AT&T salesmen dropped by my home last week and convinced me to try out their new fiber-optic/internet-streaming TV service. Installation went fairly smoothly, although it took six hours (apparently, that's how long it almost always takes) even though my home is fairly new and is already pre-wired throughout with coax and Cat 5e. As I have heard of problems with high-def through uverseusers.com I asked them not to disconnect my TWC cable service so that I could compare the picture quality using identical programming through the same TV. So, after a week of viewing, here are my conclusions:

Cost: U-verse is cheaper
Not by much, though. The U-verse package I signed up for (U400) has 300 TV channels, 49 premium movie channels (all the usual suspects, no adult channels), and a sports package. This came out to $99/mo, before taxes/fees. The first 2 months are free. TWC, if you choose the same channel packages, will come out to approximately $110/mo before taxes/fees. However, U-verse has more HD channels, namely A&E, HGTV, Food Network, National Geographic, and TMC; also, U-verse carries both the West and East coast feeds for the premium movie channels in HD. TWC does have INHD (if you subscribe to that tier) whereas U-verse does not offer it.

Equipment: U-verse's DVR has a larger drive but an inferior UI
U-verse comes with a Motorola VIP1216 for use as DVRs and VIP1200 as HD receivers. I had one of each installed. The VIP1216 is much smaller (see photo) than the Motorola BMC9012/Moxi unit I have for TWC. It also seems to run quieter and cooler, although I haven't completely confirmed that as they are next to each other and I can't completely separate the two especially for noise. The VIP1216's Microsoft-designed UI seems primitive compared to Moxi's, however, and people coming over from Tivo will be even more disappointed. The menus run no faster than Moxi's, and, actually, seems to be slower especially in scrolling through channels. Even worse, there is no function as in Moxi to sort through channels by category (sports, movies, HD, etc). The search by title function is just as slow as Moxi's (which is to say, painfully). Changing channels is no faster than Moxi, contrary to AT&T's claims that channel surfing is "instantaneous". I would say, though, the SD set upstairs does seem for some reason or another to switch a bit faster than the HD DVR downstairs. On the upside, the VIP1216 comes with a 160gb drive and 3 times the storage (video time-wise) of the Moxi. Since the Moxi has an 80gb drive, I am not sure if this is due to overhead the Moxi takes up on the drive, or because perhaps the MPEG-4 compression on the VIP1216 is that much more efficient. Also, the VIP1216 provides a grainy "PIP" function while you are surfing channels, providing a blocky pic in the bottom left corner for you to preview prior to changing channels. The VIP1216 provides, along with the usual outputs, a HDMI port (version unknown), 2 USB 2.0 ports, and an ethernet port. Output, like the BMC9012, can be set to multiple resolutions, HD output being 720p or 1080i.

Picture quality: U-verse is slightly better in SD, TWC is slightly better in HD
U-verse's picture is somewhat sharper than TWC's in SD, and vice versa in HD. This confirms what most people on uverseusers.com have said, although many of them noticed "marked" improvement in SD and deterioration in HD. I have to say, flipping back and forth between the inputs and watching the same material, the differences are mild, and while in live motion, difficult to discern. There are some saturation/brightness differences, but those can be altered in your TVs settings to compensate. See the photos below comparing the same scene from "Planet Earth" (the fresh water episode) recorded from Discovery HD Theater through both systems. Output was set at 1080i for both DVRs. The VIP1216 was connected through HDMI, the BMC9012 through component video. The photos were taken with a Panasonic DMC-FX30 set to 7MP and no photo-editing was done. TV is a Samsung HL-R6178W outputting 1080p. To my eye, the TWC picture is sharper (look at the foliage at bottom left for example). However, while the picture is moving, this difference in sharpness is hard to detect. Both pictures, of course, are greatly inferior to HD-DVD/Blue-ray due to compression.

Conclusion: I'm switching to U-verse
U-verse improves on two main complaints I have with TWC/Moxi, which is a tiny drive in the DVR and few HD channels. The fact that it is $120 cheaper a year doesn't hurt. In return, I'll have to give up some functionality in the DVR's UI, something that I hope will improve over time as AT&T fleshes out its new service.

Is there firewire? If not, yawn

Does it support external HD's I'm assuming no because of no eSATA port although I guess you could use the USB ports. How does watching HD on the tv affect internet speeds since it all is over copper instead of fiber?

Is the VIP1216 capable of passing DD 5.1?

Can anyone explain me what the ethernet is for ?Can I mount the partition from a computer connected on the same network?

Also, can I use this item without cable tv? (just as a dvr)?

Thanks!

seems like i cannot use both outputs at same time to power two tv with same channel

installer is clueless

my time warner allow two tvs one hdmi the other compnent one box

The TWC PQ looks better, it seems the details are blurred out in the AT&T pic.

Also it seems the AT&T pic is also zommed in. If you look the bottom right the rock is missing on the AT&T pic.

Only one HD channel (to watch or record) at a time is a no go for me! I can do three at a time with my Dish DVR.

Just got the AT&T Uverse 400 package as well. I got suckered into it due to the "fiber optic" connection deal. Just wanted to compare it with my Charter service. Like F said. It took them a LONG time to install everything. But I am glad that everything seems to work fine. For the few hours I tried it out here what I think.

1. Superior upload speed and fast download. Very close to the advertised 5mb download/1mb upload claim. But then again, for the $110 monthly fee, It better deliver.
2. Lot more HD channels on AT&T. HD looks good. According to my Westinghouse LCD monitor, both display at resolution of 1920 x 540. But it does appear to me that the detail on the Charter HD is finer and more life like.
3. Uverse gave us 1 or 3 month free of movie channels. Meh, I can care less. Don't watch them enough to care.
4. UI wise, I can not say for sure yet. As I may be biased now since I am so familiar with my SONY DHG-HDD250 DVR's UI. I remember not liking it after getting used to my RePlay DVR UI. But now I am pretty comfortable. I think it will take some time for me to see. Besides, the remote for the AT&T is very TiVo like and I think it is pretty good looking.
5. Holy macro, the Residential Gateway 3800HGV-B is MASSIVE. Granted, it serves as a wireless router, cable modem, and possibly VIOP phone modem? But I much prefer it over my Charter set up of cable modem + VOIP modem + wireless router. Less wire, less power adapters, and less of those maddening flickering status lights.
6. Odd that the Uverse thingy requires both phone cable and the RG-5/6 cable to work. I guess the RG-5/6 is for video and the phone serves the internet service?
7. It feels weird to have both ethernet cables connected to both of my LAN connecters on my motherboard. I get to use multi-networks. I wonder if they stack. Like I can download at combined 10mb and upload at 1.5mb? Hmmm.

Well, it is my intention to check both out to see which one I intent to keep. The 30 day trial on AT&T does not hurt either.

Anybody else have some info on this. I am greatly interested, but HD PQ and inDemand are key to me so I can't convert quite yet.

How is the phone service, I have tried a few different VOIP services in my time but nothing very good yet.

I have only had it installed for a little over a week. I have had D for the past 12 years, so that is the only thing I can compare it to.

I signed up for the u400 and I think I get about 42 HD channels. More will be added soon. Although, I think I will be lowering my package to u200, which is more that enough channels for me.

I wasn't expecting much from SD but it's actually very good.

You can only get HD feed at this time. That is suppose to change soon.

As far as HD quality I am a little confused. I have a 1080p LCD and an older 1080i RP CRT. The HD quality on the LCD is fantastic on most channels. I would say it's the same as I was getting with D and sometimes a little better. HD on the CRT is not as good as it was with D. I really don't understand this yet. It can't be the service or all the TV's would look bad. I am still trying to tweak it.

The internet is 6/1 and delivers as promised.

Bottom Line: I don't know yet. I plan on keeping it for a while. A contract is not required so I can change any time.

Is there firewire? If not, yawn
No.

Does it support external HD's I'm assuming no because of no eSATA port although I guess you could use the USB ports. How does watching HD on the tv affect internet speeds since it all is over copper instead of fiber?
No to external HDrives. People have had success upgrading the 160GB drive to a larger one.
Usb ports are disabled.
Speed isn't affected.

Is the VIP1216 capable of passing DD 5.1?

Yes via optical.
2.0 via HDMI

Can anyone explain me what the ethernet is for ?Can I mount the partition from a computer connected on the same network?

Also, can I use this item without cable tv? (just as a dvr)?

Thanks!
The STB connects to the gateway via ethernet or coax. You can use the ethernet port to access the internet with say a HTPC, laptop or HD DVD player.
No to being a stand alone DVR.

I have and love it. But be willing to be patient as they get some bugs out, as it is still developing.

AT&T U-Verse Review
Location: South Palm Beach County Florida
Date: September 30. 2008

After five days and 22 man hours of technicians at my house, I now have AT&T U-Verse service on two HD television and three computers connected via ethernet plus WiFi service for laptop devices.

The internet is good! It is stable at 2950 KBS download and 980 KBS upload. This speed is two and half times faster on download and three and a half times faster on upload than my old regular type ADSL system. I have the "Pro" internet but I think the least expensive service would be much better than standard ADSL.

The television is not as good! First, the technicians tried to use the coaxial system that was pre-wired when the house was built which I didn't like because I was using that system for an off-air antenna system. Fortunately, they were not able to get it to work so I have the antenna system back. Next, I ask them to run a line outside of the house for a second TV which is far away from the modem/router which is the system hub. This approached worked. Following are facts about the TV service.

- I only have one HD feed. I am 3050 feet from the neighborhood box that contain the fiber optics. They can only certify two HD feeds if you are less than 3000 feet away from the neighborhood box. They are working on it but it doesn't look good at the moment. I can imagine family arguments over only one HD feed if all have HD TV's. Even two HD feeds for a family of four will be a problem.

- I am happy I still have off-air antenna service which is FREE and I have not cancelled my DirecTV service yet.

- Good quality picture! In fact, they actually fixed a local channel that broadcast an odd, stretched out picture.

- The DVR seems typical to what you get from cable or satellite companies except the box is FREE. It is suppose to be able to record several channels at a time but with one HD feed that feature will probably never be used.


Now that I finally have service after a long and painful installation, I am going to give AT&T a chance to compete. At this point in time, it seems they have a 50% chance to retain my business. Of course, it all depends on your local situation. If I was 50 feet closer to the neighborhood box, it would have made a big difference in terms of getting two HD feeds. It is all very interesting technology which is basically a modem and router. The price is good compared to the competition. All of the technicians were professional and nice people even though new to the business since the service has only been available in my area for three weeks.

I have 4 HD TV's and Direct TV. Are you telling me I cannot connect all 4 TV's to UVERSE?

Hey Guys
I'm new to this forum. I've been searching around finding out as much info on U-verse as I can, and what I've read so far is not good. I've got Dish right now and was looking at AT&T to save some money. I have an install date coming up in a couple of weeks for the service,but it seems that all of the bugs have not been ironed out yet. I'm more of an audiophile then a video guy, but I have very nice HT system. My question is should I wait a while or dive in now. I live in the Metro Detroit area, and friends that have the service are split on it's quality. One has cancelled the service after only a month claiming constant outages and a parade of tech's coming and going to fix the problems. This seems to be a knowledgeable forum on things video, so a little help. If the thing does not work,then it's not a bargain.

Thanks

Just got Uverse here in California's Central Valley. It has been available for about a month. I agree with what I have read elsewhere, the DS picture is good but the HD might be less than Dish, hard to say for sure, still looks good.
The tech had told that I would not have total home dvr or whatever they call it, but got off work today and the system had an update saying it was enabled (install was yesterday).
The internet/tv have dedicated bandwidth. The whole Uverse is 25 Mbps (info available in system settings and matches both what the online and inhome tech stated). My internet went form a DSL 6/1 to Uverse 6/1 and have not noticed any difference in speeds with two HD feeds going.
The service allows for 2 HD and 2 SD recordings at the same time. I do like the UI though miss the multiple Guide settings of Dish (you can customize). I assume such user friendly features may be in the future (if this doesnt infringe on others' patents). The UI is WinCE based. It was easier than Dish to set up series recordings.
My setup is all ethernet based. If you opt for an SD only enabled box, you can send the same feed to other locations via coax (ala Dish boxes). I opted for two HD setups and will try to send enable this feature anyway, hopefully the tech was wrong.
I think I was told 5 boxes is max? I know I was offered 4 HD.
Install was quick since my home is newer with a media panel and wired for ethernet and coax. Also fiber to premise. Opted for the home IP package going with VOIP and no change in call quality - it sounds good.
I still have my nice DISH HD-DVR/service and will do some comparisons.

Sure would like to know more about Hard Drive expansion/replacement. I have had a TIVO HD for 6 months or so and absolutely love it for OTA but am missing ESPN and a couple other stations. I'm considering uverse when it becomes available in my area and am hoping that some kind of hard drive/archiving is available.

I have quick question.... does the in-house cable still work without a receiver at a TV I do not want to get another receiver for (for example, guest bedroom)?

With U-verse, every TV has to have a receiver. $5 a month per set to box.

I have quick question.... does the in-house cable still work without a receiver at a TV I do not want to get another receiver for (for example, guest bedroom)?

An additional receiver will be necessary to view Uverse tv in the other rooms. No way around it.

Let me see if I can get a response in this section. I originally posted this in the Onkyo 606 Owners forum. I recently picked up the 606 and it's connected with the U Verse (Motorola VIP 1216) via HDMI. Somehow I can;t get the Dolby Digital to come through on the 606. My previous receiver hooked up to the Uverse box connected via optical displayed DD...I can't figure it out. I know that the UVerse box can pass DD, why can't I get it to show DD on the 606. Any help is greatly appreciated.

Originally Posted by BuckNaked
Is the VIP1216 capable of passing DD 5.1?

Yes via optical.
2.0 via HDMI




Found this a few posts up.

^Thanks Moxie ! So via HDMI is limited to 2 channels? I see-- well, I'll go back to optical for the audio then.

HDMI limited to two channels? That was an annoying limitation in the year 2004 with the first HD Tivo. This is 2008... Are they kidding?

can you download video from the uverse dvr via usb on the front.

can you download video from the uverse dvr via usb on the front.

No.

I currently use SA8300 box with an esata 1TB HD expansion for the DVR. I also use the firewire port to output to my computer. It sounds as if both of these set-ups are not available with U-Verse...How hard is it to replace the HD, is there a size limitation?

"After five days and 22 man hours of technicians at my house, I now have AT&T U-Verse service on two HD television and three computers connected via ethernet plus WiFi service for laptop devices."

I am going to assume the above computer connections are for the internet and not the TV service....if I am wrong please clarify.

Thanks,

No.


No to external HDrives. People have had success upgrading the 160GB drive to a larger one.
Usb ports are disabled.
Speed isn't affected.



Where have you seen this done? I have scoured the net on anyone who has upgraded the puny 160gb drive to at least a 500gb drive.

With the old Tivo DVR you had to put an image on it or pull the power cable when it was booting to force a new image burn.

I am desperately waiting for someone to do it so i can give it a try. 160gb and PATA is ridiculous in this computer age. Cost cost cost cutting...

I am considering Uverse, but the very small hard drive in their DVR (160G) stops me. And since all TVs in the entire house must share this one drive (one DVR per house, with sharing), AT&T is insane.

Has anyone upgraded the drive themselves yet? I know this is risky since you do not own the unit, but without an upgrade, the AT&T service is of no interest to me.