UVerse vs Comcast Xfinity

[scannerdude]

I have been a UVerse internet & phone customer since March 2010 and before that was a DSL customer with Bellsouth/AT&T.  Recently Comcast was in the area doing a promotion, so I signed up for their 30-day trial.  UVerse in my neighborhood is limited to 18Mbps so I wanted to test drive Xfinity's 50MBps as well as their phone service.  I kept UVerse active while trying Xfinity in case I didn't like Comcast.

The bottom line, after 17 days I am dropping Comcast and sticking with UVerse, and thought I would share my experience in case it helps others.  Some background:  I'm in a South Florida neighborhood (Pompano Beach area) built in the early 1970's and we have old Bellsouth pedestals in our yards (and mine is OLD).  The UVerse VRAD in the middle of the neighborhood is anywhere from 700 to 3000 feet from my house (depending on which way the underground cabling gets from the VRAD to my house).  I do not have Uverse TV or any cable, just internet & phone.  I also have an alarm system that uses dial-up to communicate to the central station.  AT&T told me they cannot do 24Mbps in this neighborhood, so the highest I can go is 18.

The biggest reason I'm staying with UVerse: RELIABILITY.  Since switching to UVerse from DSL in March 2010, it has gone down ONCE, and even then I just had to cycle power to the UVerse router.  It's just rock solid reliable, even with the lousy pedestal in my yard that used to give us fits with standard DSL.  It's pretty stable at around 16-18 Mbps and bad weather never affects it.  Phone calls always work and never have noise.  Alarm system has never had problems using the line.  Anonymous call reject works mostly well (some oddball numbers like "1" still get through) and I can block up to 20 numbers.

The biggest reason to stay with Xfinity: 50MBps.  However my family didn't notice a huge difference (they're all non-techies) and even complained to me that some pages loaded slower or not at all.  I noticed faster replication with Lotus Notes on my company's VPN, and pages do seem to load faster, but nothing earth shattering.  Video streaming on Youtube and Amazon Prime had no difference between the two.  The phone sometimes had some IP-phone-sounding noise on it (i.e. choppy, small noise bursts, etc), but nothing major, yet noticable since UVerse never had any of this.  Anonymous call reject does seem to work better (no weird numbers getting through) but you're limited to 16 numbers blocked.

I was ready to cancel UVerse, but on the 17th day, Comcast had an area outage for at least 3 hours starting around 9pm.  During that time we had no phone or internet, which also meant no alarm central station monitoring.  It made me realize how stable UVerse had been and that we've never had an outage like this.  I was away on a trip and thought about my family - what if someone broke in?  911 would only be available by cellphone, if they could reach it.

So for me, the slower but steady & reliable UVerse is staying. I don't know how reliable it is elsewhere but it works great here. This is hard for me because I WANT faster speed!  I really wanted Xfinity to work, and I might keep just the internet part (trying to figure out how to justify the extra cost of having both!).  I read today that AT&T is testing faster speeds in other markets, so I have hopes that this will result in them upping speeds to 45 Mbps here sometime in the future.

Anyway I hope this helps those trying to decide which service to use for internet and phone.

[Computer-Joe]

---

Vivy wrote:
Thanks dhascall.. I will call tomorrow and see if they come out and do internet tests?? Also looking for more feedback from gamers.. All I have seen is negative feedback from gamers, to slow not enough bandwidth but are they just cry babies??

---

No, they're not just cry-babies.

It's not really a "bandwidth" problem. A low-latency (35 - 50 ms to server) 3 Mbps connection is better for gaming than a 24 Mbps connetion with high latency (150 - 300 ms or more to server).

Uverse Internet (not sure if it's specific to VDSL, ADSL2/2+, or both), does suffer from higher (than necessary) latency. Whether due to unoptimized routing, the extra layers of systems AT&T runs, or regional/local infrastructure issues, gamers may have problems with excessive latency which can cause issues with maintaining a connection to game servers and/or delays in game (lag). AT&T's old ADSL system does not usually have those latency or routing issues if you've got a stable connection.

AT&T also still suffers from locationitis. Depending on your location there is a whole menu of somewhat confusing options as to what they can provide and how they will provide it. You might only be able to get DSL internet and POTS phone, or only Uverse Internet and POTS phone, or Uverse internet and VOIP phone, or Uverse Internet and VOIP phone and Uverse TV. For the areas that are not eligible for Uverse TV they'll (currently) bundle DirecTV (used to be Dish). What Internet speed you'll be able to get is also dependant on your location. With Comcast, if you can get it, you can get everything from one service.

Unlike Comcast, AT&T does not have constant (sometimes three a year when I had it) 10 - 15 percent rate increases, but you will have to keep an eye on your bill because the "promotional" pricing (true value of the service) will double to their "suggested retail price" and you have to call in to get it back down to where it belongs. Usually that's a simple process. When I had Comcast, all they could/would do is reduce your channel package (tier) to reduce your price (above and beyond the standard tier reduction/rate increases).

__________________________________________________________
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

[JefferMC]

 VDSL2 protocol inserts 10-15ms of latency due to the way data is interleaved between mulitple transmisisons between the RG and the VRAD.  Other than that, AT&T U-verse latency tends to be very similar to traditional ADSL latency.  For most people, this amount of latency is not an issue.  If you have a very, VERY time sensitive game, this may actually affect you.

One should always be aware of Bandwidth and Latency when measuring the quality of an network connection, though it always seems that all anyone wants to talk about is downstream bandwidth.

---

Computer-Joe wrote:

... A low-latency (35 - 50 ms to server) 3 Mbps connection is better for gaming than a 24 Mbps connetion with high latency (150 - 300 ms or more to server).

---

For some games.  And 150 ms latency is not typical for a 24 Mbps U-verse connection.

[cowboyjohnny904]

Comcast sucks... I used comcast for years... everyone I know who had comcast or does still have it says it sucks. They sniff the lines and cap it too much. AT&T is very reliable unlike comcast. Comcast does not give the advertised speeds unlike AT&T. Comcast some days would give 20mpbs on a 50mpbs plan. My new AT&T service gives me 26mpbs now on a 24mpbs plan. I moved alot and everywhere I went I tried both and AT&T hands down owns comcast. I cant wait for the 45mpbs down speed in 2 months in Jacksonville Florida. Also AT&T will have 100mpbs down speed by the end of 2015 they say.

Good luck everyone else!!

(Im a heavy user on speed so my pick is AT&T due to the reliable speeds and nevery going down like comcast)

[klepp0906]

Now if your a quote on quote "techie" you would understand that if your not noticing a speed difference it has to do with a hardware or software limitation on your end. Nothing they can do about that.

Not to mention your review while I'm sure is placed with the best intentions, is hardly indicative of the service as a whole. Let me start by saying, I am a uverse customer and I switched from comcast, but it sure wasnt for the price and it sure wasnt for the speed. I'm debating going back based on those two points alone. Matter a fact, the only reason I don't is my OCD. Unlike you, I simply stress out when my services are provided by a Buncha different people. Subjective and matter of preference.

Still with comcast you get more for your money (much cheaper), you get a better on demand experience (content wise it blows att away), and you get faster speeds (att offers 24 when Comcast offers 50, now comcast offers up to 300 and att just stepped up to 45)

You also must consider reliability which has been rock stable with both, but with anything you will have an issue once a blue moon. To pay this criteria much attention is silly considering this is so dynamic and different via case by case.

Att also suffers in that they went with an AIO solution that requires their proprietary hardware and excludes you from using your own. When you add in the fact ATT is shared bandwidth and you are only afforded a maximum of 4 streams (2 recording shows and 2 TVs or. 3:1 etc) which all take away a quarter of your bandwidth...it's just largely inferior.

If you consider all the points I listed, their isn't a single reason to go with att. Not one. Go ahead and give me one because i would love some convincing to stay. It's just an inferior product in every way which is disappointing.

I used att for years for wireless due to att having iphone exclusivity, and they foolishly gave that up. Now they're left with uverse which they tout as this great service but after the initial promotion I received for signing up expired, I'm on my way out.

If I had to pick one thing that they edge out the competition with I guess it's the interface. It's a bit prettier for what that's worth lol. (Subjective anyhow)

Here's to hoping they become a serious competitor in the future, they're already struggling to stay in business and a market needs competition. Problem is, they aren't competing, they are just there.

Just my 2c (I don't use landline as with uverse you lose it if you lose your service anyhow which is the only point to having a landline) even then it's the 90s use your cell phone lol. I do have their wireless, tv, and internet however and the U450 and 45megabit service. (Which they charged me an upgrade fee to go from 24-45 of 100 dollars lol.

I. Hate to say it but comcast is the clear winner. This is their territory

[klepp0906]

Your exaggerating. A) sure u will lose bandwidth if other people in your house are on the web, if you are testing via an old wireless tech, or if your broadband is being stolen. Maybe even if it's a Sunday night and a ton of people are on in your area. Their is no 30mbit descrepancy though lol!

If thst were the case don't post here call tech support Atleast you don't cut your bandwidth by 25% every time you use a tv!! Ugh

If uverse is 100 by 2015, Comcast is 300 now lol. They will probably be 500 or better by that point. And when you want to upgrade to the faster speed (assuming your close enough to the vrad to get good speeds anyhow) you will be charged another install fee. Comcast just enters it in their system, you reset your modem and wallah!

Inferior tech. It's ok for people who aren't in the know, aren't tech savvy, or have no other options. Still you are hearing it from a 10+ year att customer here, there is NO comparison.

Do yourself a favor and if you want a subjective unbiased review, look elsewhere. Broadbandreports or avn, it will be overwhelmingly obvious. Here you will deal with fanboys and affront accounts.

That's like asking mike Tyson if he is a good boxer. /lightbulb

[klepp0906]

Computer joe forgot to mention the simplest reasoning of all. Cheapo hardware that doesn't support the newest standards and piggy backing another router on top of theirs is far from ideal and almost impossible for someone without a pretty high degree of technical experience.

As I said, for the average joe.. Perhaps uverse is absolutely fine. However the price we pay for this stuff, is "fine" good enough when their is superior out there? Someone had mentioned Comcast speed increases, I didn't really touch on that. It is what caught me off guard when att wanted 100 install fee to increase my speed?!? Comcast does it for free and often.

Phew I'm done here. If you have a choice and you haven't already made it after reading all this. There is no convincing you.

I know as an it professional and a compulsive gamer, I'm really disappointed with att. It's such a pain to switch!

[JefferMC]

I can't compart U-verse to Comcast, because I never had Comcast.  I did have Charter, however, and:

1. My Charter Internet service would drop without reason.  Constantly, multiple times a day.  I ended up getting a low speed AT&T DSL line as a "make sure I have something" connection.
2. When I had an Internet connection, the download speed could be half of what is was supposed to be, on anything better than 5 MB.  Upload was worse.  On AT&T, I get all of my 12 Mbps and more, on a consistant basis.  I get all of my upload bandwidth.  
3. SD video quality.  There's no comparison; Charter's was poor; AT&T's is great.
4. DVR, Charter: record two channels at once, play back on one TV.  U-verse, record up to four channels at once, play back on any TV.
5. Price: After 4 years, I'm paying AT&T about the same as I was paying Charter for more channels and better service.

I pay for U-verse now about what I paid for Charter when I disconnected from Charter.  For a higher service level than I had with Charter.  For less than I'd be paying them now for what I had then.

Is AT&T perfect?  Absolutely not.

Have they improved continously since I signed up? Yes.

[klepp0906]

Ugh poor souls (just read the rest of the posts) I hope when switching your att sales person (who works on commission) has made you aware that of your xxx mb connection, you lose 6mb of it for every tv you have on and every show that is recording? If you game at best make sure no one in the house is using the tv or recording anything!!

I also just had my promotional pricing expire. I called to see what the new promotions were before switching and I was told promotions are for new customers only. I could either pay the new price (went from 140-210) or I could cancel.

Color me absolutely stupefied.

[klepp0906]

Can't argue they have improved, they used to be an absolute disaster from what I gather. I guess you can give them points for that but if they hadn't I'm not sure they would be here currently.

As far as charter goes, I have seldom heard of them I'm afraid. Not sure if they are a new start up or just small and highly localized?

In this case you have to pick your poison but if performance and volume of content is what your after go comcast. Will be cheaper too.

I remember when I switched and I thought "on demand" was similar to say Netflix. Having a standard persay, I wasn't aware it varied between providers based on contracts etc.. Not sure if att is cheap or what but I could find almost anything I wanted to watch on comcasts on demand and when I went to att I was surprised to see not just 1 or 2 shows missing but it is practically barren I can't say I have been able to find one of the half dozen things I used to watch and that's ignoring my wife yelling that it sucks and she can't find her hallmark channel (att didn't renew contract with them for whatever reason) I could care less but women >.<

[klepp0906]

Sounds like charter was the pits lol. Why would you go with something like that in the first place? You live in a rural area that had no options initially or?

[JefferMC]

---

klepp0906 wrote:
Sounds like charter was the pits lol. Why would you go with something like that in the first place? You live in a rural area that had no options initially or?

---

Probably same reason you're still with AT&T and posting on their forums instead of moving on.

[NorthLineTony]

---

KlarkKen wrote:
Since NBC bought Xfinity it's been a steady downhill roll. I'm a techie by trade and haven't had any issues downloading files or assisting customers remotely. There were times in my last month with Comcast that connections were so sketchy that I sat in the parking lot at McDonalds to have internet access so I could get any work done.

---

it's a 180. Comcast owns NBC., NBC does not own Comcast.

[JefferMC]

NLT is correct.  Comcast owns NBCUniversal.

[darknesscrown2000]

I'm dropping Xfinity altogether at the end of the month.  Currently I still am with Xfinity and pay for the 50Mbps internet line.  I can CONFIRM that if Uverse is consistently offering 18Mbps speeds then it IS better than Xfinity's 50Mbps speeds.  No one paying for 50Mbps is likely getting that fast.  I've done speed and ping tests on my internet connection with Xfinity weekly for 2 years since moving out to CA.  I PAY for the 50Mbps line, but my PEAK speeds rarely exceed 21Mbps, and, in fact, average in the 8-11Mbps range.  I know this is true almost everywhere because Xfinity tosses as many people as they can onto a line, so even though the line CAN go to 50Mbps, it will never get that fast.  It's been exceedingly infuriating.

Because Comcast offers no-contract service, your rates are also subject to the whims of their management.  You can sign up for a 1-year "plan", like I did, that offers phone, internet, and cable tv for, say $130 per month...and within a few months, you're paying $180...or $200.  I have used Xfinity long enough to be sufficiently confident that this is their MO.  They advertise no contract as if it is a good thing, which it is...if you want to leave.  But, assuming you live in a place that has no competitors (which is at least half the country) who are you going to defect to when they decide to start bending you over again?  No one.  After talking to AT&T's reps and getting their assurance that my monthly payments will NOT go up for the duration of the contract, and the fact that they were offering me a better package for nearly $70 less than Xfinity, it made little sense to stay with them.

I can only hope that AT&T doesn't turn into another Comcast.  I'm really on the verge of just not paying for any kind of service at all.  It's ludicrous how little options consumers have when it comes to this, and it is unacceptable.  It is unacceptable that corporate entities are allowed to own all this data infrastructure...but I digress.  I'm happy to be leaving Xfinity (at least for now, anyway).  They really are a horrible company and will stop at nothing to make money off you simply because they can...STAY HONEST AT&T!

[Jwil736]

I worked for Comcast as an installer. Their internet service (when working) is top notch. About once a month (usually late at night so it doesn't effect too many people) they do line maintnance. This is due to ever changing demand. Everyone in a neighborhood is feeding off a "node" which regulates service. These nodes from time to time need tweaking to offer better bandwidth to the neighborhood based on demand. 

The ocassional modem and router reboot is no big problem. You unplug the power thirty seconds and plug back in, you're back in business. 

My my mother just dropped UVerse for Comcast because of the speed. Her UVerse was at risk of being throttled (Slowed down due to using a preset, by att, amount of data).