[colug-432] Comcast and connectivity alternatives
Robert Grimm
robertgrimm at gmail.com
Sun Mar 2 00:11:21 EST 2014
I'm closer than that. It can't be more than 400 feet away, yet the
installer found no signal at the pole when he started. I asked questions
about the gateway device before the install started and got incorrect and
confused answers about it. I should have taken that as a sign and cancelled
the installation right then.
Robert Grimm
Voice only: (614) 212-4625
http://www.datablitz.net
http://www.grimmphotography.com
On Sat, Mar 1, 2014 at 11:59 PM, Jeff Stebelton <jeff.stebelton at gmail.com>wrote:
> I must have lucked out with my location. They said I'm 1000 feet or so
> from the DSLAM, one pair was active and they found the other pair in the
> pedestal, if I have my terminology correct, and hooked it right in. I'm not
> canceling my Road Runner for at least 3 or 4 days. I'll keep a close watch
> out for what you're seeing.
> On Mar 1, 2014 11:47 PM, "Robert Grimm" <robertgrimm at gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> I got my U-verse installed on Friday. I'm taking it out on Monday.
>> Netflix looks terrible, Hulu is often bad, the higher latency is noticeable
>> in web browsing, and I don't think I've ever disliked a networking device
>> as much as this gateway. Fortunately, I haven't cancelled my WOW yet.
>>
>>
>> Robert Grimm
>> Voice only: (614) 212-4625
>> http://www.datablitz.net
>> http://www.grimmphotography.com
>>
>>
>> On Sat, Mar 1, 2014 at 8:23 PM, Jeff Stebelton <jeff.stebelton at gmail.com>wrote:
>>
>>> Got my uverse installed today. I'm getting consistent 35 Mbs down and 5
>>> Mbs up. I've seen as high as almost 40 down when I can kick my daughter off
>>> of Netflix. I'm a happy man.
>>> On Feb 19, 2014 6:55 AM, "Stephen P. Molnar" <s.molnar at sbcglobal.net>
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>>> I switched to U-verse about 15 months ago when the monthly charge for
>>>> DSL went up again. I didn't realized at the time that the telephone
>>>> service, included with what I wanted was VOIP! The phone service kept
>>>> dropping while maintaining the internet connectivity. It took three
>>>> service calls by techs (?) of questionable ability (I was convince that the
>>>> first one wasn't sure as to what end of the screwdriver was the handle).
>>>> To shorten the story a bit the third technician did, indeed, know what he
>>>> was doing solved the problem. Part of his solution was my calling the AT&T
>>>> Business Office and demanding that my telephone service be returned to an
>>>> analog line, while maintaining the same overall monthly rate (that was his
>>>> suggestion and a learning experience for the customer service person I
>>>> talked to).
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> All was then well until two months ago when the U-verse bill increased
>>>> by ~40%, it was the end of the introductory year. I solved that problem by
>>>> allowing the download rate to be degraded. I'm still getting good
>>>> transmission rates.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Bottom line is that I'm satisfied with U-verse (at least so far). Oh
>>>> yes, they did try to bundle TV with the service, but had no answer to the
>>>> question 'why should I pay for many channels of garbage when I never watch
>>>> what's available over the air?'
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Stephen P. Molnar, Ph.D. Life is a
>>>> fuzzy set
>>>>
>>>> Foundation for Chemistry Stochastic
>>>> and multivariate
>>>>
>>>> www.FoundationForChemistry.com
>>>>
>>>> (614)312-7528 (c)
>>>>
>>>> Skype: smolnar1
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> *From:* colug-432-bounces at colug.net [mailto:colug-432-bounces at colug.net]
>>>> *On Behalf Of *Jeff Stebelton
>>>> *Sent:* Tuesday, February 18, 2014 6:44 PM
>>>> *To:* David Reed
>>>> *Cc:* Central OH Linux User Group - 432xx
>>>> *Subject:* Re: [colug-432] Comcast and connectivity alternatives
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> I looked at this again and it says:
>>>>
>>>> Residential AT&T High Speed Internet service includes 150 gigabytes
>>>> (GB) of data each billing period, and residential AT&T U-verse High Speed
>>>> Internet service includes 250 Gigabytes (GB) of data each billing period.
>>>> U-verse with Gigapower, where available, includes 1 terabyte (TB) of data
>>>> each billing period. The data you send and receive each month contributes
>>>> to your monthly data plan.
>>>>
>>>> I'm on the U-verse site, looking at Internet only plans and they are
>>>> calling it U-verse High Speed Internet. It looks to me like I'd be ordering
>>>> U-verse High Speed which is capped at 250 Gb. Am I missing something?
>>>> (probably am which is why I'm asking.. =-)
>>>> "Get new U-verse High Speed Internet and receive a discounted rate for
>>>> 12 months... blah blah"
>>>>
>>>> And...
>>>>
>>>> I watched the video "Broadband Usage Overview" in your link and it also
>>>> made a distinction between AT&T High Speed Internet and U-verse High Speed
>>>> Internet. I couldn't find anything that mentioned TV or bundling. Is that
>>>> hidden and if I sign up I'd find "U-verse High Speed Internet" really means
>>>> U-verse Bundled TV and High Speed Internet? Not trying to pick at what you
>>>> said; I just want to make sure if I sign up I know what I'm getting.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> On Mon, Feb 17, 2014 at 7:54 AM, David Reed <dave256 at mac.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> This says 150GB if you don’t also have tv.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> http://www.att.com/esupport/article.jsp?sid=KB409045&cv=812#fbid=wpWmyP0XTGj
>>>>
>>>> Dave
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> On Feb 17, 2014, at 7:35 AM, Jeff Stebelton <jeff.stebelton at gmail.com>
>>>> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> > I chatted with a service rep who told me it was 250 Gb per month.
>>>> I'll find that on their site before proceeding. If ordered online they're
>>>> offering a $50 gift card right now, including Internet only.
>>>> > The setup process is telling me:
>>>> >
>>>> > A $100 one-time Internet equipment fee automatically applies for
>>>> orders without U-verse TV or orders with select lower Internet speeds.
>>>> >
>>>> > It's put in the cart as $99.00. Go figure. =-)
>>>> > So in my cart I have the following:
>>>> >
>>>> > AT&T Rewards
>>>> > Additional online only $50 reward card when you order today!
>>>> $50.00
>>>> >
>>>> > Monthly Charges TOTAL $71.95
>>>> > One-Time Charges TOTAL $99.00
>>>> > Your Estimated First Bill* This total is only an estimate of your
>>>> first bill. The monthly charges on your first bill will be slightly higher
>>>> than normal. The charges may vary based on the following:
>>>> >
>>>> > Monthly charges are billed one month in advance
>>>> > Prorated monthly charges from date of installation to start of
>>>> bill period
>>>> > Taxes, fees, and surcharges
>>>> > Applicable installation charges
>>>> >
>>>> > $170.95
>>>> >
>>>> > My next option is to order, so it looks like the $99.00 install fee
>>>> is the only one. But I've dealt with AT&T before.. heh.
>>>> >
>>>> >
>>>> >
>>>> > On Mon, Feb 17, 2014 at 7:09 AM, <davelist at mac.com> wrote:
>>>> > AT&T only sends the channel(s) you are watching to your house so in
>>>> effect everything you are watching is streamed to you. Note this means you
>>>> need one of their boxes on every tv you want to use with their service. So
>>>> the phone lines can (at least with their current technology) carry a max of
>>>> 45 Mbps total so 3 HD channels takes over 30 Mbps leaving less than 18 Mbps
>>>> for internet.
>>>> >
>>>> > Rick answered Jeff’s other question, but Jeff, check the 30 day
>>>> guarantee if you’re just getting internet (and then I think the cap is
>>>> 150GB instead of 250GB). And I suspect they won’t waive the fees (and no
>>>> gift card) since they’re not getting as much money from you per month as if
>>>> you were getting UVerse.
>>>> >
>>>> > Dave
>>>> >
>>>> >
>>>> > On Feb 16, 2014, at 1:27 PM, FiL Farris <philipfarris at gmail.com>
>>>> wrote:
>>>> >
>>>> > > When you say your recording HD channels @ 10 - 12 Mbps are you
>>>> referring to some type of streamed media or HD shows coming into the
>>>> digital tuner(s) of your cable box?
>>>> > >
>>>> > > On Feb 16, 2014 12:30 PM, <davelist at mac.com> wrote:
>>>> > >
>>>> > > AT&T has run fiber to newer neighborhoods so you if you are lucky
>>>> enough to have fiber to your house, you might be able to get those speeds.
>>>> I made another post about this but maybe you didn’t see it. I finally got
>>>> fed up with TW (after about 13 years with them) and switched to AT&T
>>>> U-Verse. I don’t have fiber to my house. There is an AT&T box near my
>>>> neighborhood (about 1/4 mile straight line distance from my house) that I
>>>> suspect has fiber to it and then phone lines to my house. I’m paying for
>>>> the 18 Mbps (and I think 2 Mbps up) service and speed tests report 16-20
>>>> Mbps (and 1.5-2 Mbps up) so I’m reasonably happy.
>>>> > >
>>>> > > I think right now the max they can get is 45 Mbps total over the
>>>> phone line with their current technology so if I’m recording 3 HD channels
>>>> (I think those take around 10-12 Mbps each), the internet drops to
>>>> 7-10Mbps, but as long as no more than 2 HD channels, the internet seems
>>>> consistent (where I live in Hilliard - obviously YMMV). I hear that max
>>>> over phone lines may go up to 70 Mbps this year in which case I shouldn’t
>>>> see any slowdown when recording 3 HD channels. But I don’t think you’ll get
>>>> 45 Mbps internet if you’re watching/recording tv unless you have fiber to
>>>> your house.
>>>> > >
>>>> > > AT&T will give you 30 days to try out their system before you’re
>>>> locked into a 1 year contract so I kept TW for 3-4 days while I tested
>>>> AT&T’s service. I had a 6-7 year old TW HD DVR that I hated. It would
>>>> occasionally not record shows it should and interface was sluggish and took
>>>> too many button presses to do some things IMO. And it only held about 30
>>>> hours of HD shows whereas the AT&T DVR seems to hold around 150 hours of HD
>>>> shows (if you get their U300 or U450 service you get that larger capacity -
>>>> don’t recall what capacity is for U100 or U200 but it’s less). TW signal so
>>>> it would occasionally cut out for 1/2 a second so watching tv was annoying
>>>> at times. TW’s internet service was reasonably reliable but the extreme
>>>> cold caused my internet to go out for half a day multiple times in January.
>>>> > >
>>>> > > After 4 weeks with AT&T’s service, I’m happy as DVR hasn’t missed a
>>>> show and internet has been reliable even in the cold temperatures. AT&T
>>>> will waive some, but not all of the installation fees and then give you a
>>>> gift card so the end result is all the fees are covered. They seem to be
>>>> making a big push to get new subscribers right now. They do give you a big
>>>> discount to get you hooked. We’ll see what price they’re willing to give me
>>>> in a year when the contract is up. I’m hopeful it will be reasonable since
>>>> I’m lucky enough to have the options of TW, WOW, and UVerse in my
>>>> neighborhood. At this point, I’ll stick with them if the price is
>>>> reasonable and if not look into WOW.
>>>> > >
>>>> > > Right now I’m paying what I was before with TW (and I had a pretty
>>>> decent discount from TW’s listed prices) but also have a second box in the
>>>> basement so I can watch tv while exercising. I’ve got a few more channels I
>>>> actually want to watch and a larger capacity DVR that works well. I had
>>>> TW’s 12-15 Mbps (can’t remember exact speed) internet service so internet
>>>> speed is slightly faster than what I had.
>>>> > >
>>>> > > I had checked my usage on my router last year and I was using
>>>> 100-150 GB a month so the 250 GB (gigabyte not 250 Gb - gigabit) data cap
>>>> doesn’t bother me too much. I suspect if you watch a lot of streaming video
>>>> (we don’t have netflix) that could be an issue.
>>>> > >
>>>> > > And yes, watch what the installer does so you can go back to TW if
>>>> you want easily. I wanted the internet router in an upstairs bedroom/office
>>>> so they ran the internet service (which is what the tv runs over too) up
>>>> the phone line to that office. Then the box in the office splits out the tv
>>>> and internet and they ran the tv data back down to the basement using the
>>>> coax line in the office. Since I only have two tvs they put the actual DVR
>>>> in the basement there and then are using a wireless box for the first floor
>>>> tv. I think we could have run the signal back up to the first floor over
>>>> the coax if we wanted.
>>>> > >
>>>> > > I still have Vonage for my home phone (AT&T offered me 200 minutes
>>>> for the price I’m currently paying Vonage for unlimited so I didn’t switch
>>>> the phone). I told the installer I still wanted the phone outlets to work
>>>> and he ran the internet up to the office over two of the four phone wires,
>>>> put a double jack in the office and the other two wires run the phone back
>>>> to the phone outlets throughout the house.
>>>> > >
>>>> > > Dave
>>>> >
>>>> >
>>>> > _______________________________________________
>>>> > colug-432 mailing list
>>>> > colug-432 at colug.net
>>>> > http://lists.colug.net/mailman/listinfo/colug-432
>>>> >
>>>> >
>>>> >
>>>> > --
>>>> > Jeff Stebelton GCIA GCIH GPPA GWAPT CEH SFCP
>>>> > _______________________________________________
>>>> > colug-432 mailing list
>>>> > colug-432 at colug.net
>>>> > http://lists.colug.net/mailman/listinfo/colug-432
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> --
>>>>
>>>> Jeff Stebelton GCIA GCIH GPPA GWAPT CEH SFCP
>>>>
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>> colug-432 mailing list
>>>> colug-432 at colug.net
>>>> http://lists.colug.net/mailman/listinfo/colug-432
>>>>
>>>> Spam detection software, running on the system "lists.colug.net", has
>>>> identified this incoming email as possible spam. The original message
>>>> has been attached to this so you can view it (if it isn't spam) or label
>>>> similar future email. If you have any questions, see
>>>> the administrator of that system for details.
>>>>
>>>> Content preview: I switched to U-verse about 15 months ago when the
>>>> monthly
>>>>
>>>> charge for DSL went up again. I didn't realized at the time that the
>>>> telephone
>>>> service, included with what I wanted was VOIP! The phone service
>>>> kept dropping
>>>> while maintaining the internet connectivity. It took three service
>>>> calls
>>>> by techs (?) of questionable ability (I was convince that the first
>>>> one wasn't
>>>> sure as to what end of the screwdriver was the handle). To shorten
>>>> the story
>>>> a bit the third technician did, indeed, know what he was doing
>>>> solved the
>>>> problem. Part of his solution was my calling the AT&T Business
>>>> Office and
>>>> demanding that my telephone service be returned to an analog line,
>>>> while
>>>> maintaining the same overall monthly rate (that was his suggestion
>>>> and a learning
>>>> experience for the customer service person I talked to). [...]
>>>>
>>>> Content analysis details: (5.6 points, 5.0 required)
>>>>
>>>> pts rule name description
>>>> ---- ----------------------
>>>> --------------------------------------------------
>>>> 1.0 MSGID_MULTIPLE_AT Message-ID contains multiple '@' characters
>>>> 1.8 ONE_TIME BODY: One Time Rip Off
>>>> 0.7 MIME_HTML_MOSTLY BODY: Multipart message mostly text/html
>>>> MIME
>>>> 0.0 HTML_MESSAGE BODY: HTML included in message
>>>> 2.0 BAYES_50 BODY: Bayes spam probability is 40 to 60%
>>>> [score: 0.5000]
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> colug-432 mailing list
>>> colug-432 at colug.net
>>> http://lists.colug.net/mailman/listinfo/colug-432
>>>
>>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> colug-432 mailing list
>> colug-432 at colug.net
>> http://lists.colug.net/mailman/listinfo/colug-432
>>
>>
> _______________________________________________
> colug-432 mailing list
> colug-432 at colug.net
> http://lists.colug.net/mailman/listinfo/colug-432
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.colug.net/pipermail/colug-432/attachments/20140302/44881bc0/attachment-0001.html
More information about the colug-432
mailing list