Teacher
•
28 Messages
Thinking about making the switch from DirecTV to U-verse, has it matured?
Hey everyone I'm Justin and I thinking about making the switch. I was hoping some current U-verse customer could guide me in my decision. First of all I'd like to say I really like the idea of this forum and have already seen how helpful ATT staffers are.
Currently we have DirecTV with HD and a single DVR STB. Our DirecTV STB is a HR21-700 which features a 320GB internal HDD. I was told by an ATT online chat representative that I can expect to receive a Moto VIP1216 STB which only has a160GB of internal storage.
1.) Do I need a residential gateway for U-verse TV service only?
2.) How many hours of HD content can be stored on a VIP1216 160GD HDD?
3.) Can I purchase a VIP1216 privately OR are the units on eBay actually property of ATT?
4.) Can I upgrade a VIP1216 internal hard drive? If so, could you provide a link. TIA.
I already have HSI service from Comcast so I will not need service from ATT. Will not purchasing his from ATT effect my U-verse experience in any way? Our neighborhood is in the process of having Hotwire Communications install a fiber network with GPON FTTH. Unfortunately Hotwire says it won't be ready for at least another two months not including wiring up each home. They will be providing 20MBps HSI service to every home included in our quarterly dues and for $20 additional will provide a 100MBps tier!
5.) Does having a different HSI provider effect the U-verse experience?
Since FTTH is incoming, what is the preferred way to have U-verse TV service installed? We've currently got the original COAX being used by Comcast HSI. We've got nothing going over the copper phone lines but however it terminates in strange spots in each room. We had DirecTV installed with fresh COAX as Comcast TV service is/was included in our dues and we wanted flaxability.
6.) What is the preferred way to have only U-verse TV service installed?
7.) Will ATT upgrade OR install network cable (Cat6) / coax (RG6) / and or copper phone lines IW in our home?
I'm really excited about IPTV from ATT, so I look forward to hearing from you all.
larry11
Scholar
•
135 Messages
14 years ago
How about the customers who did their homework and signed up for U because they had Hallmark. Would you agree that they would have a good case about coming on this site and bashing U??
0
0
texasguy37
Expert
•
14.5K Messages
14 years ago
0
0
oufanindallas
ACE - Master
•
6.9K Messages
14 years ago
No, I would not say that they have a good reason to bash UVerse. Uverse isn't the only provider to have contract disputes and they won't be the last.
0
0
larry11
Scholar
•
135 Messages
14 years ago
I find that just a bit hypocritical. On one hand you bash people who " don't do their homework", but you blow off the people that did go their homework with "U isn't the only provider to have contraxt disputes". Should the customers who did their homework be compensated for losing what they signed up for??
0
0
oufanindallas
ACE - Master
•
6.9K Messages
14 years ago
It's one thing to be upset, that's understandable, to come in and bash UVerse when a contract dispute happens? No one knows what goes on in those meetings between the two parties so they when someone comes in here and blames AT&T for losing a channel, they are doing so without any true facts. We've seen the articles that have been posted about Crown Media, they are going broke. Martha is a failure and is bringing down the entire network. Martha Stewart Cut Back It probably costs Crown Media $.25 to show those 20 year old reruns of Golden Girls and Little House on the Prarie, but it costs several thousand per episode for Martha. They have already shrunk her time slot due to terrible ratings, but they still have to pay her. I'm sure Crown is trying to recoup their money any way they can and they are going to try and charge more for each provider as one way.
AT&T has has several successful negotiations for channels and has brought many more channels on than they have lost and the rates have not gone up. To be "compensated" for what they lost? It wouldn't even lower the bill by $.05/mo. but yet people are demanding the moon for the loss of two channels that have some of the lowest ratings. If everyone who came in here to complain about the loss of one channel actually watched it as much as they say, their ratings would be a lot higher.
To answer your hypocritical callout, no I'm not being hypocritical, unless you are sitting in on the negotiations, then you have no clue what is going on and to ague without any facts is just assinine and ranting to be ranting. AT&T doesn't force anyone to sign a contract so if the loss of Hallmark enough to cause you to leave, so long, make sure you send your equipment back. Good luck on your next provider who has a contract dispute that doesn't work in your favor, (Dish - No Fox Sports, FX, National Geographic Channel; Cablevision - No Fox channels at all - No MBL Playoffs), and those companies require a minimum contract so you can't just drop them.
0
0
SomeJoe7777
Expert
•
9.4K Messages
14 years ago
I think you also have to look at negotiations with AT&T as a whole ... and look beyond the Hallmark negotiation as to part of AT&T's strategy.
AT&T is a new TV provider. It's first contracts are just now coming up for renewal. I personally believe that AT&T is using a strategy of "setting the tone" for all of it's future negotiations. They're sending a message to all of the other media companies that:
1. AT&T will not pay a higher-than-market price for channels.
2. AT&T is willing to drop channels from the lineup if that requirement isn't met.
AT&T chose to send this message using two small players (Rainbow Networks and Crown Media) and thereby establish it's reputation at the negotiating table.
Now, when the big players like News Corp. (FOX) and ESPN come to the negotiating table, they will be prepared for AT&T's requirements.
It's a good long-term strategy. It means that there will be bumps in the road (like the loss of the Crown Media channels) but in the long-term, it will keep prices down.
If anyone chooses to solely blame AT&T for the loss of the Hallmark channels, at least know that there is a reason behind their choice. If Crown media had been successful getting double their monthly rate of approximately $0.12, that wouldn't have affected our price as customers, but when ESPN then is able to do the same thing, you suddenly have a $5/month price increase.
0
0
Terry_2
Scholar
•
153 Messages
14 years ago
I think what people have to take into consideration is that U-verse didn't intend to lose the Hallmark Channels. In most contract cases, there is ultimately a meeting of the minds and the issue is resolved. Occasionally, things don't wotk out that way and a channel is lost. If that's a deal breaker for you then you change providers. DISH are in a mess right now. DirecTV lost versus for six months in September 2009. These things happen.
0
0
oufanindallas
ACE - Master
•
6.9K Messages
14 years ago
AT&T offered to continue broadcasting Hallmark and Hallmark Movie Channel at the current prices while negotiations were ongoing, however, Crown Media refused forcing AT&T to turn those channels off.
0
0
ShaunMN
Moderator
•
2.8K Messages
13 years ago
0
0
ShaunMN
Moderator
•
2.8K Messages
13 years ago
I would like to thank everyone for taking the time to post your comments and opinions related to this topic. This topic has been thoroughly discussed and will now be closed.
0
0