or Connect
AVS › AVS Forum › HDTV › HDTV Programming › AT&T U-verse HDTV
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

AT&T U-verse HDTV - Page 58

post #1711 of 4208
Quote:
Originally Posted by steveken View Post

The firewall is shut off.

Do not leave your firewall off when your computer is in the DMZ. Ever.
Quote:


I am not real familiar with how to change the server port in 10.5.6, can you walk me through it?

The file you need to edit is /private/etc/httpd/httpd.conf (it's not visible from the Finder, so it's easiest to use pico). If you're not familiar with Apache and the Mac Terminal, there's a step-by-step tutorial here:

http://homepage.mac.com/car1son/change_apache_port.html

The above isn't the easiest way to do it, but it is the most user-friendly way for novices.

Creating the user rule for port 80 isn't any different from selecting "Web server" from the application list, so if one doesn't work, neither will the other. You have to make sure that only one computer is set to host on port 80--if you've got too many computers configured to do it, or you've added user rules, you need to clear it all out, because that alone could be your problem. By changing the port on your webserver, you're avoiding these conflicts. If you're using DynDNS, all you have to do is set your domain to your AT&T IP with the modified port (e.g. 123.456.789.0:8080), and then you can use and give out your regular http://yourname.host.com without needing any special instructions.
post #1712 of 4208
A quick update on today's (attempted) U-verse install at our place in Sunnyvale, CA, with some interesting news items.....

The good news – the installer did show up roughly on-time and we went through the house wiring issues (which I had asked about on an earlier forum page -- thanks again for everyone's advice). Looks like he will do the install with all new Cat5 and without using any of my existing CATV cabling, which is as desired in my particular situation. Also, the guy confirmed that we should get good U-verse speeds because we will be wired to a VRAD only 700 feet away.

The bad news – despite the fact that I clearly requested U-verse to be installed on my home business line, AT&T “conditioned” our second home phone line for it instead. As you might guess, the U-verse installer isn’t allowed to do that work; AT&T’s “outside plant” guys have to do it and they are stacked up with work orders for at least 2 days. So.....it'll be a few days before the U-verse install starts in earnest. The installer said he runs into this issue fairly frequently with so many people now having home offices, and has complained about the recurring problem but to no avail.

A couple interesting pieces of info mentioned by the U-verse install tech:

- AT&T is currently not approving overtime for techs in our area, so no more working into the evening to get the jobs done if needed.

- One of the reasons the tech said he decided to use new Cat5 instead of trying to use my home CATV cable is that they are "no longer allowed to use CATV to twisted pair converters". Not sure what the reason is, but since it is to my benefit in our particular install I'm not complaining. :-)

More later after the install is actually completed.
post #1713 of 4208
I don't get why people request U-Verse come on on a certain line over another, it has ZERO effect on the existing phone line, and you can cancel the phone line at anytime and still keep the U-Verse service.
The overtime line was bs, there is plenty of overtime available, I make more in ot than I do in normal pay. Coax to twisted pair is for installs only utilizing the existing twisted pair phone wiring, which is very rarely done.
post #1714 of 4208
AuroraProject, I requested it that way for several reasons: (1) Part of the service is being paid for by my company and that is a line they installed for a home office. (2) The other line needs to remain analog due to a centrally monitored alarm system. My alarm company strongly recommends against putting a monitored alarm on a digital/VOIP line -- their policy. On top of those reasons, what I don't appreciate is that everything I did in the online sign-up process was done with one phone number/line -- the other main line phone number was never even asked for and I didn't enter it anywhere in the sign-up screens. But somehow in AT&T's infinite wisdom, they selected and conditioned the other line anyway. The tech was just as frustrated as me. Hopefully they will correct the issue quickly -- it can't be that complex as is supposedly only involves something that is done inside the local wiring junction pedestal next to the VRAD.
post #1715 of 4208
Did you order voip? The U-Verse service can exist along side a standard pots line (pots means plain old telephone service). There is no need to convert a line to voip for the U-Verse install. I understand the company provided part though. Plant conditioning was done awhile ago, and I can't find any good pattern for how it was done. 90% of the time the houses primary line receives the conditioning, but in other cases it can be a secondary line or an unused pair, for whatever reason.
post #1716 of 4208
Aurora, I'm a good (though still potential until they actually install!) customer and ordered the full-on 30/30/30 U-verse bundle. VOIP voice line and DSL will be used for home office, TV for family. Sorry if that wasn't clear in my original post.

It's funny that they conditioned the primary line because I actually originally ordered the second line many years ago with DSL, which at the time ended up as an unsuccessful install due to my distance at that time from the CO. Fortunately I now have a VRAD 700 feet away.

P.S. I worked in telco and CATV early in my career (hence my "Ex-EE" monikor) , so I do know what POTS and many other arcane telco terms mean -- like "tip and ring".
post #1717 of 4208
Just so you know, if you are talking about ADT as your alarm carrier (or a vast majority of other alarm companies), it really doesn't matter if you are on VoIP or whatever with their service. If the alarm goes off, it dials the number, and then proceeds to send DTMF tones across to the connected system. That is unless they have somehow changed all the stuff to work with an actual modem type connection or digital system. I would think that they wouldn't because all it really needs to do is interpret keypresses to convey the necessary information to the monitoring facility.

There is no real reason why you can't use a VoIP line to do it. I had ADT hooked up through Vonage before (they didn't know I was on VoIP) and it worked just fine. Never had an instance where it didn't do right. I would say that all you have to do is tell the alarm company that you are on a regular landline and you will be fine regardless of what you are really hooked up with.
post #1718 of 4208
steveken, thanks for the info. I'm aware of the way alarm system dialers work using DTMF, however there are actually other factors in addition to just requiring a line that will allow DTMF to be sent. Most alarm systems also want a line that can be "seized" by the alarm system on a priority basis regardless of whether other phones on the inside wiring are off-hook. This can be challenging to do with a VOIP line. In any case, my alarm company will currently not support a line that is dialing over VOIP. Their policy may be arcane, but that's the way it is currently and I'm not going to risk them blaming a non-responded alarm on my phone line.
post #1719 of 4208
Quote:
Originally Posted by dbaydoun View Post

I have read through most of this thread and my local thread (detroit). My question is very simple: would you change from Cable (brighthouse) to Uverse? Specifically for HDTV. I'm not concerned about the money, just quality of the HD signal. I'm really nervous after reading through these threads about the quality of the Uverse HD signal. I have an Uverse install scheduled for Feb 20th but I am seriously considering canceling it. Can anyone give me some advice please. Thanks.

I just switched from Comcast to U-verse this past week. I can't speak for Brighthouse either, but the picture quality for HD is not quite as good as it was with Comcast in my opinion. The SD quality seems to be better to me. The features and price are what sold me though. I have 1 more TV with a box, 4 tuners (instead of 2), whole home DVR, less clutter with the Residential Gateway running pretty much everything, it's cheaper than Comcast was, and I couldn't be happier. I'll take a nominal decrease in HD picture quality for all of the other benefits any day. That's just my 2 cents.
post #1720 of 4208
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kustom Kid View Post

I just switched from Comcast to U-verse this past week. I can't speak for Brighthouse either, but the picture quality for HD is not quite as good as it was with Comcast in my opinion. The SD quality seems to be better to me. The features and price are what sold me though. I have 1 more TV with a box, 4 tuners (instead of 2), whole home DVR, less clutter with the Residential Gateway running pretty much everything, it's cheaper than Comcast was, and I couldn't be happier. I'll take a nominal decrease in HD picture quality for all of the other benefits any day. That's just my 2 cents.

Awesome. Thanks for your input.
post #1721 of 4208
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ex-EE View Post

steveken, thanks for the info. I'm aware of the way alarm system dialers work using DTMF, however there are actually other factors in addition to just requiring a line that will allow DTMF to be sent. Most alarm systems also want a line that can be "seized" by the alarm system on a priority basis regardless of whether other phones on the inside wiring are off-hook. This can be challenging to do with a VOIP line. In any case, my alarm company will currently not support a line that is dialing over VOIP. Their policy may be arcane, but that's the way it is currently and I'm not going to risk them blaming a non-responded alarm on my phone line.

Yeah, they are "supposed" to be able to be seized regardless of other phones being off the hook around the house, but that doesn't always happen.

In the case of my alarm system when it was installed, the tech didn't run a line out to the NID for the panel. Instead, he just spliced it into the nearest phone jack and took it from there. With that in place, there is NO way for the line to be seized if the alarm goes off and a phone is off the hook.

In fact, when I worked for a short time doing alarm installs in houses (was way too nervous drilling holes in peoples houses, plus I didn't like working under houses or in attics), we never ran a line to the NID, just used the closest jack. So, IF your system is installed properly, then I can understand how the company doesn't want it to be done over VoIP, but with how most are installed, I don't think it makes a bit of difference.

Anyway, I understand what you are saying and agree.
post #1722 of 4208
Understand, steveken....my alarm system is definitely wired "properly" to the NID to that it can seize the line, not just to the nearest jack. Our alarm installers really did a exceptional job of wiring our system a few years ago, which I know is uncommon these days.

By way of further update on my U-verse install -- The AT&T outside plant guy is here now testing lines. He claims that if we want U-verse we will *have* to install it on our other (main) voice number. He says that AT&T already invested a couple years ago in conditioning that line by ensuring it is on a clean pair with no bridge taps between my house and the VRAD, and they are unwilling to repeat the process for the other line on which I ordered U-verse. He says it is standard policy that when someone has multiple lines running to their house, AT&T only conditions one.

I will probably see what I can reconfigure and go ahead with the U-verse install anyway. Would sure be nice if AT&T's ordering system picked up this issue when one signs up to avoid surprises like this.
post #1723 of 4208
Hey all,

I was watching my U-verse TV on Sunday and a Severe Thunderstorm Watch and Severe Thunderstorm Warning had popped up on my tv from the National Weather Service. Does anyone know anything about this service or what other weather warning products come through the U-verse TV?
post #1724 of 4208
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ex-EE View Post

Understand, steveken....my alarm system is definitely wired "properly" to the NID to that it can seize the line, not just to the nearest jack. Our alarm installers really did a exceptional job of wiring our system a few years ago, which I know is uncommon these days.

By way of further update on my U-verse install -- The AT&T outside plant guy is here now testing lines. He claims that if we want U-verse we will *have* to install it on our other (main) voice number. He says that AT&T already invested a couple years ago in conditioning that line by ensuring it is on a clean pair with no bridge taps between my house and the VRAD, and they are unwilling to repeat the process for the other line on which I ordered U-verse. He says it is standard policy that when someone has multiple lines running to their house, AT&T only conditions one.

I will probably see what I can reconfigure and go ahead with the U-verse install anyway. Would sure be nice if AT&T's ordering system picked up this issue when one signs up to avoid surprises like this.

I think I'd tell em where to stick it. If they can't do it the way you want it done, then you can go to one of the other providers in your area. It's quite evident that "the customer is always right" is no where near accurate these days.

Most of these companies realize they have enough people out there that they don't have to do right by the customer. They could care less if you go somewhere else.
post #1725 of 4208
Some good news After calling every day for a couple days I finally got someone who went the extra step and sent a trouble ticket to engineering... and bam I'm gettin U-Verse on Sunday March 8th. Since Sunday is my only day I can get it installed, I have to wait almost a month, but there's only 28 days in February. I can't wait to get rid of COX. I need to find a VP or something and email them and praise the work Lisa did
post #1726 of 4208
Aargh...earliest mutually agreeable rescheduled install that AT&T can offer for our situation is now Monday, February 23. Time to move all the furniture and other stuff back into place. The install tech who was here yesterday implied it would be much sooner, but of course they don't set their own schedules. I hope that at least the same install tech is assigned so I don't have to go over all the wiring routing with a new person again.
post #1727 of 4208
Ok. I have been reading diligently, but I have one question. I have read in this forum that a set top box is required at every tv. This contradicts the Uverse literature that I've read that says only that a set top box is required to receive the full house dvr functionality.

I have 5 tvs in the house currently. 3 are on a Time Warner set top box (terrible!!!) and the other two are just plugged directly into the cable (don't care about premium channels or even hd on those tvs). I want to replicate that with the new Uverse setup. If I can't, the extra $14 bucks a month to put boxes on the other tvs eats the majority of the savings I'll get by switching.

Can I get channels directly at the tvs or do I absolutely need a box to receive anything?

Thanks!
post #1728 of 4208
https://ask.att.com/esh/uverse/request.do?session={13667b70-f86d-11dd-f0b4-000000000000}&event=3&view(52b0)=c{368d52b0-a1ef-11dd-f94c-000000000000}
Question:

How does U-verse TV connect to my house?

Answer: Answer last updated: 01-22-09

AT&T U-verse is Internet Protocol Television (IPTV), and works by plugging your high speed Internet connection into a set-top box that's connected to your television. Once the connection is made, the set-top box assembles the code from your phone line into video and audio. AT&T U-verse broadcasts in both standard definition and high definition. Each TV in the home must be hooked up to a set-top box in order to receive the signal.
post #1729 of 4208
Quote:
Originally Posted by avnimrod View Post

Ok. I have been reading diligently, but I have one question. I have read in this forum that a set top box is required at every tv. This contradicts the Uverse literature that I've read that says only that a set top box is required to receive the full house dvr functionality.

I have 5 tvs in the house currently. 3 are on a Time Warner set top box (terrible!!!) and the other two are just plugged directly into the cable (don't care about premium channels or even hd on those tvs). I want to replicate that with the new Uverse setup. If I can't, the extra $14 bucks a month to put boxes on the other tvs eats the majority of the savings I'll get by switching.

Can I get channels directly at the tvs or do I absolutely need a box to receive anything?

Thanks!

Each tv must have it's own set top box.
post #1730 of 4208
Aurora, do you know anything about the rollout that was supposed to have occured back in December here up the road from you in Martinez? I see the cables have been strung but no ads promoting it yet.
post #1731 of 4208
Quote:
Originally Posted by avnimrod View Post

Ok. I have been reading diligently, but I have one question. I have read in this forum that a set top box is required at every tv. This contradicts the Uverse literature that I've read that says only that a set top box is required to receive the full house dvr functionality.

I have 5 tvs in the house currently. 3 are on a Time Warner set top box (terrible!!!) and the other two are just plugged directly into the cable (don't care about premium channels or even hd on those tvs). I want to replicate that with the new Uverse setup. If I can't, the extra $14 bucks a month to put boxes on the other tvs eats the majority of the savings I'll get by switching.

Can I get channels directly at the tvs or do I absolutely need a box to receive anything?

Thanks!

Absolutely need a box at each. But you only need one DVR box for all.
post #1732 of 4208
Thread Starter 
Tuesday, February 10, 2009

THOUSAND OAKS — AT&T is expanding its U-verse television service into Thousand Oaks, the company announced Monday.

Simi Valley and Moorpark residents already had access to the service, which provides television using Internet Protocol, allowing functions such as being able to pause a show in one room and start it again in another, more than 85 high-definition channels and personalized, on-screen weather, sports, traffic and stock information.

AT&T recently announced its U-verse customers can add voice services to their plan for their home telephone service. Customers can bundle television, high-speed Internet and voice.

Besides Thousand Oaks, the company is extending its area coverage into Culver City and San Bernardino.

http://www.venturacountystar.com/new...10/?printer=1/
post #1733 of 4208
Question: Where the hell does AT&T get their guide data??????

I ask because more often than not their damn guide data is really screwed up. For instance, on The Office, they list the British cast instead of the United States cast. When Stargate: Atlantis was on they listed cast members that hadn't been on the show in years. None of the other services I have ever used has ever had this kind of problems with guide data. AT&T is getting their data from the least accurate source in the country it looks like. This is one thing I am getting very tired of.
post #1734 of 4208
Quote:
Originally Posted by steveken View Post

For instance, on The Office, they list the British cast instead of the United States cast.

The British version of the Office makes the US version look like child's play....
post #1735 of 4208
Hey guys, we're starting to get U-verse in my area. Anyone here who switched from TWC to U-verse and if so, what were the advantages/disadvantages? Thanks!
post #1736 of 4208
Quote:
Originally Posted by jmdaniel View Post

The British version of the Office makes the US version look like child's play....

I was just gonna say - maybe it's wishful thinking on the part of some programmer - that he had that to show instead of this.
post #1737 of 4208
We're switching to Uverse after many years with DirecTV. I've loved the guide on DirecTV but noticed that my DVR has issues with recording the Daily Show and Colbert because of the data submitted by Comedy Central. Instead of just recording first run shows, it records all of them.
post #1738 of 4208
Quote:
Originally Posted by mmarton View Post

We're switching to Uverse after many years with DirecTV. I've loved the guide on DirecTV but noticed that my DVR has issues with recording the Daily Show and Colbert because of the data submitted by Comedy Central. Instead of just recording first run shows, it records all of them.

If it didn't do that with D*, then it's not the data submitted by Comedy Central. It's the guide provider U-Verse uses.
post #1739 of 4208
No, this is not a Uverse issue, it's a "D*" issue. We haven't switched yet.
post #1740 of 4208
Quote:
Originally Posted by mmarton View Post

No, this is not a Uverse issue, it's a "D*" issue. We haven't switched yet.

In that case, it may very well be a D* issue, not a Comedy Central issue. The data on the new D* receivers is, to put it midly, lacking...

I get a lot more "no information available" messages in the program descriptions than I do with my older UTV DVR. I also see many fewer programs listing the original air or production date, which makes filtering recordings by year pretty much useless.

I'm not sure who the guide provider is for U-Verse, though. Unless it's the same, it can only be better.
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: HDTV Programming
AVS › AVS Forum › HDTV › HDTV Programming › AT&T U-verse HDTV