AVS Forum banner

AT&T U-verse HDTV

716K views 4K replies 596 participants last post by  macmane 
#1 ·
U-verse TV, Internet & Voice ...

Check AT&T U-verse Availability


AT&T U-verse Keeps Getting Better With Service Expansion, More Upgrades and Apps


248,000 net gain in AT&T U-verse TV subscribers during Q4 reach 2.1 million in service, up more than 1 million in 2009, with continued high broadband and voice attach rates. Overall AT&T Registers 2.7 Million Net Customer Additions in Q4 2009 Posts $30.9 billion in revenues for the period. http://news.softpedia.com/news/AT-T-...9-133418.shtml


March 30th, 2010 AT&T U-verse High Speed Internet in All U-verse TV Markets Brings 24Mbps download speeds
http://news.softpedia.com/news/AT-T-...s-138774.shtml


The evolution of AT&T U-verseSM TV continued in the second quarter of 2009 as we introduced several service enhancements and interactive applications to customers at no extra cost. We began the rollout of our exclusive new Total Home DVR functionality that allows customers to schedule and delete recordings from any U-verse receiver in the home. And we launched the Mobile Remote Access App for iPhone, giving customers another easy way to remotely schedule DVR recordings. U-verse Internet Max customers received a 20 percent downstream speed increase for free. As AT&T U-verse builds on its history of ongoing upgrades for our customers, we continue to see customer growth and demand across our triple-play of services. Below is a recap on our AT&T U-verse growth and highlights from the second quarter. Update 2Q09 http://www.att.com/Common/merger/fil...rse_Update.pdf


DEPLOYMENT: Continued Network and Service Expansion
U-verse TV available in 105 markets (MSAs) across 19 states, with launches in Champaign-Springfield-Decatur and Corpus Christi and regular expansions in existing markets. U-verse Voice available in 93 markets, with launches in West Palm Beach, Orlando and Raleigh-Durham. More than 19 million living units passed by our advanced fiber network, with ongoing expansion.


Launched in order of introduction: June 2006 to June 2007


1. San Antonio, Texas

2. Houston, Texas

3. San Francisco-Oakland-Fremont, Calif.

4. San Jose-Sunnyvale-Santa Clara, Calif.

5. Hartford, Conn.

6. New Haven, Conn.

7. Stamford, Conn.

8. Indianapolis, Ind.

9. Muncie, Ind.

10. Bloomington, Ind.

11. Anderson, Ind.

12. Milwaukee, Wis.

13. Racine, Wis.

14. Dallas-Fort Worth, Texas

15. Kansas City, Kan.

16. Los Angeles-Long Beach-Santa Ana, Calif.

17. Riverside-San Bernardino-Ontario, Calif.

18. Oxnard-Thousand Oaks-Ventura, Calif.

19. Detroit-Warren-Livonia, Mich.

20. Ann Arbor, Mich.

21. San Diego-Carlsbad-San Marcos, Calif.

22. Cleveland-Elyria-Mentor, Ohio

23. Akron, Ohio


SOURCE: AT&T


Check AT&T U-verse Availability http://localization.att.com/loc/cont...p/home/explore

___________________________________________________________


Motorola Receiver/DVR VIP 1200 Series Installation Manual
http://www.att.com/support_media/ima...0-receiver.pdf


___________________________________________________________


AT&T: Lightspeed Could Dim Cable

By Karen Brown 1/31/2006 10:53:00 PM


AT&T Inc. continues to glow about its Project Lightspeed fiber-to-the-home initiative, this time telling a group of analysts at a New York conference Tuesday that the technology will force cable operators to pony up as much as $20 billion in plant upgrades to keep pace.


John Stankey, AT&T's senior executive vice president and chief technology officer, told analysts at the daylong conference that Project Lightspeed is on track to expand from its San Antonio controlled deployment to include several new markets starting this summer. AT&T is on track to roll out the Lightspeed-powered U-verse video service in 20 markets by year's end, Stankey added.


Based on the network build so far, AT&T is estimating that it will be able to offer big bandwidth to Lightspeed subscribers.


We've got the speed we need to deliver IP-based [Internet protocol] services, Stankey said. We've seen speeds of 25 megabits per second and more at shorter loop lengths.


Starting in late 2007, it can also pair bonding and compression technology to deliver even more bandwidth, Stankey added. In contrast, he said, cable operators will face a more constrained cable plant and limits to how much they can increase bandwidth using higher quadrature-amplitude-modulation transmission schemes.


In my opinion, cable needs to respond to our Lightspeed offering through capital expenditures. At the low end, that could total $20 billion, he told the analysts.


Lightspeed won't come cheap for AT&T, however. The company expects to spend $1.4 billion this year, $1.7 billion in 2007 and $1.3 billion in 2008 for Lightspeed construction. That will expand Lightspeed from 3 million homes passed now to 9 million in 2007 and 18 million by 2008.


Replacing copper with fiber links leading to the customer premises could save the telco as much as $700 million in annual operational costs by 2011, Stankey said. It can also ramp up average revenue per user to at least $60 -- the average now for its Dish Network direct-broadcast satellite customers -- and it will be able to keep all of that revenue.

http://www.multichannel.com/article/...=Breaking+News
 
See less See more
#5 ·
AT&T has plans to make data travel at 'Lightspeed'

Oakland Tribune, CA - Jan 13, 2006

... John Britton said that AT&T plans to incorporate the Lightspeed technology to a 13-state area including California by the end of 2008. ...
 
#7 ·

Quote:
Originally Posted by Mark Vidonic /forum/post/0


I'd never heard of this service until this thread.

What markets will it be available in first?

I beleive San Antonio is the major test market for the full array of services.


There are a few test markets on the internet side of things right now:

http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showt...&post6979969


It was also brought up in one of the FIOS threads:

http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showt...&post6959755


Between this and the possible D*/E* internet service, it's looking good for more options in the near future.
 
#8 ·
#9 ·

Quote:
Originally Posted by Mark Vidonic /forum/post/0


I'd never heard of this service until this thread.

What markets will it be available in first?

Lightspeed/U-Verse was an SBC brainchild (prior to the merger with AT&T) so I'm guessing it's going to be available in all the SBC markets at least. Since I'm in one of those areas I've been trying to find out who's going to be seeing it first outside of Texas but haven't seen that info posted anywhere yet.
 
#10 ·
"ABI Research principal analyst Mike Arden said he heard that San Diego is on the (at&t) early rollout list. He said San Diego is seen as a lucrative market because customers here are likely to buy telephone and Internet service from the same company that provides TV."

http://www.signonsandiego.com/news/...n23telcotv.html
 
#11 ·
As mentioned earlier, Lightspeed is available in some San Antonio neighborhoods right now. The service will compete with Verizon in certain areas, I know here in Texas that Verizon is in Boerne and Dallas along with many other towns. Verizon has all of the old "GTE" locations which is primarily small towns (see Boerne) but does have some larger markets (see Dallas).


I tried to get on the beta list but our new home isn't serviced by a "Lightspeed" enabled wirecenter. So for now, I'll have to live with my 6MB DSL service and POTS line
 
#12 ·

Quote:
Originally Posted by bgooch /forum/post/0


Replacing copper with fiber links leading to the customer premises could save the telco as much as $700 million in annual operational costs by 2011, Stankey said. It can also ramp up average revenue per user to at least $60 -- the average now for its Dish Network direct-broadcast satellite customers -- and it will be able to keep all of that revenue.

I thought originally it wasn't going to be fiber to the premise, it was just going to be fiber to the pole, then copper to the customer premise. When did this change? I always thought that was a bad solution.


Unfortunately for all of us in CT, we are exclusive SBC territory, so it's not easy reading all the posts about FIOS. I really have nothing good to say about SBC, they are always so late to the game with everything.
 
#14 ·
Far as I've read Lightspeed does not go all the way the the Household. The only major Telco doing that is Verizon with their FiOS.


Early comments were that IPTV solutions would allow only three channels throughput to the house with 'Fiber to the Node' at any one time. Some breakthoughs have been noted, but even then they 'thought' they could get up to 5 channels into a home at the same time with IPTV.
 
#15 ·

Quote:
Originally Posted by rad /forum/post/0


25Mbps won't go far if you want to watch two HD channels at the same time.

Think MPEG-4.
 
#17 ·
People, remember that 25Mb is the 1st iteration of this technology for AT&T. There will be upgrades in technology coming next year that will push that ceiling higher.

AT&T: Lightspeed Could Dim Cable

By Karen Brown 1/31/2006 10:53:00 PM


AT&T Inc. continues to glow about its Project Lightspeed fiber-to-the-home initiative, this time telling a group of analysts at a New York conference Tuesday that the technology will force cable operators to pony up as much as $20 billion in plant upgrades to keep pace.


John Stankey, AT&T's senior executive vice president and chief technology officer, told analysts at the daylong conference that Project Lightspeed is on track to expand from its San Antonio controlled deployment to include several new markets starting this summer. AT&T is on track to roll out the Lightspeed-powered U-verse video service in 20 markets by year's end, Stankey added.


Based on the network build so far, AT&T is estimating that it will be able to offer big bandwidth to Lightspeed subscribers.


We've got the speed we need to deliver IP-based [Internet protocol] services, Stankey said. We've seen speeds of 25 megabits per second and more at shorter loop lengths.


Starting in late 2007, it can also pair bonding and compression technology to deliver even more bandwidth, Stankey added. In contrast, he said, cable operators will face a more constrained cable plant and limits to how much they can increase bandwidth using higher quadrature-amplitude-modulation transmission schemes.


In my opinion, cable needs to respond to our Lightspeed offering through capital expenditures. At the low end, that could total $20 billion, he told the analysts.


Lightspeed won't come cheap for AT&T, however. The company expects to spend $1.4 billion this year, $1.7 billion in 2007 and $1.3 billion in 2008 for Lightspeed construction. That will expand Lightspeed from 3 million homes passed now to 9 million in 2007 and 18 million by 2008.


Replacing copper with fiber links leading to the customer premises could save the telco as much as $700 million in annual operational costs by 2011, Stankey said. It can also ramp up average revenue per user to at least $60 -- the average now for its Dish Network direct-broadcast satellite customers -- and it will be able to keep all of that revenue.
 
#18 ·
I'll beleive this when I see it. They better hurry up and get some fiber in my neighborhood, because I'm about ready to switch my internet access over to Wide Open West, my cable TV provider. All SBC aka "The new ATT" can provide around here is relatively pathetic 1.5Mb DSL at my loop length. The only thing that keeps me is the $14.95/mo price. Customer service is a joke, and they can't manage any ancillary ISP services to save their life (i.e., DNS and mail servers)


ATT has a lot of reputation repairing to do, at least for this customer. After all the splits/mergers and the screwing of us as a business LD customer and nationwide cellular customer, ATT to me is a big joke.
 
#19 ·

Quote:
Originally Posted by jpeckinp /forum/post/0


Even at that compression you only get at best 3 excellent quality HD signals.

Besides that if they only have 25Mb then you know what will happen. They will be just like D* they will over compress so they can get a few more on that pipe.

You do realize this isn't the same as cable, right? You don't have every channel running over the system at one time, but just a single video stream at a time per user. Two assuming there's a dual tuner option.
 
#20 ·

Quote:
Originally Posted by Addicted2HD4Now /forum/post/0


You do realize this isn't the same as cable, right? You don't have every channel running over the system at one time, but just a single video stream at a time per user. Two assuming there's a dual tuner option.

SBC/ATT have said 1 HD and 3 SD streams at a time ... which kinda puts a crimp on a dual-tuner HD DVR (or even multiple single tuner HD DVRs).


An nDVR (network DVR) would be a very nice compliment to the FTTN IPTV providers. Otherwise ...
 
#21 ·

Quote:
Originally Posted by paule123 /forum/post/0


I'll beleive this when I see it. They better hurry up and get some fiber in my neighborhood, because I'm about ready to switch my internet access over to Wide Open West, my cable TV provider. All SBC aka "The new ATT" can provide around here is relatively pathetic 1.5Mb DSL at my loop length. The only thing that keeps me is the $14.95/mo price. Customer service is a joke, and they can't manage any ancillary ISP services to save their life (i.e., DNS and mail servers)


ATT has a lot of reputation repairing to do, at least for this customer. After all the splits/mergers and the screwing of us as a business LD customer and nationwide cellular customer, ATT to me is a big joke.


You do realise that a big part of your probelm there is the city its self. You cant tell me that given the amount of money there that both the phone and the electric company would love to come in and upgrade like mad. I know your power goes out at the drop of a hat. It's your city council holding up things
 
#24 ·
I still prefer FiOS

http://arstechnica.com/news.ars/post/20060202-6104.html


"At the same time, concerns are being raised about exactly how much of Verizon's Fios network will be available to non-Verizon traffic. With over 80 percent of network capacity devoted to TV, that leaves the remainder for all other traffic. So will Google, ESPN.com, and Ars Technica be battling to squeeze through that last
 
#25 ·

Quote:
Originally Posted by bfoster /forum/post/0


Why would you need a dual tuner DVR? If it is a dedicated 25 Mbs to each home the content can be cached at a server somewhere and requested at your pleasure

That would be the nDVR model ... like I said, an nDVR would be the perfect compliment to an FTTN IPTV provider.


But, Time Warner has been wanting to do this for years and hasn't been able to get permission from content owners (beyond the limited Start Over model). A customer premises DVR gets around the issue ...
 
#26 ·

Quote:
Originally Posted by Dmon4u /forum/post/0


Far as I've read Lightspeed does not go all the way the the Household. The only major Telco doing that is Verizon with their FiOS.


Early comments were that IPTV solutions would allow only three channels throughput to the house with 'Fiber to the Node' at any one time. Some breakthoughs have been noted, but even then they 'thought' they could get up to 5 channels into a home at the same time with IPTV.

As far as I've read, AT&T will do FTTN on existing construction, then utilize existing copper to the home, and FTTH on new construction.
 
This is an older thread, you may not receive a response, and could be reviving an old thread. Please consider creating a new thread.
Top