AT&T's Gigabit just one big BLUFF

[Bluejay0]

http://www.dslreports.com/shownews/ATTs-Expansion-of-1-Gbps-to-100-Cities-is-a-Big-Fat-Bluff-128628

 

 

 

Ever since Google Fiber came on the scene, AT&T's response has been highly theatrical in nature. What AT&T would have the press and public believe is that they're engaged in a massive new deployment of fiber to the home service. What's actually happening is that AT&T is upgrading a few high-end developments where fiber was already in the ground (these users were previously capped at DSL speeds) and pretending it's a serious expansion of fixed-line broadband.

It's not. At the same time AT&T is promising a massive expansion in fixed line broadband, they're telling investors they aren't spending much money on the initiative, because they aren't. AT&T's focus is on more profitable wireless. "Gigapower" is a show pony designed to help the company pretend they're not being outmaneuvered in their core business by a search engine company.

 

 

 

In short, if your city plays nice and gives AT&T what they want legislatively (namely gut consumer protections requiring they keep serving DSL users they don't want so they can focus on more profitable wireless) you'll get 1 Gbps fiber to a few high-end developments and apartment buildings. As an added bonus, your local politician can hold a lovely cord-cutting ceremony where he or she pretends to be encouraging the broadband networks of tomorrow (while in reality doing the exact opposite).

 

Well @TopWargamer looks like it is just another move to gain popularity but just another load of bull...

[Misanthrope]

 

That's got to be the most stupid fucking solution possible, seriously AT&T? How is this not just A Ponzi Scheme!? It's so stupid I actually believe it could be true, only and American Telecom company can be that short sighted.

[AlwaysFSX]

designed to help the company pretend they're not being outmaneuvered in their core business by a search engine company.

Sad part is that they are...

[beebskadoo]

AT&T need to just die in a fire already.

[Misanthrope]

Sad part is that they are...

 

Aye, again typical "save my own ass and keep my pay checks coming for another 18-24 months before the entire fucking boat sinks" mentality that is so commonplace in the corporate world.

[Kilerbomb]

Did anyone honestly expect anything different? This is AT&T we're talking about here.

[Mooshi]

How is this even news? It's universally excepted that AT&T are scumbag assholes. Always were and always will be. End of discussion.

[Misanthrope]

Did anyone honestly expect anything different? This is AT&T we're talking about here.

 

I expected lobbying. I expected accusations of monopolizing and bad business practices to be leveraged at google. I expected a few rants about the high costs of bandwidth or even a few jabs at those evil fucking pirates that are now....legally buying services like Netflix and Steam...

But what I didn't expect was a ponzi scheme. This is basically AT&T's plan in a nutshell:

 

[LAwLz]

Oh God this can't be real.

Even by American ISP standards this is idiotic/evil.

[420istoday]

I spend $30 a month on 3mbps down and .375mbps up. Why? Because AT&T is the only ISP in the area (besides satellite providers and their 15GB data caps). What's messed up is that only a mile from here Comcast has 50Mbps down for $60 a month.

[Misanthrope]

I spend $30 a month on 3mbps down and .375mbps up. Why? Because AT&T is the only ISP in the area (besides satellite providers and their 15GB data caps). What's messed up is that only a mile from here Comcast has 50Mbps down for $60 a month.

 

A mile isn't that far away I bet a directional wifi antenna could reach but alas, your alternative it's fucking Comcast....

[carolkarine]

AT&T need to just die in a fire already.

I like their cell service tbh.

[TriBeard]

I like their cell service tbh.

 

Their coverage is good, and if you don't need a lot of data, I can see the appeal. However, I use 5GB+ a month, and by the time me and the rest of my family were to get on a plan, it would be stupid expensive. That, and their policies and consistently trying to screw the consumer make me really want to stay away. The only one worse IMO is Verizon. 

[ijKs Snow]

I personally believe that internet infrastructure should be built by the government using tax money like public roads, highways and sewer systems. ISPs should be companies that provide SERVICES using these infrastructure rather then providing/limiting access. They should be paid for services like tech support, customer services, and other goods that a user might need/want. But, it seems ISPs here in the states are getting both sides of the coin. They get tax breaks and handouts while controlling user experience by having complete power over access. Sadface.

[Misanthrope]

I personally believe that internet infrastructure should be built by the government using tax money like public roads, highways and sewer systems. ISPs should be companies that provide SERVICES using these infrastructure rather then providing/limiting access. They should be paid for services like tech support, customer services, and other goods that a user might need/want. But, it seems ISPs here in the states are getting both sides of the coin. They get tax breaks and handouts while controlling user experience by having complete power over access. Sadface.

 

Precisely, however that makes too much sense to become reality sadly. I mean who would benefit from that model? Everybody? Who wants that when there's mad profits to be made!

[carolkarine]

I personally believe that internet infrastructure should be built by the government using tax money like public roads, highways and sewer systems. ISPs should be companies that provide SERVICES using these infrastructure rather then providing/limiting access. They should be paid for services like tech support, customer services, and other goods that a user might need/want. But, it seems ISPs here in the states are getting both sides of the coin. They get tax breaks and handouts while controlling user experience by having complete power over access. Sadface.

 

even if they were treated like other infrastructure, they'ed only be contracted out to the lowest bidder to build. this means ultimately we'd never see the spirit of competition that theoretically can occur in the industry currently (which google is trying to incite) look at the roads - there's some of them that haven't been touched since 1970. that wouldn't fly with the internet.

[ijKs Snow]

even if they were treated like other infrastructure, they'ed only be contracted out to the lowest bidder to build. this means ultimately we'd never see the spirit of competition that theoretically can occur in the industry currently (which google is trying to incite) look at the roads - there's some of them that haven't been touched since 1970. that wouldn't fly with the internet.

Well, this is the model that is currently working for top connected countries like South Korea, Singapore, and Hong Kong. They even have a law that states an ISP can't own fiber lines because it's government property. The ISPs in these countries compete using service oriented marketing rather then "we are the only ones that can bring you a connection so ha ha". For example, some no-name company can join the party and provide consumers with better services since technically the infrastructure itself is same as a big name brand like SKT (South Korean Telecommunications). While big name companies get big because they have the funds to rent out more lines/towers from the government. In return, the user pays low prices (since the ISPs can't mark up prices since there is so much competition). The government then uses the funds made from renting out lines to make more lines/towers to provide users with more stable/faster connections.

 

Now, will this model work in the U.S? Who knows. But, the current model is pretty bad especially for the consumer, so a change is needed.

[DeViLzzz]

I spend $30 a month on 3mbps down and .375mbps up. Why? Because AT&T is the only ISP in the area (besides satellite providers and their 15GB data caps). What's messed up is that only a mile from here Comcast has 50Mbps down for $60 a month.

And I thought I had it bad in Canada. Sorry for your internet issues.

[EChondo]

There is literally AT&T fiber lines underground less than 100 feet away from me. I have AT&T U-Verse Business and the max we can get is ~30Mb down, ~3Mb up. We have called into AT&T and asked if we could upgrade to their 50Mb plan(as listed on their website), but they said no because they would have to upgrade the fiber to copper card in the node at the corner of our street, and since that would cost them a bit of change to do, they want other people on my street to call in requesting the same so they can see the demand for it.

 

Otherwise I'm stuck with 30Mb/3Mb.

 

This seems to be the same exact scenario, but with 1Gb instead, I bet my city could be a contestant for this, but it wasn't listed in TopWargamer's original thread.

[Unhelpful]

And they will get away with it. Again. 

 

Fuck AT&T.

[LAwLz]

I personally believe that internet infrastructure should be built by the government using tax money like public roads, highways and sewer systems. ISPs should be companies that provide SERVICES using these infrastructure rather then providing/limiting access. They should be paid for services like tech support, customer services, and other goods that a user might need/want. But, it seems ISPs here in the states are getting both sides of the coin. They get tax breaks and handouts while controlling user experience by having complete power over access. Sadface.

That's how it works where I live.

The municipality owns all the infrastructure (or rather, they hire a company to build and maintain it, but that's the companies only job, they don't sell Internet access to end customers) and then ISPs are allowed to use the fiber.

The competition becomes crazy since all ISPs gets access to the same fiber connections.

Right now I can pick between ~10 ISPs, all of which offers at least 100Mbps down and 10Mbps up (and going all the way up to 1Gb up and down).

 

I think it's ridiculous that companies are allowed to have monopolies like that in the US. Of course you're going to have terrible Internet if there is no competition.

[420istoday]

A mile isn't that far away I bet a directional wifi antenna could reach but alas, your alternative it's fucking Comcast....

Comcast > AT&T and that's a mile, through a forest.