Archive for: dsl
Bad news for “unlimited” data users, AT&T is killing off “unlimited”…again. This time, it’s hitting your household instead of your cellphone. According to reports from DSLReports and confirmation with AT&T PR guy, Seth Bloom, “unlimited” is a thing of the past. Starting May 2nd, your typical non-U-Verse package will have a 150GB data cap. U-Verse customers will have a bit loftier ceiling at 250GB. Overages will set you back $10 per extra 50GB of data. In a small act of good will, AT&T will email customers when they’ve hit 65%, 90%, and 100% of their allotted bandwidth.
AT&T maintains that a paltry 2% of customers (whom consume 20% of the company’s bandwidth) will be affected. That leaves 98% of us to go on with business as usual. However, we can’t but help but feel screwed by AT&T yet again. Comcast has a similar cap set around 250GB for all users regardless of package they subscribe to. With all media providers, ISPs, and every company in between talking up social networking, photo sharing, video uploads, and online gaming, 150GB is going to become less and less generous with each passing year. (Read: today’s heavy user is tomorrow’s standard user.) The most popular online service that could easily bump up against that cap that we can think of off hand — Netflix. AT&T should have led in this regard instead of merely following — half-assed we might add. But that’s business (and AT&T) for you.
We’d like to reach out to AT&T to provide us with some actual data proving to us that the killing of unlimited data is actually justified and that rising bandwidth usage is indeed a problem. It’s only fair, right? AT&T, we’re waiting…
Remember a time way back in 2007 when AT&T announced a little gem for the Xbox 360 relating to U-Verse? For many people, that initiative to bring U-Verse programming to the Xbox 360 and have it function as a set top box have all but died. Three years and still no product/service generally means “death” in the consumer electronic world. But the powers that be have managed come through. The U-Verse-enabled Xbox 360 is nearing an official release.
But before you get all hog wild with the celebrations, we’ll point out that there are a few stipulations…
If you’re one of millions of AT&T U-verse users, you’ve got a new handy dandy feature headed your way. Coming soon to a smartphone (still undetermined) near you, AT&T Voicemail Viewer will allow users to remotely listen to and manage home voicemails left on traditional land line systems from the comfort of the open road. Currently, there’s no mention of what actual smartphones will be supported. Complicating those seeking more, pointing your browser to att.com/vmviewer as is stated in the press release serves up a nasty 404 error instead. Whoops!
No worries, folks. AT&T should have that little snafu fixed lickity split, at which point I’ll share the good word with the lot of you…
If you came up to me and said that real-world broadband speeds are nowhere near the big, beautiful number we see advertised on TV, I’d smack you up side the head and question your earthly origins. As more tech savvy individuals know, said problem is hardly a new secret. The ISP’s of maintain that distance, amount of users, and amount of content per user all ratchet our broadband speeds lower and lower, citing the advertised speeds we see on TV as theoretical maximums. But just how far off are real-world speeds compared to advertised rates?
If you’re living in the UK, the difference between real-world and advertised speeds is actually quite alarming, thanks to a new study published by Ofcom. In the study, one can see differences so great that paying end users are getting a paltry 33% of their actual bandwidth — this being DSL users. I don’t know about you, but paying 100% for something and only getting 33% is infuriating and frustrating. We don’t accept such failure in say, auto mechanic work. Why accept it in our broadband speeds/rates?
While old school DSL suffered pretty bad, newer fiber networks such Virgin emerged from the digital bloodbath a bit better. Still, only receiving ~50% of a paid service is inexcusable.
But don’t take my word for it. Jump inside to see a bigger image of the graph above. If you live in the UK and pay for the service of one of the providers above, get out a tissue box — you’ll need it.
- February 16, 2010 1:58 pm
Google may be the talk of the town with their proposed 1Gbps super-network, grabbing headlines for it’s crazy fast speeds and reported “competitive cost”, but the FCC would like to remind you that they aren’t just sitting idle while Google steps forward and does their job, making them look like the fat lazy kid in gym class. No sir.
In an effort to better the overall lives of US citizens, FCC chairman Julius Genachowski announced (Warning: PDF) plans to boost the speed of internet access within the US border to 100Mbps+. Such a move is long overdue according to many in the tech sector who site other developed countries such as Japan and Korea both as being close to or surpassing the 100Mbps mark. Considering we ourselves are a developed country, having to see/hear/read people calling 6Mbps “fast” or “high speed” is depressing. One nifty addition to the chairman’s announcement was his nod to Google, commended their 1 Gbps “super-network” ambitions.
Simply decreeing that it shall be done and actually getting it done are two different stories however. One of the biggest hurdles for a nation wide 100Mbps rollout will be hampered by old, aging technology — hardware and services alike. A fair amount of the country’s internet is provided via DSL/phone line services and hit’s it’s absolute max at a mere quarter of the FCC’s goals (25Mbps). Current DOCSIS 3.0 hardware in place that is capable of hitting 100Mbps is being limited to only half speed as well. Furthermore, getting that DOCSIS 3.0 hardware moving closer to the 100Mbps limit is going to take, yet again, more hardware upgrades — upgrades that don’t come quickly or cheaply.
100Mbps speeds will come at some point. It’s inevitable. While landline/fiber methods may linger for now, 4G/LTE/WiMax and emerging wireless technologies are making the expansion of high speed networks easier and faster. But as we wait until that speed filled day I can’t help but feel impatient. You know, I would like to enjoy 100Mbps+ internet speeds wherever I decide to call home and before I start counting my age with three digits.
Are you ready for 100Mbps internet?
Electronista
- September 15, 2009 2:55 pm
I’ll make it short and sweet. AT&T has a broken underperforming wireless network. Their DSL service (which I currently have) is over priced and also under performing. And to wrap it up, something as simple as registering for online account management for a dry loop DSL line requires me to wait 3-5 days for a stupid registration code coming to my humble abode via the US Postal service. The AT&T trifecta is complete. Screw AT&T!
/rant
- September 14, 2009 8:49 pm
As if we needed another reason to despise AT&T, it seems besides being a god awful cellular provider, just as awful DSL provider, and overall pain in all of our rear ends just isn’t enough. The FCC if you didn’t know in recent weeks has reached out to find the “true meaning” of broadband for the current government mandated number falls somewhere around 220Kbps — which is undeniably laughable. It seems AT&T has written the FCC to exclude gaming from being considered in the “speed limit” needed to be officially called broadband as it isn’t a necessity. Silly me, I thought whatever you did on the internet was…well…the internet and it shouldn’t matter what you do. According to AT&T’s wishes, the “internet” does not include gaming as that falls under “aspirational service”. Riiiiiight. Yet again, AT&T is searching for ways that they can continue to provide lackluster service for over-inflated amounts. Way to continue the streak of mediocrity AT&T. Obviously, broadband should be legally classified as no less than 1 Mbps. Period. Anything less in this day and age is useless. Maybe when AT&T starts losing customers left and right they’ll learn. Until then we’ll have someone to rely on when we feel the need to criticize.
Source: Ars Technica
- September 2, 2009 10:11 am
Image above is slightly outdated as South Korea, Japan, and France in particular now average 10-35Mpbs more
Sadly, the US sinks further and further out of relevance when the topic of global broadband speeds are brought up. Are average speeds pail in comparison to many other countries. Just a few numbers to get you all in a bunch:
- US Average Broadband Speeds: 4.8Mbps
- Japan widely offers speeds of 80+Mbps
- South Korea also is around the 70-80Mbps mark
- Even France slaughters us with speeds in the 40-50Mbps range
Sure, you could argue that these nations have much less square mileage to cover, which, costs them less in rollout and upkeep costs. Still, when countries across the pond are bouncing off of the 100Mbps routinely while we sit here twiddling our thumbs tyring ot open up Wikipedia, chugging along at 5-6Mbps (on the faster side — used by the general population) is ridiculous. Perhaps even more ridiculous is the fact that US broadband providers want to steal our money and piss it away without actually doing much upgrading. Why the colorful language? What are the speeds these “broadband” providers are lobbying the FCC to declare “Basic Broadband” for?
- Comcast: 0.256 Mbps (256Kb/s) — It’s comcastic!
- Verizon: 0.768 Mbps (768 Kb/s) — slightly better but still worthless for anything
The Comcast quoted number of even “basic broadband” is the dumbest thing and worst attempt and grabbing public money I have ever seen. Basic broadband running at 256K was ok in 2004. In 2009 the minimum speed should be 2-3 Mbps no if’s and’s or but’s. Of course, then there’s the whole issue with the blatant false and misleading advertising every internet provider is guilty of — that is, listing the maximum connection rate instead of real world daily speeds. My AT&T 3 meg connection actually steamrolls along at roughly .7-1.3 Mbps with ocasional “good days” of around 1.5 Mbps. Hardly what I’d call fast, reliable, or honest. These companies talk about innovation and being global leaders while our friends overseas laugh at us everytime they see a case like this. Comcast is a disgrace to America. Verizon isn’t far behind.
In reality, it’s pretty much all broadband providers. Here’s a crazy idea that’ll never see the light of day. Fire some executives and slash executive bonuses and pay. Why should they make huge sums of money when their networks are crap? Hopefully the FCC can see through their silkscreen of lies, deceit, and plain BS as nothing under 1 Mbps is broadband in my book. I’m sure there are many of you out there who agree no?
Source: Gizmodo, MSNBC, Image Source
Internet junkies and most gadget freaks have a border line addiction when it comes to being connected. Naturally, in the age we live in with quickness and efficiency being constantly rammed into our heads, we want whatever it is we’re searching for on the digital frontier to arrive on our computers fast…instantly even. While we all know that the U.S. is sorely lacking when it comes to broadband speeds compared on a global level, with our friends across the big blue pond enjoying the upper double digits routinely, who gets to claim bragging rights here in the states? As you can see from the list pictured, the digital playland, California, isn’t number one as many would assume. Instead, the land silicon comes in at a rather low 11th place nationwide. Instead a cluster of smaller north eastern states such as Delaware, Rhode Island, New York, and Massachusetts make up the top four.
