AT&T's Plan to kill-off chances for "last-mile" folks who don't have broadband

[jonathanm1978]

I currently have DSL...but it's DSL over copper from AT&T..so this might affect me. I'm just not sure how...I live next to the hut, and the hut doesn't have an IPDSLAM in it...which would provide U-verse if it did have one...

 

http://gigaom.com/2012/11/07/heres-atts-14b-plan-to-kill-its-copper-network-and-leave-rural-america-behind/?go_commented=1#comment-1162190

 

So will AT&T swap the current DSLAM and put a new IPDSLAM in it's place so that I continue to have DSL?? It'll still be DSL to my house...but fiber to the hut already in place....so just the equipment needs to be changed.

If they don't swap, and they just cut the DSLAM out and lose the copper network providing me DSL, then I get left out in the cold with the other people in this area who sub to their DSL..and we have to go from having DSL the past 5 years back to having nothing again (except wireless data services)

 

If AT&T thinks for one minute that this will push me into sub'ing to their 4G LTE network...they are BADLY mistaken. I don't care that the AT&T tower is ONE mile from my house, and if they outfit that tower with LTE, I'll likely get BLAZING speeds...doesn't bother me one bit...I want my DSL, and would rather have U-verse...and they aren't going to bully me into going over to their capped, crappy LTE / HSPA+ network with fake 4G.

[JeffDTD]

Oh Randall..... Back when the t mobile merger fell through, you promised us higher prices, a smaller LTE network, and a spectrum choked future for AT&T.

 

Now AT&T will cover 99% of the population and push data and network use more than ever?

 

Oh, okay. Sounds like this was the plan all along and they just don't have to promise lower prices like they once were.

[S4GRU]

AT&T says that they were lying before, but this time they are telling the truth. Believe me now! I mean it this time! Really! Honest!

 

Anyone who gets into bed with those bastards deserves what they get. I really, truly hate AT&T.

 

Robert via Samsung Note II using Forum Runner

[jonathanm1978]

I despise them as a company, and how they work....but it's the ONLY..and I do mean ONLY way I have of getting high-speed internet at home. I used to have their landline blah blah complete "choice" crap...but that's a joke and cost me way more than it ever saved anyone.

[S4GRU]

I despise them as a company, and how they work....but it's the ONLY..and I do mean ONLY way I have of getting high-speed internet at home. I used to have their landline blah blah complete "choice" crap...but that's a joke and cost me way more than it ever saved anyone.

 

I completely understand. When I lived in Nevada, it was AT&T DSL, or nothing. When Clearwire came in with their Expedience service, it was great. I gave AT&T the bird.

 

Robert

[MacinJosh]

I despise them as a company, and how they work....but it's the ONLY..and I do mean ONLY way I have of getting high-speed internet at home. I used to have their landline blah blah complete "choice" crap...but that's a joke and cost me way more than it ever saved anyone.

 

Back in 2003 when SBC first came out with unlimited long distance, it was great, especially for my friend who ran a trucking company at the time. Now, it's the biggest rip-off since she has unlimited on Straight Talk for $45/mo. At least you have high-speed internet from at&t. They told me to screw off when they said they won't spend the money to upgrade the copper on my side of the street to support DSL. 2 streets down from me in either direction, east & west, however have DSL.

[jonathanm1978]

I really think the only thing that's going to save me and keep me with having DSL here is the fact that 1) I'm not "last mile" DSL. I literally live next door to the hut where the dslam is located.

2) the hut next door feeds the fiber back to the cell tower that's one mile up the road. And this is the big thing, AT&T will keep the cell site active using this hut, and likely will upgrade the backhaul to it for the stuff they call 4g. And that upgrade should mean them installing an ipdslam instead of the one they have now. Fingers crossed.

 

Sent from my SPH-L710 using Tapatalk 2

 

 

[gusherb]

We used to have 4 lines and DSL at my mothers business on AT&T, 2 lines and DSL at home, and 3 wireless lines with them.

 

Those 4 lines and DSL at the business were a reliability nightmare from the getgo in 2003, you pretty much NEEDED 4 lines just to guarantee that you would always have one working line without static and buzzing...

At home service was always fantastic, POTS never died except one day in 2004 when a digger cut the 300 pair trunk running to the neighborhood when they were retrofitting DSL and running a cable from the new DSLAM across the railroad tracks to our crossbox.

 

the 200 dollars a month for 4 noisy lines, and DSL that maxed out at 2.0 Mbps and dropped often was my reason for pushing her to switch to Comcrap, now she has 3 VOIP lines and 17/3 internet for 165. After the contract ends I'm porting those lines to another VOIP provider as their standard rate is a rip. At home I ported the second line to Ooma, switched the DSL over to Uverse and kept the main line on POTS.

As for the cell service I was on them for 5 years she was on them for 13 years, service was great til beginning of this year then took a huge dump all over, and here I am now on Sprint...

 

It's been a long process but I've been removing myself and my parents from AT&T, slowly but surely.

[Fraydog]

This is likely going to take YEARS. We're talking about the glacial pace AT&T moves. The likely outcome is that if you're on a DSLAM, the IPDSLAM will replace it. If it bothers you that much, you will likely have other options build out to where you live by the drop dead date. I would have preferred that AT&T and the federal, local, and state governments work to subsidize fiber optics where profitability is not assured, but I don't think that's going to be the plan here.

 

Sprint sold off their copper years ago and were very smart to do so. AT&T is retiring their copper, and that's bad? I don't get it, especially since they had to move forward with LTE in the first place. The FCC itself said that in turning down the AT&T/T-Mobile merger they would have to expand their LTE footprint to their entire native footprint by 2014 in order to remain competitive with Verizon. The FCC was right. I blame AT&T for not adopting this strategy in the first place and losing precious AWS spectrum and money in an ill-fated move, but any more analysis of it is beating a dead horse. I can tell you from a very well-placed source in AT&T that Stephenson almost lost his job over the merger.

 

I'm glad AT&T failed in the end though because it gave T-Mobile a lot more investment and headroom.