail to come out.

Thanks for the tips guys.

Hmm, it looks like I have a few settings on the Kuro. It can be set to Video or PC, and either can be set to 16-255 or 0-255. By default it was set to Video and 16-255. Changing it to 0-255 seemed to open of the blacks a bit, but I'm still not sure if there's crushing taking place. It's an improvement, but it definitely makes compression more noticeable. Setting it to PC makes things difficult as I don't have the picture calibration modes available that I have under Video, so it's hard to compare (it switches over to default Standard, instead of my configured Cinema mode).

Telco's Web Site Includes Content From Broadcast, Cable Networks
By Todd Spangler -- Multichannel News, 9/3/2009 5:16:37 PM EDT

AT&T has publicly launched the beta version of a video portal -- which serves up free TV shows and movies to any Internet user, and promises even more to U-verse TV customers -- with content from more than a dozen programming partners.

In addition, the AT&T Entertainment site, http://entertainment.att.net/tv, promises U-verse TV customers "bonus content" if they log in but doesn't spell out what that extra content is.

The free section of the site offers shows and movies from CBS; ABC and ABC Family; NBC and NBC Universal's USA, Bravo, Syfy and CNBC; MTV Networks' MTV and VH1; Lionsgate; MGM; Universal Studios; PBS; and Current TV. The site also lists Hulu, the joint venture of NBC, The Walt Disney Co. and News Corp., as a partner.

In an e-mailed statement, AT&T said, "We have started a soft launch of the AT&T Entertainment site. This site will feature free online content available to any consumer. We're finalizing a few final elements, and we'll share more details on our official launch soon."

The company added, "This site is another step forward for our three-screen strategy to provide more content to more customers across any device."

Shows currently available to watch include episodes of USA's Monk, Showtime's Dexter, MTV's The Real World, ABC's Lost and Ugly Betty, NBC's The Office and 30 Rock, and CBS's How I Met Your Mother.

Free feature-length movies on AT&T Entertainment include The Breakfast Club, Along Came Polly, Carlito's Way, Fear and Loathing in Las Vegas and The Last Temptation of Christ.

AT&T in May had said it was working on an "authentication" system that would provide a TV Everywhere-like service to subscribers, with content available on both its own site and programmers' sites.

Comcast and Verizon Communications have initiated trials of services that provide additional TV shows on-demand to paying video subscribers, and Time Warner Cable expects to test its own version of TV Everywhere in the next few months.

http://www.multichannel.com/article/339526-AT_T_Soft_Launches_Video_Portal.php

Actually, there may be a fix for the blacks. Check out the 7th post or so in THIS (http://utalk.att.com/utalk/board/message?board.id=Uverse_TV_Equipment&thread.id=18758)thread. If that doesn't work for you, component may look better.

Thanks for that tip, the display that is mentioned in SomeJoe7777's post is actually what I have at home, so I'll give it a shot.

Unfortunately I think I am going to ditch Uverse pretty soon, unless someone here knows a way to fix the sound dropping issue? It is just a deal breaker for me. :(

Thanks for that tip, the display that is mentioned in SomeJoe7777's post is actually what I have at home, so I'll give it a shot.

Unfortunately I think I am going to ditch Uverse pretty soon, unless someone here knows a way to fix the sound dropping issue? It is just a deal breaker for me. :(

I too get sound drops over optical, HDMI, and even 2-ch analog! You'd think they would address this.

AT&T has publicly launched the beta version of a video portal -- which serves up free TV shows and movies to any Internet user, and promises even more to U-verse TV customers -- with content from more than a dozen programming partners.

Looks to just be Hulu sourced videos on their site.

We switched from Cox cable to Uverse about a month ago and I haven't been very happy with Uverse at all. The PQ on our Cox cable was way better, Uverse compresses the signal too much. Also, the past few days I've been having problems with the picture stuttering. I want to switch back to Cox but will have to work on the wife about it because when I mentioned it before she didn't want to.

We switched from Cox cable to Uverse about a month ago and I haven't been very happy with Uverse at all. The PQ on our Cox cable was way better, Uverse compresses the signal too much. Also, the past few days I've been having problems with the picture stuttering. I want to switch back to Cox but will have to work on the wife about it because when I mentioned it before she didn't want to.

You nailed it. We're here representing 1/1000 of one percent of the subs, complaining about every little pixel and it boils down to the fact that our wives can record four channels at once. To the average Joe even severely compressed HD is the Holy Grail as long as there's tons of HD channels and record options. Did I mention there's a uverse app for your iPhone, Ma'am. ATT appeals to the masses not the perfectionists ,hence, the 13 billion net profit last year. But, then, who am I to complain. The two checks I write them a month are a small fraction of the two they write me.

Well I gave Uverse the old college try over the weekend, and had it installed next to my Comcast cable. No magic results here, I found the HD PQ to be an albeit sometimes small, but unacceptable step down from Comcast. I was able to switch back and forth for A-B comparisons. I really wanted it to work too because I love the added features and having HD boxes in all my rooms that can access recordings.

I will say I found the HD PQ to be acceptable on my 720p 42" and 32" TVs. But on my 100" 1080p screen, the extra compression was obviously apparent. And since my projector is the only place I care about getting the best PQ, I'm not going to be able to live with Uverse.

So far the internet has been an improvement over my lately unreliable Comcast connection. Now I have to debate keeping Uverse past 30 days to claim my supposed $400 in rebates (hear they can be difficult to claim). Or just cut my losses and get the 30 day money back guarantee at the end of the month.

Well I gave Uverse the old college try over the weekend, and had it installed next to my Comcast cable. No magic results here, I found the HD PQ to be an albeit sometimes small, but unacceptable step down from Comcast. I was able to switch back and forth for A-B comparisons. I really wanted it to work too because I love the added features and having HD boxes in all my rooms that can access recordings.

I will say I found the HD PQ to be acceptable on my 720p 42" and 32" TVs. But on my 100" 1080p screen, the extra compression was obviously apparent. And since my projector is the only place I care about getting the best PQ, I'm not going to be able to live with Uverse.

So far the internet has been an improvement over my lately unreliable Comcast connection. Now I have to debate keeping Uverse past 30 days to claim my supposed $400 in rebates (hear they can be difficult to claim). Or just cut my losses and get the 30 day money back guarantee at the end of the month.

Interesting I didn't know the rebates could be hard to claim ... I was told on the phone you just mail in a form for each (why there are 3 seperate ones is beyond me though.)

Another reason I'll wait.

I guess I'm an unusual case but my rebates were no problem at all, even got one for 40 dollars that I didn't know about.

My U-verse DVR has eaten all of my pre-recorded shows :(

Up until last night, I had about 20 shows, I remember checking randomly and noticing this left about 78% of disc usage space available. Everything's cool.

So yesterday evening, I check and see that all of those 20 shows are gone, then only thing left is a series recording that recorded last night. I was pretty mad, but figured I'll watch those recorded shows one way or another.

Today, I notice that even the show recorded from last night is gone, and now there are no recorded shows available to watch. I checked disc usage, it said N/A. I tried to record a live show, and got the message that it could not be recorded because disc space is full - remove some recordings. Nonsense!

Is my DVR fried?

You nailed it. We're here representing 1/1000 of one percent of the subs, complaining about every little pixel and it boils down to the fact that our wives can record four channels at once...

We had Uverse for a week and switched back to Time Warner, and my wife even said how much better the picture is now. I think I'm starting to turn her into a home theater snob too :p

Well I gave Uverse the old college try over the weekend, and had it installed next to my Comcast cable. No magic results here, I found the HD PQ to be an albeit sometimes small, but unacceptable step down from Comcast. I was able to switch back and forth for A-B comparisons. I really wanted it to work too because I love the added features and having HD boxes in all my rooms that can access recordings.

I will say I found the HD PQ to be acceptable on my 720p 42" and 32" TVs. But on my 100" 1080p screen, the extra compression was obviously apparent. And since my projector is the only place I care about getting the best PQ, I'm not going to be able to live with Uverse.

So far the internet has been an improvement over my lately unreliable Comcast connection. Now I have to debate keeping Uverse past 30 days to claim my supposed $400 in rebates (hear they can be difficult to claim). Or just cut my losses and get the 30 day money back guarantee at the end of the month.

I opted for the 30 day money back guarantee. I will say that canceling the service was rather easy, the tech I spoke with on the phone was very polite and didn't go to crazy lengths to try to keep me subscribed. And to return the equipment you just take it into a UPS Store and they do all of the work.

I also enjoyed the internet service through AT&T. I don't think I've ever had high speed internet that consistently ran at the advertised speed until having Uverse. On the other hand, now that I've plugged Time Warner back in I'm getting ~18 - 20Mbs(!) download speeds. Don't know how that happened, but I'll take it.

My U-verse DVR has eaten all of my pre-recorded shows :(

Is my DVR fried?

My neighbor had the same problem. He recently switched to Uverse and I noticed an AT&T truck there on Saturday. When I asked him if he was having issues he said the DVR was deleting all of the recordings. After checking on some things they swapped out the box.

My neighbor had the same problem. He recently switched to Uverse and I noticed an AT&T truck there on Saturday. When I asked him if he was having issues he said the DVR was deleting all of the recordings. After checking on some things they swapped out the box.

I called U-verse, and they are bringing out a new box today.

Reading about the picture quality issuse, I would have to say that either your tv was not properly calibrated for that input or your box(U-verse) is not sending out a good picture. Not sure how you would set( calibrate) this box to output a truer picture, but the first step would be to have that input from the U-Verse box calibrated. But that really is only 1/2 the job. Typically, you would input through the box/device in order to properly calibrate for that box/device. Since I do not have any friends who use U-Verse, I can not tell you if that can be done. I do not know what inputs you have and whether or not the calibration equipment can be hooked at in the proper manner. Perhaps someone else can help on this.
Michael

Reading about the picture quality issuse, I would have to say that either your tv was not properly calibrated for that input or your box(U-verse) is not sending out a good picture. Not sure how you would set( calibrate) this box to output a truer picture, but the first step would be to have that input from the U-Verse box calibrated. But that really is only 1/2 the job. Typically, you would input through the box/device in order to properly calibrate for that box/device. Since I do not have any friends who use U-Verse, I can not tell you if that can be done. I do not know what inputs you have and whether or not the calibration equipment can be hooked at in the proper manner. Perhaps someone else can help on this.
Michael

Typically most people set up a recording for a calibration pattern that's broadcast on HDNET, Sunday mornings I believe?

Forcing the input to 0-255 instead of 16-255 (Auto) levels seemed to fix the crushed blacks. This of course does nothing for the high compression, and artifacts resulting. The levels should be properly negotiated over an "Auto" setting, but the DVRs are saying they're sending something they're not.

Turns out my bad HDD was resolved with a Disaster Recovery reset (enter+arrow down while power on).

The tech also noticed that my Max Rate was only ~38000kpbs. She called in a ticket to repair a bridge tap that was causing the problem. Now my Max Rate is 50700kpbs, and I think I am seeing less compression. Should result in few audio/video breakups regardless.

You can check you Max Rate by logging into your RG http://xxx.xxx.x.xxx/mdc and clicking on Statistics on the left. Tech says you should be at least 42-45000kpbs.

So does anyone love UVerse?

So does anyone love UVerse?

Only people without HDTV's.

Only people without HDTV's.

Ouch :)

So does anyone love UVerse?

As I said before, I thnk it is great. Far better service than the local cable company. The HD could be better, but it is by no means anywhere close to unwatchable.

As I said before, I thnk it is great. Far better service than the local cable company. The HD could be better, but it is by no means anywhere close to unwatchable.

Agreed. The PQ is very watchable- it's more for casual viewing as opposed to a sit down and enjoy top notch PQ/AQ like a Blu-ray is anyway. Still, it's definitely the #1 thing I wish they'd improve.

Still thinking about Dish/DirecTV for better PQ, but not quite there yet.

Either way, any are better than cable's offerings in my area. 45ish HD channels for more money than everyone else is a joke.

Compared to FIOS, the U-verse PQ is several notches down. U-verse is OK for casual viewing on a <50", or if the image is static. Start watching something with a lot of motion, like a 1080i football game, and the screen turns into a blocky mess. Once you see it razor-sharp image with FIOS, it hard to adjust to.

Compared to FIOS, the U-verse PQ is several notches down. U-verse is OK for casual viewing on a <50", or if the image is static. Start watching something with a lot of motion, like a 1080i football game, and the screen turns into a blocky mess. Once you see it razor-sharp image with FIOS, it hard to adjust to.

Just don't see this. I watch 4-5 football games on the weekend and I have a 65" DLP and have no issues with artifacts. In fact the only place I have artifact issues is with NBC and this is because of their crappy broadcasts which were lousy via cable and OTA as well.

Just don't see this. I watch 4-5 football games on the weekend and I have a 65" DLP and have no issues with artifacts. In fact the only place I have artifact issues is with NBC and this is because of their crappy broadcasts which were lousy via cable and OTA as well.

Do you have fiber to your home? I have copper here, but am getting 50000kpbs total max download. The HD channels are only allocated 6Mpbs. Even with good MPEG4 encoding, I don't see how this limited bandwidth can avoid artifacting.

65" is plenty big... try watching from 2-3" away on a channel with a lot of motion.

So does anyone love UVerse?

Only people without HDTV's.

I've had U-verse w/ HD since April and absolutely love it. No complaints whatsoever. Comcast is nothing but a distant memory...

Meh, I get 6 Mbps/1 Mbps service for about half the price of Comcast cable Internet.

Canceled the TV service a couple of weeks after installation.

If they finally wised up and offered FTTP along with choice in DVRs, then maybe look at it again.

As it is, in a couple of years, I could see looking at Comcast again because the speed disparity may be hard to overlook.

I've had it for about a week - came from Charter everything to U-Verse everything. Very happy with it, and ATT support. I have 5 TVs, of which 3 are HD. Largest is 56". HD quality is very acceptable to me.

>>try watching from 2-3" away on a channel with a lot of motion.<<

You are kidding, right? Why would I care?

Ned

>>try watching from 2-3" away on a channel with a lot of motion.<<

You are kidding, right? Why would I care?

Ned

No, I'm not kidding. If you get close enough to the TV, you will likely see the compression artifacts. Once you see what the artifacting looks like, you can see if you see it from your normal seating position. If not, then no big deal I suppose.

I most certainly can see a substantial amount of compression from my seating distance. I had none before (same seating distance) with Verizon.

No, I'm not kidding. If you get close enough to the TV, you will likely see the compression artifacts. Once you see what the artifacting looks like, you can see if you see it from your normal seating position. If not, then no big deal I suppose.

I most certainly can see a substantial amount of compression from my seating distance. I had none before (same seating distance) with Verizon.
Should not rain on his parade. He is happy.
Michael

No, I'm not kidding. If you get close enough to the TV, you will likely see the compression artifacts. Once you see what the artifacting looks like, you can see if you see it from your normal seating position. If not, then no big deal I suppose.

I most certainly can see a substantial amount of compression from my seating distance. I had none before (same seating distance) with Verizon.

U-verse, Charter Cable, Dish/DirecTV, OTA ... I've yet to see anything that doesn't have compression artifacts.

U-verse, Charter Cable, Dish/DirecTV, OTA ... I've yet to see anything that doesn't have compression artifacts.

Verizon FiOS. Best HD PQ I have ever seen, even less compression that OTA.

Verizon FiOS. Best HD PQ I have ever seen, even less compression that OTA.

Which is great, and I'd pay twice what I'm paying for U-verse to have it- but I don't have the option.

Which is great, and I'd pay twice what I'm paying for U-verse to have it- but I don't have the option.

Right. It would be impossible AFAIK to have the option for one or the other. I just happen to be in an area with both... I moved a few miles away to go from Verizon to an AT&T area.

There are plenty of great features of U-verse. Reference picture quality, is unfortunately, not one of them.

I guess I'm an unusual case but my rebates were no problem at all, even got one for 40 dollars that I didn't know about.

Feedback from customers I've talked too was it's auto deduction on future bill. No physical rebate had to be filled out.

U-verse, Charter Cable, Dish/DirecTV, OTA ... I've yet to see anything that doesn't have compression artifacts.

The sad thing is, it doesn't have to be that way. I would gladly give up my 2sd/2hd profile for 2hd. Allow a third hd channel to record if needed and use a variable bitrate so that if one channels in use only it receives th full available data stream bandwidth.

Verizon FiOS. Best HD PQ I have ever seen, even less compression that OTA.


FIOS still has compression artifacts. Especially with their VOD.

FIOS still has compression artifacts. Especially with their VOD.

Agreed with their VOD (which is their IPTV offering). However, I don't know of any service that has less compression artifacting than FiOS.

The sad thing is, it doesn't have to be that way. I would gladly give up my 2sd/2hd profile for 2hd. Allow a third hd channel to record if needed and use a variable bitrate so that if one channels in use only it receives th full available data stream bandwidth.

Especially considering the bandwidth the system is capable of, and what we get to the home even now.

Why can't they have 10-12mbit H264 streams per channel, which should result in better PQ than everyone else, and tailor the number of streams available to the home based on the bandwidth it can receive. Leave the current system where internet speeds throttle based on TV usage. Add a half-bitrate stream (5-6mbps, basically what they have now) for those that would prefer more streams over better PQ.

Make this a menu configuration in the DVR to switch between the two, and you make everyone happy.

If Sam S is really seeing 49.5mbps (50700kbps), this would allow him at least 4 HD channels at once with 10-12mbps bitrate. Better PQ than any other provider, and as many HD streams playing/recording as most sat/cable setups would ever use or want.

Those seeing 37.1mbps (38000kpbs) could have the option of 3 HD streams at full-bitrate, or 6 HD streams at half-bitrate.

Those seeing less bandwidth may choose to have 2 HD streams at half-bitrate instead of 1 at full. Having the ability to watch a big game at full-bitrate and then switch to half-bitrate later for casual viewing on multiple TVs would be great even for limited bandwidth.

With this setup and multi-room DVR- how could anyone else compete? :D

I'm sure there are plenty of holes in this scenario ... mainly doubling the number of HD feeds they'd have to carry- unless the half-bitrate recompression option took place post-fiber and pre-home delivery (is that even an option?).

If Sam S is really seeing 49.5mbps (50700kbps), this would allow him at least 4 HD channels at once with 10-12mbps bitrate. Better PQ than any other provider, and as many HD streams playing/recording as most sat/cable setups would ever use or want.

My bandwidth fluctuates slightly, now I'm at 49994kpbs.

The amount of video service depends on the profile your location is provisioned for. 25/2 is I assume 25Mpbs down, 2Mbps upload, which is what my RG shows as my DSL "Current Rate". This is a fixed number. 49994kpbs is my Max Rate.

The 25/2 profile allows for 2HD/2SD. The lower profile is (I think) 18/2? This is where you would only get 1HD/2SD. If you get really far away from the node, they have to drop you to this profile.

I don't know how to account for the delta between the ~49Mbps Max Rate I have available and the 25216 kbps shown as my DSL rate, which I know is related to the video portion of the bandwidth.

Should not rain on his parade. He is happy.?

In fact the only place I have artifact issues is with NBC and this is because of their crappy broadcasts which were lousy via cable and OTA as well.If you're still having issues with NBC, blame your provider and/or local station.

NBC eliminated the HD bandwidth issue last year when they went to MPEG4 distribution.

I have something unusual to report. A few posts ago I mentioned the wireless stb adapters that are being tested in the SF bay area. Reports are coming in that the pq is markedly improved when utilizing the wifi adapters. I have not got my hands on one to test yet, but I will be getting one this weekend. I will post back once I've been able to compare coax, cat5 and this new wireless package. The theory is that the wifi setup allows the stb to communicate with the rg faster than both current methods, resulting in higher pq, but I'll believe it when I see it.

I have something unusual to report. A few posts ago I mentioned the wireless stb adapters that are being tested in the SF bay area. Reports are coming in that the pq is markedly improved when utilizing the wifi adapters. I have not got my hands on one to test yet, but I will be getting one this weekend. I will post back once I've been able to compare coax, cat5 and this new wireless package. The theory is that the wifi setup allows the stb to communicate with the rg faster than both current methods, resulting in higher pq, but I'll believe it when I see it.

That seems counter-intuitive. My STBs are connected to my RG via relatively short connections of Cat5e, which has bandwidth of over 100Mbps.

I have something unusual to report. A few posts ago I mentioned the wireless stb adapters that are being tested in the SF bay area. Reports are coming in that the pq is markedly improved when utilizing the wifi adapters. I have not got my hands on one to test yet, but I will be getting one this weekend. I will post back once I've been able to compare coax, cat5 and this new wireless package. The theory is that the wifi setup allows the stb to communicate with the rg faster than both current methods, resulting in higher pq, but I'll believe it when I see it.

That seems counter-intuitive. My STBs are connected to my RG via relatively short connections of Cat5e, which has bandwidth of over 100Mbps.

I would agree with Sam S that it's counter-intuitive since you get a much faster connection through Cat5e.

The only thing I could see making a difference would be if changes were made to the picture processing hardware of the stb as well.

?

If you are wodering about my "do not rain on his parade" it is in reference to post 2208 and 2209.
What reason would a person have to "force" his unhappiness of PQ on another, especially when the other has stated that they aare very happy with what they have. No need to berate someone else because you have a bad PQ from your setup. If others are happy, then why press it?
Michael

If you are wodering about my "do not rain on his parade" it is in reference to post 2208 and 2209.
What reason would a person have to "force" his unhappiness of PQ on another, especially when the other has stated that they aare very happy with what they have. No need to berate someone else because you have a bad PQ from your setup. If others are happy, then why press it?
Michael

One of the objects of AVS is to educate, not to let them live in ignorant bliss.

One of the objects of AVS is to educate, not to let them live in ignorant bliss.

It is AV "Science" Forum after all, right ;)

The science of U-verse picture quality, is that it sucks compared to other offerings. This can be proved anecdotely as well as technically.

I think it's important to relay this information to others considering the service. True, I am more picky than most, and the benefits/price may outweigh this for some.

Please enlighten us with some scientific evidence then. I've compared them bit for bit practically (D* versus Uverse) in the store, and there was no difference. I realize Uverse has a lower bitrate and higher compression than D*, but this did not cause the picture to "suck". Also, the evidence shows that Uverse SD is superior to many offerings. I've also seen cable HD that looks worse than D* SD, which is the benchmark for the worst picture possible.

Of the millions of customers of all these services I have yet to see a single post of screenshots for comparison. That would be real evidence.

Please enlighten us with some scientific evidence then.

You acknowledged yourself that the bitrate and compression is higher on U-verse, what exactly are you looking for me to provide? Maximum HD channel bandwidth is 6Mpbs.

I've compared them bit for bit practically (D* versus Uverse) in the store, and there was no difference. I realize Uverse has a lower bitrate and higher compression than D*, but this did not cause the picture to "suck".

Compared to FiOS, the compression artifacts are substantial, hence, the picture often "sucks".

Also, the evidence shows that Uverse SD is superior to many offerings.

I believe that. I do not watch very much SD, so it's a non-issue to me. My comments are applicable to what I experience with HD.

I've also seen cable HD that looks worse than D* SD, which is the benchmark for the worst picture possible.

See above.

Of the millions of customers of all these services I have yet to see a single post of screenshots for comparison. That would be real evidence.

Would you like me to post a picture with my digital camera? Before I go through the hassle, I want to make sure if I show you artificating, you will acknowlege it. However, since I no longer have FiOS, I'm not going to be able to offer any valid A/B comparison.

I had FiOS since late 2005. You can search for my comments on this thread (http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showthread.php?t=590208), but I don't recall I had anything negative to say about the picture quality.

65" is plenty big... try watching from 2-3" away on a channel with a lot of motion.

Who does this?

goofy nonsense

Who does this?

goofy nonsense

As I explained previously, once you spot the artifacting from that close distance, you can look for it at your normal seating area. If you don't see it, then I suppose you have nothing to be concerned about.

Personally, I see it from close up, and from my normal seating distance. It is not subtle.

AT&T U-verse TV to Deliver NFL RedZone Channel to Football Fans

Fri Sep 11, 2009 1:00pm EDT


DALLAS, Sept. 11 /PRNewswire-FirstCall/ -- AT&T* today announced that the new NFL RedZone channel will be added to the AT&T U-verse(SM) TV channel lineup. Through an agreement with the NFL Network, AT&T will make the channel available to U-verse TV football fans beginning with the NFL season's opening Sunday, Sept. 13.

NFL RedZone, a new sports channel produced by NFL Network, gives football fans quick and easy access to the most important moments of NFL Sunday football.Once a team gets inside their opponent's 20-yard line, U-verse TV customerswill be able to experience the anticipation and excitement of each play withinthe red zone. NFL RedZone keeps fans up-to-date in real time by switching from game to game with live look-ins, highlights and a chance to see every important play.

"AT&T U-verse just got better, again. NFL RedZone is a new and exciting way tostay on top of Sunday football, and we're proud to kick off the NFL footballseason by adding this channel to our lineup," said Dan York, executive vicepresident of content and programming, AT&T Converged Services. "U-verse TVfootball fans will truly enjoy tuning to NFL RedZone to watch the touchdownsand the biggest plays as they happen on their big screen TV."

"We're excited to offer NFL RedZone to AT&T U-verse football fans so they cansee the important plays from NFL games," said Kim Williams, chief operatingofficer for NFL Network. "U-verse TV customers across the country are going toenjoy this special channel produced by NFL Network."

NFL RedZone will be available on channel 1629 as part of the U-verse HDPremium Tier, which is available to U-verse HD subscribers for an additional $5 per month.

http://www.reuters.com/article/pressRelease/idUS162093+11-Sep-2009+PRN20090911

AT&T U-verse TV to Deliver NFL RedZone Channel to Football Fans

NFL RedZone will be available on channel 1629 as part of the U-verse HDPremium Tier, which is available to U-verse HD subscribers for an additional $5 per month.


That's a better deal then FIOS who wants $50 for just the RedZone channel. At least on Uverse you get other channels for the $60 a year it would cost. Of course you could just have the Premium tier for the 4 months of the season and it would only cost you $20.

Compared to FiOS, the compression artifacts are substantial, hence, the picture often "sucks".

Would you like me to post a picture with my digital camera? Before I go through the hassle, I want to make sure if I show you artificating, you will acknowlege it. However, since I no longer have FiOS, I'm not going to be able to offer any valid A/B comparison.I hadn't seen your other posts and didn't realize where you were coming from. Compared to FiOS, I acknowledge Uverse sucks. I was comparing to DirecTV. From what I've seen, Uverse is on par with that, and well above some cable systems I've seen.

No need to post FiOS versus Uverse. Point taken. I would like to see someone identify D*/Uverse differences, because I certainly can't see them. I do see artifacting all the time. It's horrendous on D* SD and quite noticeable on cable HD, so I know it when I see it.

It's horrendous on D* SD and quite noticeable on cable HD, so I know it when I see it.

We're not concerned with SD here. As for cable HD, it varies too widely to make any kind of generalized comment.

Here's discussion of another well known U-verse HD image quality issue: http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showthread.php?t=1138881

That seems counter-intuitive. My STBs are connected to my RG via relatively short connections of Cat5e, which has bandwidth of over 100Mbps.

It doesn't make any sense to me either, the specs for the device they are using claim 40-60 mbps throughput, which is slower than cat5 at 100mbps, or coax at 112mbps. So how could it possibly increase pq? I'll have one on Sunday and will be testing it later next week.

I have had Uverse about 2 weeks and am fairly happy with it for the most part. One thing that is different from the DVR I had with Charter cable is this doesn't record all of the time. With the cable DVR it was continually recording even when not being used, so if you turned the TV on you could rewind up to an hour back on whatever channel it had been set to before. I found out that this Cisco Uverse DVR will also do that if you leave it on all of the time. The problem is it goes off either by itself or it gets turned off sometime during the night. Is there a way around this?

I have had Uverse about 2 weeks and am fairly happy with it for the most part. One thing that is different from the DVR I had with Charter cable is this doesn't record all of the time. With the cable DVR it was continually recording even when not being used, so if you turned the TV on you could rewind up to an hour back on whatever channel it had been set to before. I found out that this Cisco Uverse DVR will also do that if you leave it on all of the time. The problem is it goes off either by itself or it gets turned off sometime during the night. Is there a way around this?

All of the U-verse boxes go into a standby mode after a period of non-activity. This is to save on bandwidth. Every time you're watching a program, it is pulling data from the video central office, and your RG has to process the image. Standby reduces this activity.

I had a U-verse tech out yesterday to replace my DVR which lost another round of recordings and gave me the dreaded "red X" with two dots. I told him about being unsatisfied with the amount of blocking on HD, and the amount of picture freezing and breakup I was experiencing. He was very sympathetic, and recommended a few things. First, he added a Linksys WiFi router, and turned off the RG's wireless. This apparently reduces the amount of processing the RG has to do. It also adds some flexibility to how my wireless is distributed, because now I can hang this Linksys off any ethernet port in the house.

Each of my rooms with U-verse is fed off an ethernet drop which goes into a switch. He replaced those switches with 8-port Gigabit Netgear units. We also put the RG on a shelf with more air circulation.

Either some or all of these changes really helped, because now picture breakup is virtually non-existent, and macroblocking is reduced. On a scale of 1-10, with 10 being the very best broadcast HD (i.e. Verizon FiOS), I would say my U-verse was about a 4 before, now it is a 6-7.

I got uverse installed about a week ago and for the most part I am happy. I have had 5 techs out in the last week though because I am too close to the vrad (400feet). This seems to be a common problem that is popping up as my area has a special unit (8 techs) that service the Fort Worth area specifically with issues relating to close installs. I finally got a great Prem tech yesterday and he knew exactly what was going on and was done in about an hour. It has been good for the last 24 hours but we shall see how it holds up (I have had different techs fix this issue 3 other times only to have it fail within a day). The customer service has been great as long as you get a Tier 2 or greater. The Prem Tech had to add some more cat5 to my line in the attic as I was getting random disconnects where my RG couldn't sync for hours. It would then finally sync and be fine for a couple of days before doing it again. The VRAD is basically blasting my RG with power at random times because it is so close.

Overall I love the speed of the internet considering we could only get 3mb download with DSL and now have the 12mb. I am pretty disappointed with the HD picture though. I am coming from Dish that in my eyes had an amazing picture. Uverse just doesn't look that great in hd. You can see the compression they use especially on football (the field has a green smear/compression to it when the camera moves). Some channels do look almost as good as Dish in HD but others are very noticeable. Also the occasional freeze/pixelization/lock up is also annoying (have only had it once for a second since the tech left yesterday). I know Dish wasn't perfect and honestly I still got random freezes with that also, but the HD quality just doesn't feel as life like as my old satellite provider. I will say that the SD quality is way better than I had with Dish. If I had to rate it, I would give Dish HD about a 9 (nothing is perfect, except maybe Fios :)) and Uverse HD about a 7-7.5. I am definitely keeping the internet side but am currently debating on whether to give Direct TV a shot as I won't go back to Dish (that's another story for another day :)). I don't want another contract and having another dish on my roof (currently just removed my old dish network one) and more coax on my house next to the already installed Uverse is not something I find appealing. Anyone else dissappointed with the HD quality? I wonder if it will get better over time.

We're not concerned with SD here.OP questioned my ability to recognize compression artifacts. I was just giving an example of where I'd seen artifacts. I think it's ok to utter the term SD if you're making a comparison to HD. I've seen some cable HD look as bad as SD. I think using that term gives the reader a better idea of the PQ I'm talking about.
As for cable HD, it varies too widely to make any kind of generalized comment. That's why I didn't generalize. I said SOME cable systems.
Here's discussion of another well known U-verse HD image quality issue: http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showthread.php?t=1138881Thanks for the link, but didn't changing an input setting or switching to component fix it?

U-Verse to me was probably one of the worst services I have had. I have had adelphia, Comcast (currently have), directv (2001-2005) Dish (2006-2007). In the last 3 months I have had U-Verse, comcast, and directv as I wanted the best picture possible and comcast (where I live) just blows them away. U-verse lasted about a week. Their HD was very soft and lost detail as well as black crush issue was bad. Their internet is capped so I felt it was very slow coming from comcast so I switched back. Tried directv this past weekend as I thought it would be better than what it was years ago but it was the same, if not worse, than U-Verse. Comcast and dish (voom days) is the best I have ever had. Our current comcast PQ is excellent with almost no issues and the only reason I have been trying other services is because I want more than 33 HD channels. I would go back to U-Verse if they stop compressing their signal so much and fix the 5.1 audio drop out issue. They had the best DVR and user interface next to the dish 722.

Well the Colts/Dolphins game last night looked mediocre at best in HD. I went over to my friends house at half time and could not believe how much better his HD picture was over mine (on a cheap LCD but he has Direct TV). I knew the HD quality was a downgrade after it was installed (I had Dish HD before but was trying to tough it out with Uverse as I thought it would get better) but it only brought back memories how good I had it before uverse. I love the internet (We would have had to get Uverse internet regardless as our speeds were to slow with regular DSL) but it is becoming harder and harder each day to stay with Uverse tv wise. I am trying to resist calling Direct TV as there will be a contract and I would probably have to buy a second DVR for our family room. It is tempting though as the compression ATT uses is rediculous. Some HD channels are tolerable (tv shows, some movies, etc.) but sports are average (below in my opinion) HD wise at best.

U-Verse to me was probably one of the worst services I have had. I have had adelphia, Comcast (currently have), directv (2001-2005) Dish (2006-2007). In the last 3 months I have had U-Verse, comcast, and directv as I wanted the best picture possible and comcast (where I live) just blows them away. U-verse lasted about a week. Their HD was very soft and lost detail as well as black crush issue was bad. Their internet is capped so I felt it was very slow coming from comcast so I switched back. Tried directv this past weekend as I thought it would be better than what it was years ago but it was the same, if not worse, than U-Verse. Comcast and dish (voom days) is the best I have ever had. Our current comcast PQ is excellent with almost no issues and the only reason I have been trying other services is because I want more than 33 HD channels. I would go back to U-Verse if they stop compressing their signal so much and fix the 5.1 audio drop out issue. They had the best DVR and user interface next to the dish 722.

I understand everyone has their own view on PQ, but DirecTV's quality is usually right on par with cable. If your picture was equal to or worse than U-Verse, you may have had a bad install or a setup issue.

IMO.

I understand everyone has their own view on PQ, but DirecTV's quality is usually right on par with cable. If your picture was equal to or worse than U-Verse, you may have had a bad install or a setup issue.

IMO.

I actually thought that to but my install was perfect minus a few cable issues afterwards (my Prem tech actually stated I had one of the cleanest lines he has seen all year). I had a new cat5 install by the tech and am really close to my VRAD (400 feet but they added another 1000 because I am technically to close). My neighbor down the street also has Uverse and has complained about the same thing. His picture looks just like mine. It isn't horrible but you can see artifacts, compression, etc. especially when the image moves on a football game. Dish wasn't perfect but it was almost completely clear with zero artifact/compression issues. I do have a 60" Pioneer Kuro Plasma so I am sure the issues are more pronounced on my set (HD looked amazing on this set though when I had Dish HD). I am trying to live with it but I definitely don't want to compromise. Now there is the talk of ATT going 3HD/1SD soon and the rumors of the compression getting even worse (I still can't believe they only use 5-6mb for HD). I don't see how this can be acceptable in the long run especially for the future of Uverse.

I actually thought that to but my install was perfect minus a few cable issues afterwards (my Prem tech actually stated I had one of the cleanest lines he has seen all year). I had a new cat5 install by the tech and am really close to my VRAD (400 feet but they added another 1000 because I am technically to close). My neighbor down the street also has Uverse and has complained about the same thing. His picture looks just like mine. It isn't horrible but you can see artifacts, compression, etc. especially when the image moves on a football game. Dish wasn't perfect but it was almost completely clear with zero artifact/compression issues. I do have a 60" Pioneer Kuro Plasma so I am sure the issues are more pronounced on my set (HD looked amazing on this set though when I had Dish HD). I am trying to live with it but I definitely don't want to compromise. Now there is the talk of ATT going 3HD/1SD soon and the rumors of the compression getting even worse (I still can't believe they only use 5-6mb for HD). I don't see how this can be acceptable in the long run especially for the future of Uverse.

Sorry I wasn't more clear; what I should have said was "If your DirecTV-fed picture was equal to or worse than U-Verse, you may have had a bad DirecTV install or a setup issue."

Sorry I wasn't more clear; what I should have said was "If your DirecTV-fed picture was equal to or worse than U-Verse, you may have had a bad DirecTV install or a setup issue."

No problem. I figured that is what you meant. I just wish Directv would give me two free HD DVR's for signing up :). Oh well I will continue to configure my tv in hopes I get a better picture with Uverse (even though nothing is going to cure the compression issues). I will probably keep Uverse for a month to get the rebate, but then drop the tv (if I can't live with it) and keep the internet.

just switched from timewarner to u-verse last week. Upgraded to the 450 package plus 2 extra receivers for upstairs hd plasmas. After all hookups were made tech said i was on the fringe area about 3000 feet from their box and i would only receive 1 hd signal. So if my wife wants to either watch or record an hd station down stairs. i would not be able to watch an hd channel upstairs, which defeats the whole purpose of subscribing to all of u-verse hd channels and their $14 rental each month for the receivers upstairs. Thinking about switching back to time warner where a least you can watch 2 hd channels at a time and i think the hd picture is better.

hal

I understand everyone has their own view on PQ, but DirecTV's quality is usually right on par with cable. If your picture was equal to or worse than U-Verse, you may have had a bad install or a setup issue.

IMO.

Actually I wired the home myself less than 2 years ago...cat-5 short runs designated if I chose satellite. Install was perfect and had 97% ping. I had the HR22 and what was amazing was that once I got the update the picture dramatically improved, however still not even close to comcast. Even my wife said something after watching something for about 2 minutes. I really think U_Verse may have been better than what I was seeing. Now directv has come leaps and bounds vs what they were producing post 2008 but it just was very poor to me. Again I really wish U-verse would re-think their strategy of quantity vs quality because I really like their interface and DVR speed. I left the box on the side of the house incase I want to try them again in the future but with adding more HD feeds and lowering compression even more it doesnt look like I will.

just switched from timewarner to u-verse last week. Upgraded to the 450 package plus 2 extra receivers for upstairs hd plasmas. After all hookups were made tech said i was on the fringe area about 3000 feet from their box and i would only receive 1 hd signal. So if my wife wants to either watch or record an hd station down stairs. i would not be able to watch an hd channel upstairs, which defeats the whole purpose of subscribing to all of u-verse hd channels and their $14 rental each month for the receivers upstairs. Thinking about switching back to time warner where a least you can watch 2 hd channels at a time and i think the hd picture is better.

hal

Sorry to hear that. I'm at 3200 ft. and have 2hd/2sd service. Insist on having an uverse-trained MST (maintenance splicing tech) recheck the installation. I've found several simple issue's (bad connector or nicked IW) to be the cause of this in some cases. We have different meters and can assess the copper network far beyond the scope of a Uverse installation tech. I've found something as small as twisted pairs at a splice can make a huge difference. Express your frustration to the tech about not being able to have the second HD stream. Pair bonding will hopefully be available to push these footage's out.