19 Responses to “Why I Don’t Have AT&T UVerse (Yet)”

  1. cindy 18 September 2009 at 6:15 pm #

    Your input is EXACTLY what I was looking for! I had Comcast until yesterday when I had AT&T Uverse installed, thinking that I could split the signal to 5 additional tvs, but found I cannot. That makes for too many useless, nonworking tvs in this house! I just may be switching back to Comcast. AT&T does offer 30 day money back guaranty.

    • brianmcculloh 18 September 2009 at 6:45 pm #

      Since I wrote this post I got a new Comcast deal. You have to sign a 2 year contract, but you get a fixed $95 per month rate for everything I described in this post PLUS all the higher-end channels (nat-geo, bbc, science, paladium) PLUS NFL Network. The second year of the contract is $105 per month, so it averages out over the course of the two years to $100 per month, which is actually a great deal. Plus you don't have to worry about calling in and renewing your promotion since it's a locked-in rate. I would suggest it if you have it in your area. Good thing UVerse has a 30 day money back guarantee :)

  2. Debra 23 September 2009 at 5:56 pm #

    Thank you for your research and recommendation. We are scheduled to change from Comcast to At&T tomorrow because we don't get a strong enough internet signal throughout the house and I figured the television situation would be the same. Now I think I need to do some homework of my own and postpone the decision to quit. Thank you!

  3. hannah 28 September 2009 at 11:02 am #

    You really spend time on this. I should have switched before but then It’s not too late. Thanks for the great info.

  4. jonathan 31 December 2009 at 5:28 am #

    compare basic packages
    u100 / digital starter
    2 boxes / 2 boxes
    6 meg internet / 6 mg internet

    ATT: 91 / COMCAST:101

    u200 / preferred
    2 dvr / 2 dvr
    6 mg / 6 mg

    ATT: 106 / COMCAST: 141

    u300 / preferred with sports and movies
    3 dvrs / 3 dvrs
    12 mg . 12 mg

    ATT: 148 / COMCAST:186

    OR add hi def to any for 10 and we are still the same price or lower still. so you see att is not more expensive or even comparable unless people have 4 or more boxes.

    just an FYI from a current uverse manager and previous comcast manager. both sales. yes. comcast has promotions for up to 6 mnth (180 savings) but we do too (between 100 to 300 cash back). and no one offers promotions over 6 months without a contract anymore so…..

    FYI. feel free to contact me and ill help you out with service –

  5. IT_Architect 1 January 2010 at 4:34 pm #

    Interesting read. I'm going through this now.

    Cost: Currently I have two POTS at $25/mo. each, approximately $10.00 of long distance per month, plus taxes, Comcast 6 mbps internet + BASIC TV from Comcast. For the same money I can get U-verse 2 phones unlimited, 10 mbps Internet, the U200 package, 3 TVs, and a dvr. I still get $100 bill credit and $100 Visa card. The first TV and dvr are free, the second TV adds 7 dollars a month, but the third TV makes all 3 free. (Don't ask, and I only have 1 TV) Total is $125.50, and you're correct, that's without HD. They want us to try U200, which is $64. We watch very little TV and will probably drop to the basic, which is $20, making it 10 mbps internet, two unlimited phones, and basic TV, for $80/month. In February they will be raising their prices. The first phone will go from $30 to $33, and the second one $15, will also likely go up slightly. If I didn't need the second phone, I'd be paying less for better internet, the same basic TV package, and phone, for less than I'm paying for Internet and TV alone from Comcast.

    >AT&T sends the signal through the coax line into your house U-verse uses a single pair of twisted pair telephone lines, that uses VDSL to transfer digital data packets, not an RF signal as cable uses. VDSL way faster than ADSL and SDSL, and theoretically faster than cable, but in the real world cable and VDSL work out about the same. VDSL is simply a short-range version of DSL made possible by the neighborhood fiber. It’s not that they couldn’t combine the signal to RF to make it behave like cable, it’s just that it’s more complicated for AT&T, and more limiting meaning RF isn’t the future of television. RF’s roots are based on through-the-air broadcasts to your antenna, which can have a coax cable connected to it to prevent interference between your antenna and TV. Cable companies simply replaced the antenna, which is why splitters work. With U-verse, once VDSL makes it to the gateway, it is bridged to Ethernet, and from there it is a wireless router, Ethernet switch, and 2 port VOIP adapter rolled into one. Computers don't daisy-chain coax for Ethernet anymore, and thus the reason why U-verse recommends you not use coax to connect from your router to the DVR or STB. On the back of the DVR or STB, you will see a couple coax, RCA, HDMI, RJ45, USB, etc. If you are getting this, what you are seeing is the TVs and VCRs holding up progress. What TVs and VCRs really need is an RJ45 Ethernet connector. A 100 mbps Ethernet network has at least triple the bandwidth of cable or VDSL, with the potential of 30+ to 300+ the speed. U-verse is IPTV, which means, as with a PC, it has an Ethernet address. TVs don't have Ethernet connections, for the most part, which is why you need a box at each TV, and Ethernet twisted-pair wire to connect them to the network. This also enables interactive TV to where you can independently work with the DVR from any TV, freeze and pass a recording from one TV to another, access your call history on-line, etc. It also means you could run from the wall, to a local 4 port switch, and from the switch to the TV and nearby computer, printer, scanner, etc. If you don’t use U-verse for phone, you could even plug in VOIP phones and use one of the virtual PBXs. What will be cable’s answer to this? Who’s in a better position when TVs get Ethernet connections or become just another PC in the house? What offers more range, more two-way bandwidth, far fewer conductors per bandwidth, more resistance to storms, and less maintenance than fiber? Who’s in a better position to run fiber to the end points to increase bandwidth to Blu-ray 1080p levels and beyond than someone who already has fiber within 3000 feet of your location?

    I’m going to give U-verse a whirl. With AT&T, customers get preferential treatment, and my phones are with them now. With Comcast, strangers get preferential treatment so you need to take a 60 day hiatus anyway to get good pricing, so you might as well try AT&T. That gets you the $200 in incentives from AT&T, and a better deal from Comcast if you decide to return after 60 days :D

  6. Rob Lombardi 21 January 2010 at 5:39 am #

    So Comcast doesn't have fiber in their networks?

    • brianmcculloh 21 January 2010 at 1:41 pm #

      I'm sure they do at some point… how did you come to that conclusion?

      • Rob Lombardi 21 January 2010 at 2:58 pm #

        All this talk about AT&T U-Verse and Fiber, in comparison to Comcast and Coax had me wondering.

        They opened up U-Verse to our neighborhood recently and I'm trying to figure out if it will be better than my existing Comcast. My biggest concern is image and sound quality of HD content, and internet speed. It seems that Comcast has the edge when there's coax coming up to the house.

        They say cable shared bandwidth with other houses, but if my bandwidth is being shared, on a much more higher bandwidth connection; let's say there's a 1 GBit coax coming from the curb to my house, but the shared connection with the other houses is a 100 GBit conneciton, then it's perhaps not such an issue. But I realize its not possible to split a 100Gbit connection into 1 – 1 Gbit connection without a router. Hmm, just trying to think through this.

        • brianmcculloh 21 January 2010 at 3:04 pm #

          Personally I'd make the decision based on how many TVs you're going to hook up. That's just me though. I believe the HD quality, bandwidth, and speed are similar enough (at least for me) to not make that much of a difference either way. For me it all comes down to cost, and if I have 4 separate TVs hooked up, it costs much more with Uverse at this point. I haven't researched much into the exact specifications of speed and such, so if that is your hangup then I'm not exactly sure which one to recommend. All I can say is I have been happy with Comcast for the last 5 years. That doesn't mean there's not something better out there though :)

          • Rob Lombardi 21 January 2010 at 3:11 pm #

            We would have two T.V.'s at the moment. Really, we just have one, but have been contemplating another for the children to watch while we watch something else. Currently, in order to get a better price, I have to call up Comcast, telling them that I'm contemplating cutting services because the cost is too high. So the AT&T U-Verse looked like a better deal to get the same channels. Perhaps I need to do the math again.

          • brianmcculloh 21 January 2010 at 3:17 pm #

            How much is your Comcast plan? I had to do the same thing, but then they told me about a new contract deal they had. Downside: you have to sign a 2 year contract and pay a fee to get out of it before the 2 years are up. Upside: $95 per month the first year, $105 per month the second year (average of $100 per month for the 2 year span), includes full digital cable, all HD channels, all HBO channels, high speed internet, and DVR. That's much cheaper than UVerse's similar services – at least at the time I signed the contract. I am in Indianapolis, Indiana, so I'm not sure if they offer that in all areas. It might be worth it to ask. I believe the contract is through a third party, but I never know the difference because I just pay my monthly bill and I get the service.

    • Leroy 23 January 2010 at 9:11 pm #

      Comcast definitely has fiber in it's network, the coax only goes from your house to the primary box, from there it goes to the nodes and headends directly through fiber. (Thats why in World of More areas like the SF Bay Area, they are able to offer internet speeds of 50 mbps now..which is ludicrous and incredibly awesome both at the same time imo)

      • Rob Lombardi 23 January 2010 at 10:55 pm #

        I'm in San Jose and one evening experienced a download of 500 Mbytes in what seemed like 5-10 seconds. I thought is was an error so I checked the file size again and confirmed it.

        I looked at my neighbors new U-Verse. I think the video quality is not as good. Jaggies, over sharpened, and compression so that motion looked a little riddled with artifacts. They say you have to use their wireless router too. I have a very good wireless N dual band. Theirs is single band G. I think I'll stick with Comcast for now.

  7. Rob Lombardi 23 January 2010 at 10:52 pm #

    I'm in San Jose and one evening experienced a download of 500 Mbytes in what seemed like 5-10 seconds. I thought is was an error so I checked the file size again and confirmed it.

  8. Randy 27 February 2010 at 5:09 pm #

    Just to add some fuel to the fire. My mom got a new HD TV and had Dishnetwork SAT. Trying to work with them to get a HD signal was a nightmare. She has ATT phone and internet already. I called them for the bundle and was very happy that they offered U-Verse in her area. Not only did I speak to a person that spoke perfect English and was very knowledgable, but the price bundle was way better priced then her paying seperately.

    I am a techno-geek and I had my mom's house wired with Sat being ale to view from one reciever in 4 rooms, bdrm, kitchen, sun rm and sewing rm.

    After installing the U-verse reciever and connecting HDMI to her new TV, I was able to take the co-ax out to TV to a splitter and she CAN get signal in those rooms. The only draw back is that it is VDSL and the main TV has to be on in her bedroom.

    So this post is not accurate in stating that you can not spit ATT U-verse. Sorry. Its not a great fix but you can split it.

    • brianmcculloh 1 March 2010 at 1:48 pm #

      So you split the signal coming into her house, and then you ran one to the U-verse receiver, and one to another TV and it worked on the alternate TV?

      • Al.Mann 31 October 2010 at 10:38 am #

        "After installing the U-verse reciever and connecting HDMI to her new TV, I was able to take the co-ax out to TV to a splitter and she CAN get signal in those rooms. The only draw back is that it is VDSL and the main TV has to be on in her bedroom."

        No Brian, he took the coax output from the UVerse receiver and split it. Meaning the same channel/program would display on all sets. Also meaning that unless you had some type of IR repeater system or an RF remote you would need to go back to the room with the receiver to change the channel/program.

        The UVerse receiver has multiple outputs like HDMI, component video, composite video and RF.

        I used to be employed by 2Wire to do phone technical support for UVerse till I found a better job.

        • brianmcculloh 1 November 2010 at 12:04 pm #

          Ah, that makes sense. I was gonna say, when did they start changing the signal format that comes into the house?

          Thanks for the comment.

Leave a Reply to Rob Lombardi