Skip to main content
AT&T Community Forums
Announcements
Get to the head of the class with our Back to School deals!
Wineaux

Mentor

 • 

28 Messages

Mon, May 14, 2012 1:29 AM

Closed

802.11N Gateway?

It's been what, 4 years now for uVerse? 802.11N is now a fully ratified standard, and has been for years. Most every laptop, tablet, and cellphone is now shipping with built in 802.11N support. 802.11AC draft gear should start shipping this fall! I think most of us are sick and tired of having to put a second wireless router behind our 2Wire router for uVerse, and then not be able to use all the neat new WiFi remote apps for our cellphone's, including the most recent uVerse app. Seriously, it's time for AT&T to defecate or get off the pot and release either an 802.11N gateway, or an 802.11AC draft gateway. When can we expect to see AT&T make this very minor technological update and join the rest of us in the 21st Century?

Enquiring minds want to know...

Responses

Darknessrise

Professor

 • 

2.4K Messages

8 years ago


@gregzoll_1 wrote:

@RobM314 wrote:
The need for speed. 802.11g is limited to 54mbs. I want dual band at least 300+300. The ability to create SSID for visitors would be very nice.

It will not make your Internet connection any faster.  I laugh everytime someone brings up the subject of wanting Wireless-N, when their Internet speed does not give the means to even needing anything faster than Wireless-G.


You seem to be forgetting that the people using wireless won't be sitting their computer directly next to the gateway. You'll probably not even get high enough throughput a room or so away for a 23/3 tier. I was 3 or so rooms away with my gateway with 4 bars and could barely get over 7 Mbps when transfering files.

 

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Note: If your issue has been resolved, please mark the post that resolved your issue as the solution. Click "Post Options" and select "Accept as Solution" to help others with the same issue find an answer.
Computer-Joe

Master

 • 

5.9K Messages

8 years ago


@oufanindallas wrote:

@Darknessrise wrote:

@gregzoll_1 wrote:

@RobM314 wrote:
The need for speed. 802.11g is limited to 54mbs. I want dual band at least 300+300. The ability to create SSID for visitors would be very nice.

It will not make your Internet connection any faster.  I laugh everytime someone brings up the subject of wanting Wireless-N, when their Internet speed does not give the means to even needing anything faster than Wireless-G.


You seem to be forgetting that the people using wireless won't be sitting their computer directly next to the gateway. You'll probably not even get high enough throughput a room or so away for a 23/3 tier. I was 3 or so rooms away with my gateway with 4 bars and could barely get over 7 Mbps when transfering files.

 


And wireless N would have even less range.  G is better for longer distances.

 


 

 

It's not whether it's "G" or "N", it's all about the frequency. 5GHz has a lower penetration rate than 2.4 GHz. If you were on either side of a football field (line of sight) and tested 2.4 GHz against 5 GHz it would be a tie (range wise), but stick them in a building with walls and 2.4 GHz will win every time when it comes to distance. So in a residential setting I would say A MIMO "N" at 2.4 GHz would be your best bet. I'm stiil using an old D-Link DIR-655 which runs it "N" radio at 2.4 GHz and I can get a 150Mbps connection in my back yard ~ 250 feet from the house.

 

 

 




__________________________________________________________
How can you be in two places at once, when your not anywhere at all?
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
I really want to become a procrastinator, but I keep putting it off.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
There are three kinds of people, those that can count, and those that can't.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
“Our great democracies still tend to think that a stupid man is more likely to be honest than a clever man, and our politicians take advantage of this prejudice by pretending to be even more stupid than nature has made them." :Bertrand Russell

                               neon_sign.jpg

Wineaux

Mentor

 • 

28 Messages

8 years ago

Unfortunately, y'all have missed the point of having 802.11n on the 2-Wire gateway.

 

1) By having slower devices on my home network, like the 802.11g gateway, you slow down my entire wireless home network.  Transfering data to and from the Internet is but one component of a modern home wireless network,  I stream audio and video across my network internally, as well as copying file, and printing.  By not upgrading the gateway to 802.11n, and by the end of Q1 of 2013 to 802.11ac, AT&T is throttling and limiting my own internal network and my ability to stream hi-def video within my my home from my media server to other TV's and tablets throughout the house.

 

2) 802.11g can handle 720p streaming pretty well, but 1080p or 1080p 3D?  Not on a bet!  We're using IPTV to stream HDTV throughout our homes with uVerse.  Limiting our ability to do that wirelessly is crazy and shortsighted. 

 

Welcome to the future, and it is here now.  I expect to be able to stream my media within my home without issues.  Some executive at AT&T got a bonus for bringing those 2-Wire's in under budget by saving $2-5 when they saddled us with an 802.11g radio instead of an 802.11n radio, and then they ordered so danged many of them to bring the costs down another couple of bucks that we've been stuck with the danged things for way too many years since they have a warehouse full of the things and can't afford to make an upgraded box. 

 

So by saving a few bucks, AT&T forces its users to spend ~$50-150 on a secondary router that doesn't play well with the 2-Wire, and isn't supported by AT&T.  They just throw their customers to the wolves and let them sink or swim.  Networking isn't the easiest of subjects to master.  I know a whole lot more than most people, including the majority of AT&T's installers and techs, but I still needed to get a buddy of mine to help me get things seemless on my wireless network.  Well, it's sort of seemless.  The 2-Wire will no longer allow me to log onto my secondary router, even though it works and I can see it on the network, including the correct address for it.  So that means I'm going to have to reset the router to factory settings and go through that crap all over again, just to be able to open up a port for my Plex server to share my media via my MyPlex account.

 

This is just ridiculous, and trying to spin this mess into a discussion that AT&T's customers expect that an 802.11n router is going to give them faster internet speeds is just plain disingenuous and somewhat insulting.  There is a true FIOS provider working their way towards my neighborhood right now.  I don't expect AT&T to fix this, or any other of their myriad technical and call center issues before they arrive, and when they do I'm out.  Why in the heck are folks on here defending AT&T's *** technical implementations instead of pushing them to upgrade their equipment to not only keep up with current trends and usage, but just play catch up?  Is it just because the majority of the regular posters on here are AT&T employees and they see it as part of their job to defend AT&T at every opportunity when customers come here to ask questions or voice concerns or complaints?  It's not the first time that I've seen that happen, and I'm certain that it won't be the last.  It's also yet another reason that I'm pretty much done with uVerse, and AT&T as a company.

 

[Edited to comply with Guidelines]

Computer-Joe

Master

 • 

5.9K Messages

8 years ago


@Wineaux wrote:

Unfortunately, y'all have missed the point of having 802.11n on the 2-Wire gateway.

 

1) By having slower devices on my home network, like the 802.11g gateway, you slow down my entire wireless home network.  Transfering data to and from the Internet is but one component of a modern home wireless network,  I stream audio and video across my network internally, as well as copying file, and printing.  By not upgrading the gateway to 802.11n, and by the end of Q1 of 2013 to 802.11ac, AT&T is throttling and limiting my own internal network and my ability to stream hi-def video within my my home from my media server to other TV's and tablets throughout the house.

 

2) 802.11g can handle 720p streaming pretty well, but 1080p or 1080p 3D?  Not on a bet!  We're using IPTV to stream HDTV throughout our homes with uVerse.  Limiting our ability to do that wirelessly is crazy and shortsighted. 

 

Welcome to the future, and it is here now.  I expect to be able to stream my media within my home without issues.  Some executive at AT&T got a bonus for bringing those 2-Wire's in under budget by saving $2-5 when they saddled us with an 802.11g radio instead of an 802.11n radio, and then they ordered so danged many of them to bring the costs down another couple of bucks that we've been stuck with the danged things for way too many years since they have a warehouse full of the things and can't afford to make an upgraded box. 

 

So by saving a few bucks, AT&T forces its users to spend ~$50-150 on a secondary router that doesn't play well with the 2-Wire, and isn't supported by AT&T.  They just throw their customers to the wolves and let them sink or swim.  Networking isn't the easiest of subjects to master.  I know a whole lot more than most people, including the majority of AT&T's installers and techs, but I still needed to get a buddy of mine to help me get things seemless on my wireless network.  Well, it's sort of seemless.  The 2-Wire will no longer allow me to log onto my secondary router, even though it works and I can see it on the network, including the correct address for it.  So that means I'm going to have to reset the router to factory settings and go through that crap all over again, just to be able to open up a port for my Plex server to share my media via my MyPlex account.

 

This is just ridiculous, and trying to spin this mess into a discussion that AT&T's customers expect that an 802.11n router is going to give them faster internet speeds is just plain disingenuous and somewhat insulting.  There is a true FIOS provider working their way towards my neighborhood right now.  I don't expect AT&T to fix this, or any other of their myriad technical and call center issues before they arrive, and when they do I'm out.  Why in the heck are folks on here defending AT&T's ** technical implementations instead of pushing them to upgrade their equipment to not only keep up with current trends and usage, but just play catch up?  Is it just because the majority of the regular posters on here are AT&T employees and they see it as part of their job to defend AT&T at every opportunity when customers come here to ask questions or voice concerns or complaints?  It's not the first time that I've seen that happen, and I'm certain that it won't be the last.  It's also yet another reason that I'm pretty much done with uVerse, and AT&T as a company.

 

[Edited to comply with Guidelines]


 

 

Well, you basically seem like the type of person who probably would not utilize the average, consumer grade, ISP provided internet gateway any way.

 

You're missing the point of the "Internet Gateway". It's a device designed for the ISP to provide access to the internet. As AT&T offers no internet faster than half the wireless speed (and a quarter of the wired speed) of the gateway suits it's purpose fine. It provides more than enough bandwidth to saturate your "internet connection".

 

 

As far as the majority of posters being employees, actually better than 95% of the posts on here are from customers just like you, and a lot of us, rather than expect, as you state, AT&T to throw out a warehouse full of gateways and start over, we went out and bought our own routers.

 

Plus even if they were "N", would it give you any more confidence in the quality of the equipment?

 

 

 




__________________________________________________________
How can you be in two places at once, when your not anywhere at all?
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
I really want to become a procrastinator, but I keep putting it off.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
There are three kinds of people, those that can count, and those that can't.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
“Our great democracies still tend to think that a stupid man is more likely to be honest than a clever man, and our politicians take advantage of this prejudice by pretending to be even more stupid than nature has made them." :Bertrand Russell

                               neon_sign.jpg

Anonymous

New Member

 • 

25.7K Messages

8 years ago


@Darknessrise wrote:

@gregzoll_1 wrote:

@RobM314 wrote:
The need for speed. 802.11g is limited to 54mbs. I want dual band at least 300+300. The ability to create SSID for visitors would be very nice.

It will not make your Internet connection any faster.  I laugh everytime someone brings up the subject of wanting Wireless-N, when their Internet speed does not give the means to even needing anything faster than Wireless-G.


You seem to be forgetting that the people using wireless won't be sitting their computer directly next to the gateway. You'll probably not even get high enough throughput a room or so away for a 23/3 tier. I was 3 or so rooms away with my gateway with 4 bars and could barely get over 7 Mbps when transfering files.

 


My RG sits in our basement, we get 54meg from it through Wifi, I test out at our 12meg speed with the profile that I have with ATT, and when I had 24meg, I still got a 24meg speedtest.  Even at 54 meg with Wireless-G, I have no problems moving files from my desktop to my netbook or vice-versa.

 

Anonymous

New Member

 • 

25.7K Messages

8 years ago

Wineaux, you have missed the point. ATT is not forcing you to spend more on equipment, it is your own choice. As for streaming 1080p on your network, you are actually incorrect on that info, due to the variables involved will never happen, due to the manufacturers have not come out with perfect Wireless equipment to stream 1080p.

I have no problem streaming 720p through Wifi, same with 1080p on my netbook to Youtube or Netflix.

So again, you are totally off base, and as far as I see it, it is one's opinion over the masses and those who have been around a long time to know what can and cannot happen, and what works for them.
Wineaux

Mentor

 • 

28 Messages

8 years ago

Nope.  YOU didn't read what I wrote.  I was NOT talking about streaming Netflix, which is compressed like crazy and will in fact degrade picture quality if it detects a lack of needed bandwidth.  I was talking about streaming my OWN content from my OWN internal server to other devices WITHIN my OWN network.  For that, the transfer rate of the wireless router is paramount.  Streaming high bitrate 1080p BD rips from a server to another TV or tablet at 802.11g speeds will transform a Hollywood blockbuster into something that resembles a slideshow of your family's summer vacation.  So yes.  If I want to use my internal wireless network the way I choose to, and the way more and more people are using their home networks these days, then I have no choice but to purchase a secondary router with acceptable wireless speeds.  Have you checked out Plex or XBMC to see what they offer?  Right now I am a u450 customer, but I'm about ready to dump all of my paid movie channels and use a small porton of that monthly savings to up my bandwidth. 

I can't do too much more because I'm actually about 300 feet too far from the switch, even though when I signed up and was installed over 3 years ago, I was assured I was in range.  What IS in range though for really high speed internet access and 4 HD streams is a little rundown trailer park which may or contain a meth lab or two, a smattering of maybe 20-25 small homes strung along a rural highway, a small rural grocery store, a Dollar General, a self service car wash, a large number of small woodland animals and stray cats & dogs, and maybe 1/8th of a very large neighborhood (mine) of $200K+ homes.  In three years has AT&T added either a repeater or new CO in our neighborhood to allow them actually service the only real paying customers out here?  Nope.  So I'll get the most bandwidth I can eek out of this awful implementation of uVerse, drop all of my movie channels, get the majority of my content via Plex and all of the incredible plugins that it offers, and count the days until EATEL shows up with real FIOS and 100GB/S download speeds.

Darknessrise

Professor

 • 

2.4K Messages

8 years ago


@gregzoll_1 wrote:

@Darknessrise wrote:

@gregzoll_1 wrote:

@RobM314 wrote:
The need for speed. 802.11g is limited to 54mbs. I want dual band at least 300+300. The ability to create SSID for visitors would be very nice.

It will not make your Internet connection any faster.  I laugh everytime someone brings up the subject of wanting Wireless-N, when their Internet speed does not give the means to even needing anything faster than Wireless-G.


You seem to be forgetting that the people using wireless won't be sitting their computer directly next to the gateway. You'll probably not even get high enough throughput a room or so away for a 23/3 tier. I was 3 or so rooms away with my gateway with 4 bars and could barely get over 7 Mbps when transfering files.

 


My RG sits in our basement, we get 54meg from it through Wifi, I test out at our 12meg speed with the profile that I have with ATT, and when I had 24meg, I still got a 24meg speedtest.  Even at 54 meg with Wireless-G, I have no problems moving files from my desktop to my netbook or vice-versa.

 


Must just be from where our RG was installed then. Years ago when we got U-verse they installed our RG on the opposite side of the house from all our internet devices and put it on the floor next to a bed and a lot of other objects.

 

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Note: If your issue has been resolved, please mark the post that resolved your issue as the solution. Click "Post Options" and select "Accept as Solution" to help others with the same issue find an answer.
Anonymous

New Member

 • 

25.7K Messages

8 years ago

No, I read what you posted, and it is the same stuff you were ranting about six months ago. Nothing is going to change in the product ATT uses for their service, because it suffices for what it needs to be used for.

If a end user wants to add a N A/P, go ahead, you can do that due to they do not lock or restrict you from adding your equipment. As far as I am concerned, this is a moot point now and you have had your six minutes of fame on your soap box.

We all listened, tried to settle this in man to man, but you keep rehashing the same thing over and over.
Anonymous

New Member

 • 

25.7K Messages

8 years ago



Must just be from where our RG was installed then. Years ago when we got U-verse they installed our RG on the opposite side of the house from all our internet devices and put it on the floor next to a bed and a lot of other objects.

 


I can walk out of my house and still pick up our RG from 100' away, and it sits three feet underground, so there is nothing wrong with the device that ATT leased to me.

 

Darknessrise

Professor

 • 

2.4K Messages

8 years ago


@gregzoll_1 wrote:


Must just be from where our RG was installed then. Years ago when we got U-verse they installed our RG on the opposite side of the house from all our internet devices and put it on the floor next to a bed and a lot of other objects.

 


I can walk out of my house and still pick up our RG from 100' away, and it sits three feet underground, so there is nothing wrong with the device that ATT leased to me.

 


I can only go about 50 feet before our wireless begins to have a lot of packet loss and drop outs with 2 bars. Raising the adapter from desk level to slightly over it gives me 4 bars with an"Ok" connection. Stupid installer who put our RG there :/.

 

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Note: If your issue has been resolved, please mark the post that resolved your issue as the solution. Click "Post Options" and select "Accept as Solution" to help others with the same issue find an answer.
Anonymous

New Member

 • 

25.7K Messages

8 years ago

Nothing is stopping you from moving the RG up higher. Mine lays flat on a a/v rack downstairs, same place I have always had my networking equipment for the past 9 years.

We have Gyprock on the walls, Aluminum siding on the outside of the house and never have had issues with any A/P that I have had running down there.
Darknessrise

Professor

 • 

2.4K Messages

8 years ago

Coaxial cable isn't long enough to move it further. Would also be too much of an annoyance to re run the thing from the basement :/.

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Note: If your issue has been resolved, please mark the post that resolved your issue as the solution. Click "Post Options" and select "Accept as Solution" to help others with the same issue find an answer.
Computer-Joe

Master

 • 

5.9K Messages

8 years ago


@gregzoll_1 wrote:

I can walk out of my house and still pick up our RG from 100' away, and it sits three feet underground, so there is nothing wrong with the device that ATT leased to me.

 


 

 

When we had our Uverse, I mounted the 3800 in the basement, to the bottom of the floor joists of the first floor (that's where the phone line came in). It was technically above ground level but still surrounded by the 12 -15 inch thick fieldstone foundation and I could still get a strong signal out in the detached garage ~75 feet away.

 

No, the strength of the signal was never an issue, how the system held up in the face of interference though is a different story. It was fairly good at first but the problem was after there were four or five more RGs in range, wireless throughput went in the crapper. It worked alright for a wireless printer and a couple of laptops for basic web use. but if you wanted to do any streaming, you had to get out the ethernet cable. Although I've not had the opportunity to experience it first hand, from what I've read on here over the years the 2WIREs aren't exactly Apple freindly.

 

I guess we should be happy they even allow more than one computer on your connection. I remember when DSL first came around, if you had to have a tech come out, you had to disconnect and hide your router and all the extra ethernet cables.Smiley Very Happy

 

 

 




__________________________________________________________
How can you be in two places at once, when your not anywhere at all?
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
I really want to become a procrastinator, but I keep putting it off.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
There are three kinds of people, those that can count, and those that can't.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
“Our great democracies still tend to think that a stupid man is more likely to be honest than a clever man, and our politicians take advantage of this prejudice by pretending to be even more stupid than nature has made them." :Bertrand Russell

                               neon_sign.jpg

Wineaux

Mentor

 • 

28 Messages

8 years ago

Yep.  Six months and no reply nor discussion from AT&T on this.  It speaks volumes.  There was a great SNL sketch with Lilly Tomlin back in the very first year of the show as an AT&T operator.  The tagline for the spoof commercial?  "We're the phone company.  We don't care.  We don't have to."  Nothing has changed, and that mentality still pervades the ivory towers of AT&T's corporate office where they no longer will allow their customers to call and speak to either their executives or their assisstants.  When you start having to hide from your own customers, you know there's a problem...

 

Get started...

Ask a new question