Ask a question
Search in U-verse Forums

U-verse Forums

Reply
Posted Sep 6, 2013
9:21:32 AM
Uverse is not really optical cable?

We have Unverse installed at our church near UCI campus. However, its speed is only 1.5M download and 250K upload. Slower than DSL services.  ATT tech said that is because the locaiton is too far. My quesiton is, since ATT advertise Uverse is fiber optical, does the distance actually matter?  It is way below advertised speed.  In addition, if distance limited download speed, who limited upload speed?  This is way way too slow.

We have Unverse installed at our church near UCI campus. However, its speed is only 1.5M download and 250K upload. Slower than DSL services.  ATT tech said that is because the locaiton is too far. My quesiton is, since ATT advertise Uverse is fiber optical, does the distance actually matter?  It is way below advertised speed.  In addition, if distance limited download speed, who limited upload speed?  This is way way too slow.

Uverse is not really optical cable?

1,307 views
22 replies
(0) Me too
(0) Me too
Reply
View all replies
(22)
Highlighted
0
(0)
  • Rate this reply
View profile
Sep 6, 2013 10:51:01 AM
0
(0)
ACE - Expert
Edited by JefferMC on Sep 6, 2013 at 10:52:08 AM

A couple of notes here:

 

1) The Original U-verse service is Fiber Optic... to a point.  That point may be in your neighborhood (Fiber to the Node or FTTN), in front of (or behind) your home (Fiber to the Curb, FTTC) or to the side of your house (Fiber to the Premisses, or FTTP).  Only a few U-verse subscribers are "all fiber", or FTTP.  Most are FTTN, and use copper from the Node (a VRAD) to their home.  FTTP customers get a nearly 30 Mbps link to their home.  FTTN/FTTC can get as much as 55 Mbps link now.  This link is shared between all services in the home (IPTV, VOIP) and is not all available for Hight Speed Internet (HSI).

 

2) A couple of years ago, some smart [sic] person in AT&T Marketing decided to brand a new, slightly better, version of plain old DSL (now ADSL2+) as U-verse High Speed Internet, to sew confusion and make people think they were getting something they're not.  This ADSL2+ flavor is used where the original is not available, normally due to low density and the expense of building a VRAD close enough.  It can come from the CO or from a VRAD.  But the main point is that because of the distance it has to serve, the speeds are much less than those enjoyed by VDSL2 and FTTP subscribers.

 

It appears you have this ADSL2+ flavor of U-verse HSI.  

 

As for the limited upload speed, nearly all consumer Internet access is asymmetrical; i.e. more channels/bandwidth going downstream than coming upstream.  For a 1.5 Mbps down, 250 Kbps up sounds about right.

 

 

A couple of notes here:

 

1) The Original U-verse service is Fiber Optic... to a point.  That point may be in your neighborhood (Fiber to the Node or FTTN), in front of (or behind) your home (Fiber to the Curb, FTTC) or to the side of your house (Fiber to the Premisses, or FTTP).  Only a few U-verse subscribers are "all fiber", or FTTP.  Most are FTTN, and use copper from the Node (a VRAD) to their home.  FTTP customers get a nearly 30 Mbps link to their home.  FTTN/FTTC can get as much as 55 Mbps link now.  This link is shared between all services in the home (IPTV, VOIP) and is not all available for Hight Speed Internet (HSI).

 

2) A couple of years ago, some smart [sic] person in AT&T Marketing decided to brand a new, slightly better, version of plain old DSL (now ADSL2+) as U-verse High Speed Internet, to sew confusion and make people think they were getting something they're not.  This ADSL2+ flavor is used where the original is not available, normally due to low density and the expense of building a VRAD close enough.  It can come from the CO or from a VRAD.  But the main point is that because of the distance it has to serve, the speeds are much less than those enjoyed by VDSL2 and FTTP subscribers.

 

It appears you have this ADSL2+ flavor of U-verse HSI.  

 

As for the limited upload speed, nearly all consumer Internet access is asymmetrical; i.e. more channels/bandwidth going downstream than coming upstream.  For a 1.5 Mbps down, 250 Kbps up sounds about right.

 

 

*The views and opinions expressed on this forum are purely my own. Any product claim, statistic, quote, or other representation about a product or service should be verified with the manufacturer, provider, or party.

Re: Uverse is not really optical cable?

[ Edited ]
2 of 23 (1,293 Views)
0
(0)
  • Rate this reply
View profile
Sep 6, 2013 11:26:57 AM
0
(0)
Tutor

Then ATT is lying. We had DSL+ already, and when we switch, we specifically told ATT we want optical version Uverse.  To be a honest company, it would remove all confusing offering, so that not fool people thought for getting low speed offering.  What is the point for us to spend money install ADSL+ when we already have ADSL+? I understand the speed is async for upload and download, however, if the distance limiting max speed, it should not limiting uplink speed propertionally, rather let uplink speed to reach the max spec, be 786K or whatever, instead of 250k/s.

Then ATT is lying. We had DSL+ already, and when we switch, we specifically told ATT we want optical version Uverse.  To be a honest company, it would remove all confusing offering, so that not fool people thought for getting low speed offering.  What is the point for us to spend money install ADSL+ when we already have ADSL+? I understand the speed is async for upload and download, however, if the distance limiting max speed, it should not limiting uplink speed propertionally, rather let uplink speed to reach the max spec, be 786K or whatever, instead of 250k/s.

Re: Uverse is not really optical cable?

3 of 23 (1,280 Views)
0
(0)
  • Rate this reply
View profile
Sep 6, 2013 11:51:55 AM
0
(0)
Scholar

Of course they're lying.  They don't seem to want to be an honest company.  They're structured to make more money lying to the customer.  It's engrained in their corporate structure.  I had to upgrade to fake uverse becaues they kept degrading my older adsl line.  It was getting slower over the months, so I ordered u-verse.  The sales people aren't technical enough to know better.  Maybe some do, but I doubt it.  I knew immediately after recieving the Motorola NVG-510 that it wasn't fiber, but it improved my speed and I paid less, so I accepted it.  I asked the tech about it and he basically said they market it that way.

 

Unfortunately, they're a monopoly.  Although they were required to open their lines for DSL, they don't need to with U-Verse.  The only other company available to me is Comcast, and I hate them just as much.  I have Sonic available, but, judging by the offering, it looks like they use AT&T's older ADSL line and cost more.

 

You must always remember that Marketting is lying to you.  These days they don't tell you outright lies becaues consumer reports used to have a show that pointed them out.  Now, they sell an image and images aren't about truths or lies, so there's no outright lying that you can call them on.  Just watch the modern Clio awards to understand.  They sell fantasy.

Of course they're lying.  They don't seem to want to be an honest company.  They're structured to make more money lying to the customer.  It's engrained in their corporate structure.  I had to upgrade to fake uverse becaues they kept degrading my older adsl line.  It was getting slower over the months, so I ordered u-verse.  The sales people aren't technical enough to know better.  Maybe some do, but I doubt it.  I knew immediately after recieving the Motorola NVG-510 that it wasn't fiber, but it improved my speed and I paid less, so I accepted it.  I asked the tech about it and he basically said they market it that way.

 

Unfortunately, they're a monopoly.  Although they were required to open their lines for DSL, they don't need to with U-Verse.  The only other company available to me is Comcast, and I hate them just as much.  I have Sonic available, but, judging by the offering, it looks like they use AT&T's older ADSL line and cost more.

 

You must always remember that Marketting is lying to you.  These days they don't tell you outright lies becaues consumer reports used to have a show that pointed them out.  Now, they sell an image and images aren't about truths or lies, so there's no outright lying that you can call them on.  Just watch the modern Clio awards to understand.  They sell fantasy.

Re: Uverse is not really optical cable?

4 of 23 (1,265 Views)
0
(0)
  • Rate this reply
View profile
Sep 6, 2013 12:19:13 PM
0
(0)
ACE - Expert

To be honest, whoever took your order for U-verse HSI may not realize that the product you got is not the same as the VDSL offering.  And your data will go over fiber, just not as early in the process as it could otherwise.  You can be fairly sure that it won't leave the CO on copper these days. 

 

Finally, keep in mind that if your signal is marginal going down, it's marginal going back as well.  AT&T sells service tiers, and the upstream speed is matched to a downstream speed.  That relationship in terms of resources is built in thoughout the plant, i.e. the number of channels, fibers, whatever are in these proportions.  

 

 

To be honest, whoever took your order for U-verse HSI may not realize that the product you got is not the same as the VDSL offering.  And your data will go over fiber, just not as early in the process as it could otherwise.  You can be fairly sure that it won't leave the CO on copper these days. 

 

Finally, keep in mind that if your signal is marginal going down, it's marginal going back as well.  AT&T sells service tiers, and the upstream speed is matched to a downstream speed.  That relationship in terms of resources is built in thoughout the plant, i.e. the number of channels, fibers, whatever are in these proportions.  

 

 

*The views and opinions expressed on this forum are purely my own. Any product claim, statistic, quote, or other representation about a product or service should be verified with the manufacturer, provider, or party.

Re: Uverse is not really optical cable?

5 of 23 (1,258 Views)
0
(0)
  • Rate this reply
View profile
Sep 6, 2013 12:34:46 PM
0
(0)
Tutor

They are not monoply in our town. Cox offers 10Mup and 10M down for about same price.  We thought we were loyal ATT customer for years, so that ATT would not cheat us like this.  I will have to recommend to my superior that we were fooled and have to switch to Cox Internet, also switch out our land phone, too.

They are not monoply in our town. Cox offers 10Mup and 10M down for about same price.  We thought we were loyal ATT customer for years, so that ATT would not cheat us like this.  I will have to recommend to my superior that we were fooled and have to switch to Cox Internet, also switch out our land phone, too.

Re: Uverse is not really optical cable?

6 of 23 (1,244 Views)
0
(0)
  • Rate this reply
View profile
Sep 6, 2013 12:39:25 PM
0
(0)
ACE - Expert

willchen wrote:

 

Unfortunately, they're a monopoly.  Although they were required to open their lines for DSL, they don't need to with U-Verse.  The only other company available to me is Comcast, and I hate them just as much.  I have Sonic available, but, judging by the offering, it looks like they use AT&T's older ADSL line and cost more. 

 


So... in addition to AT&T you can choose Comcast or Sonic.  How does this fit the definition of "monopoly."

 


willchen wrote:

 

Unfortunately, they're a monopoly.  Although they were required to open their lines for DSL, they don't need to with U-Verse.  The only other company available to me is Comcast, and I hate them just as much.  I have Sonic available, but, judging by the offering, it looks like they use AT&T's older ADSL line and cost more. 

 


So... in addition to AT&T you can choose Comcast or Sonic.  How does this fit the definition of "monopoly."

 

*The views and opinions expressed on this forum are purely my own. Any product claim, statistic, quote, or other representation about a product or service should be verified with the manufacturer, provider, or party.

Re: Uverse is not really optical cable?

7 of 23 (1,236 Views)
0
(0)
  • Rate this reply
View profile
Sep 6, 2013 12:51:59 PM
0
(0)
ACE - Master

JefferMC wrote:

willchen wrote:

 

Unfortunately, they're a monopoly.  Although they were required to open their lines for DSL, they don't need to with U-Verse.  The only other company available to me is Comcast, and I hate them just as much.  I have Sonic available, but, judging by the offering, it looks like they use AT&T's older ADSL line and cost more. 

 


So... in addition to AT&T you can choose Comcast or Sonic.  How does this fit the definition of "monopoly."

 


It's not, by any definition

” Auto racing, bull fighting, and mountain climbing are the only real sports … all others are games.”- Ernest Hemingway

JefferMC wrote:

willchen wrote:

 

Unfortunately, they're a monopoly.  Although they were required to open their lines for DSL, they don't need to with U-Verse.  The only other company available to me is Comcast, and I hate them just as much.  I have Sonic available, but, judging by the offering, it looks like they use AT&T's older ADSL line and cost more. 

 


So... in addition to AT&T you can choose Comcast or Sonic.  How does this fit the definition of "monopoly."

 


It's not, by any definition

” Auto racing, bull fighting, and mountain climbing are the only real sports … all others are games.”- Ernest Hemingway
*The views and opinions expressed on this forum are purely my own. Any product claim, statistic, quote, or other representation about a product or service should be verified with the manufacturer, provider, or party.

Re: Uverse is not really optical cable?

8 of 23 (1,229 Views)
0
(0)
  • Rate this reply
View profile
Sep 6, 2013 1:46:15 PM
0
(0)
Tutor

I did not say ATT is monoply, I only say ATT is a liar. Not a honest company.

Other people posted saying ATT is monoply in their area, that could be true.

Only loser cheat others. ATT sounds like such a cheater.

I did not say ATT is monoply, I only say ATT is a liar. Not a honest company.

Other people posted saying ATT is monoply in their area, that could be true.

Only loser cheat others. ATT sounds like such a cheater.

Re: Uverse is not really optical cable?

9 of 23 (1,199 Views)
0
(0)
  • Rate this reply
View profile
Sep 6, 2013 4:34:37 PM
0
(0)
Scholar

Yes, the two communtiy excellence apologists have correctly nitpicked my poor choice of terminology.  I'll try to word it a little more accurately in the future.  Thank you.

 

Sonic is not really a choice, since they're forced into using the lesser of AT&T's ADSL lines at a higher cost.  I would have to work with Sonic as well as AT&T, indirectly, to get service issues corrected.

 

You're right that it's not technically a monopoly.  It's more of a duopoly structure that's prevalent in US cities.  Choice is very limited and it prevents any real competition.  This country is falling behind in the telecom industry because of this.  They both need to be broken up again.

 

Yes, the two communtiy excellence apologists have correctly nitpicked my poor choice of terminology.  I'll try to word it a little more accurately in the future.  Thank you.

 

Sonic is not really a choice, since they're forced into using the lesser of AT&T's ADSL lines at a higher cost.  I would have to work with Sonic as well as AT&T, indirectly, to get service issues corrected.

 

You're right that it's not technically a monopoly.  It's more of a duopoly structure that's prevalent in US cities.  Choice is very limited and it prevents any real competition.  This country is falling behind in the telecom industry because of this.  They both need to be broken up again.

 

Re: Uverse is not really optical cable?

10 of 23 (1,166 Views)
0
(0)
  • Rate this reply
View profile
Sep 6, 2013 5:41:03 PM
0
(0)
ACE - Master

ibswayne wrote:

I did not say ATT is monoply, I only say ATT is a liar. Not a honest company.

Other people posted saying ATT is monoply in their area, that could be true.

Only loser cheat others. ATT sounds like such a cheater.


Not seeing where they are lying as you put it.  I do not see any ads claiming that UVerse is 100% fiber?  AT&T's main network is fiber, so how are they lying?

” Auto racing, bull fighting, and mountain climbing are the only real sports … all others are games.”- Ernest Hemingway

ibswayne wrote:

I did not say ATT is monoply, I only say ATT is a liar. Not a honest company.

Other people posted saying ATT is monoply in their area, that could be true.

Only loser cheat others. ATT sounds like such a cheater.


Not seeing where they are lying as you put it.  I do not see any ads claiming that UVerse is 100% fiber?  AT&T's main network is fiber, so how are they lying?

” Auto racing, bull fighting, and mountain climbing are the only real sports … all others are games.”- Ernest Hemingway
*The views and opinions expressed on this forum are purely my own. Any product claim, statistic, quote, or other representation about a product or service should be verified with the manufacturer, provider, or party.

Re: Uverse is not really optical cable?

11 of 23 (1,148 Views)
0
(0)
  • Rate this reply
View profile
Sep 6, 2013 6:51:55 PM
0
(0)
Scholar

oufanindallas,

 

You seem to be some AT&T fan boy, or someone actually indirectly hired by AT&T to promote AT&T goodness and put down legitimate critique.  While AT&T doesn't openly say that U-Verse is all Fiber Optic, they do infer it.  It's the way the market their product.  Sure, they don't outright lie, but that's how marketting works.  They're doing it in a way to trick the customer into believing it, while staying within the legal bounds of not actually lying or committing fraud.  Legally, they're in the clear, but laymen see it as a lie.  This is how all modern marketting works, and you need critical thinking skills to figure this out, which unfortunately isn't taught to the same levels everywhere.

 

oufanindallas,

 

You seem to be some AT&T fan boy, or someone actually indirectly hired by AT&T to promote AT&T goodness and put down legitimate critique.  While AT&T doesn't openly say that U-Verse is all Fiber Optic, they do infer it.  It's the way the market their product.  Sure, they don't outright lie, but that's how marketting works.  They're doing it in a way to trick the customer into believing it, while staying within the legal bounds of not actually lying or committing fraud.  Legally, they're in the clear, but laymen see it as a lie.  This is how all modern marketting works, and you need critical thinking skills to figure this out, which unfortunately isn't taught to the same levels everywhere.

 

Re: Uverse is not really optical cable?

12 of 23 (1,131 Views)
0
(0)
  • Rate this reply
View profile
Sep 6, 2013 7:48:08 PM
0
(0)
ACE - Expert

So... caveat emptor, do your research, etc... Right?


Good advice.

 

So... caveat emptor, do your research, etc... Right?


Good advice.

 

*The views and opinions expressed on this forum are purely my own. Any product claim, statistic, quote, or other representation about a product or service should be verified with the manufacturer, provider, or party.

Re: Uverse is not really optical cable?

13 of 23 (1,115 Views)
0
(0)
  • Rate this reply
View profile
Sep 6, 2013 8:21:33 PM
0
(0)
Guru

So if AT&T isn't "technically" a monopoly; and if they are not "actually" lying, I'm not sure what the problem is.  The OP was concerned about speed and distance, and a reasonable answer was provided.  The only AT&T employees here are clearly identified as such in their signatures--the rest of us are just subscribers, albeit with widely varying degrees of technical knowledge.  Some of the less technically inclined members (like myself) who lack the technical background have done their due diligence, applied critical thinking skills and selected a provider.  This forum is a great source of information, but it is up to the individual to make choices.  Misunderstandings and disappointment are unfortunate, but they most often arise from a failure to do one's homework before buying--caveat emptor, as JefferMC says.  There is no grand scheme by AT&T to deceive anyone--the information is there for the asking.  Switching providers is the other alternative.  By the way, I think I prefer "Community Excellence Apologist" to "Fanboy."  Smiley Wink

 

docbombay

"Everything should be made as simple as possible--but not simpler."
--Albert Einstein

So if AT&T isn't "technically" a monopoly; and if they are not "actually" lying, I'm not sure what the problem is.  The OP was concerned about speed and distance, and a reasonable answer was provided.  The only AT&T employees here are clearly identified as such in their signatures--the rest of us are just subscribers, albeit with widely varying degrees of technical knowledge.  Some of the less technically inclined members (like myself) who lack the technical background have done their due diligence, applied critical thinking skills and selected a provider.  This forum is a great source of information, but it is up to the individual to make choices.  Misunderstandings and disappointment are unfortunate, but they most often arise from a failure to do one's homework before buying--caveat emptor, as JefferMC says.  There is no grand scheme by AT&T to deceive anyone--the information is there for the asking.  Switching providers is the other alternative.  By the way, I think I prefer "Community Excellence Apologist" to "Fanboy."  Smiley Wink

 

docbombay

Re: Uverse is not really optical cable?

14 of 23 (1,108 Views)
0
(0)
  • Rate this reply
View profile
Sep 6, 2013 9:20:52 PM
0
(0)
ACE - Master

willchen wrote:

oufanindallas,

 

You seem to be some AT&T fan boy, or someone actually indirectly hired by AT&T to promote AT&T goodness and put down legitimate critique.  While AT&T doesn't openly say that U-Verse is all Fiber Optic, they do infer it.  It's the way the market their product.  Sure, they don't outright lie, but that's how marketting works.  They're doing it in a way to trick the customer into believing it, while staying within the legal bounds of not actually lying or committing fraud.  Legally, they're in the clear, but laymen see it as a lie.  This is how all modern marketting works, and you need critical thinking skills to figure this out, which unfortunately isn't taught to the same levels everywhere.

 


I am neither a "fan boy" or an employee of AT&T.  Do I like my service with AT&T yes, is it perfect, no. But for people to come into these forums and make such blatantly wrong statements it deserves to be shot down.  As for marketing, I know all about how marketing works, my wife is a marketing director and I've had several college courses in marketing for my college degree. I also work hand in hand with the marketing department where I work.  If someone doesn't like the services that are provided they are free to change their isp/cable provider. No one is forcing anyone to stay. 

” Auto racing, bull fighting, and mountain climbing are the only real sports … all others are games.”- Ernest Hemingway

willchen wrote:

oufanindallas,

 

You seem to be some AT&T fan boy, or someone actually indirectly hired by AT&T to promote AT&T goodness and put down legitimate critique.  While AT&T doesn't openly say that U-Verse is all Fiber Optic, they do infer it.  It's the way the market their product.  Sure, they don't outright lie, but that's how marketting works.  They're doing it in a way to trick the customer into believing it, while staying within the legal bounds of not actually lying or committing fraud.  Legally, they're in the clear, but laymen see it as a lie.  This is how all modern marketting works, and you need critical thinking skills to figure this out, which unfortunately isn't taught to the same levels everywhere.

 


I am neither a "fan boy" or an employee of AT&T.  Do I like my service with AT&T yes, is it perfect, no. But for people to come into these forums and make such blatantly wrong statements it deserves to be shot down.  As for marketing, I know all about how marketing works, my wife is a marketing director and I've had several college courses in marketing for my college degree. I also work hand in hand with the marketing department where I work.  If someone doesn't like the services that are provided they are free to change their isp/cable provider. No one is forcing anyone to stay. 

” Auto racing, bull fighting, and mountain climbing are the only real sports … all others are games.”- Ernest Hemingway
*The views and opinions expressed on this forum are purely my own. Any product claim, statistic, quote, or other representation about a product or service should be verified with the manufacturer, provider, or party.

Re: Uverse is not really optical cable?

15 of 23 (1,093 Views)
0
(0)
  • Rate this reply
View profile
Sep 6, 2013 11:03:24 PM
0
(0)
Scholar

If someone doesn't like the services that are provided they are free to change their isp/cable provider. No one is forcing anyone to stay. 

This is rather dismissive and somewhat fallacious in a mostly monopoly, sorry, duopoly system that we have.  Both are really bad providers when it comes to tech support.  A choice between two equally bad providers is not a real choice.

 

I agree that when it's working, it's great!  I had no problems for many years until they replaced a dead switch at the C.O.  When they did that, I started having continuous service interuptions and AT&T tech support has taken over a month to diagnose.  It would have taken longer if I didn't figure out the procedure by eventually asking the right questions.  This points to a problem with their tech support infrastructure that I would like fixed.  From what I've seen so far several other people have had worse exeperiences.  If they had know what to ask, they could have gotten a real resolution sooner.  Nobody should have to reverse engineer someone's tech support stucture to get real help.

 

Rather than be dismissive of people's problems when they become irate, or just pointing them to a canned bandage response, I'm trying to get that infrastructure fixed.  Everything that I've seen so far on this forum points to a broken infrastructure and all you can do is apply a bandage to an open wound.  I haven't had time to go through all the past postings, but I've gone back at least a week, so far.  This forum and customer care structure is an attempt to placate irate customers after the system failed.  This should be an unnecessary system.  It's a symptom of AT&T structural failure at Tech Support.  I'm trying to get to someone that can fix that.  I will keep contacting AT&T through as many channels as necessary to find the right people that can effect change.

 

In this very short time that I've been on here, I've only seen you dismiss complaints and point people to the PM band-aid to get your community award points.  Good for you on being able to generate those canned responses and getting those points.  If you know how I can contact the right people please point me to them.  If you don't want to read the diatribes, then don't respond to them.  Politely point people to the forum rules and continue to generate the canned responses.  You're not helping AT&T with those dismissive responses.

 

The manager that did read my PM misread my much shorter message and left for an early weekend.  Until then I will keep posting what I believe to be a fix that will eventually help AT&T and its customers long term.  Customers should not have to put up with such a broken system.


If someone doesn't like the services that are provided they are free to change their isp/cable provider. No one is forcing anyone to stay. 

This is rather dismissive and somewhat fallacious in a mostly monopoly, sorry, duopoly system that we have.  Both are really bad providers when it comes to tech support.  A choice between two equally bad providers is not a real choice.

 

I agree that when it's working, it's great!  I had no problems for many years until they replaced a dead switch at the C.O.  When they did that, I started having continuous service interuptions and AT&T tech support has taken over a month to diagnose.  It would have taken longer if I didn't figure out the procedure by eventually asking the right questions.  This points to a problem with their tech support infrastructure that I would like fixed.  From what I've seen so far several other people have had worse exeperiences.  If they had know what to ask, they could have gotten a real resolution sooner.  Nobody should have to reverse engineer someone's tech support stucture to get real help.

 

Rather than be dismissive of people's problems when they become irate, or just pointing them to a canned bandage response, I'm trying to get that infrastructure fixed.  Everything that I've seen so far on this forum points to a broken infrastructure and all you can do is apply a bandage to an open wound.  I haven't had time to go through all the past postings, but I've gone back at least a week, so far.  This forum and customer care structure is an attempt to placate irate customers after the system failed.  This should be an unnecessary system.  It's a symptom of AT&T structural failure at Tech Support.  I'm trying to get to someone that can fix that.  I will keep contacting AT&T through as many channels as necessary to find the right people that can effect change.

 

In this very short time that I've been on here, I've only seen you dismiss complaints and point people to the PM band-aid to get your community award points.  Good for you on being able to generate those canned responses and getting those points.  If you know how I can contact the right people please point me to them.  If you don't want to read the diatribes, then don't respond to them.  Politely point people to the forum rules and continue to generate the canned responses.  You're not helping AT&T with those dismissive responses.

 

The manager that did read my PM misread my much shorter message and left for an early weekend.  Until then I will keep posting what I believe to be a fix that will eventually help AT&T and its customers long term.  Customers should not have to put up with such a broken system.

Re: Uverse is not really optical cable?

16 of 23 (1,050 Views)
0
(0)
  • Rate this reply
View profile
Sep 6, 2013 11:08:38 PM
0
(0)
Scholar

JefferMC wrote:

So... caveat emptor, do your research, etc... Right?


Good advice.

 


There are only really two bad choices available.  What additional research is available?  When the line are working, you never have to deal with customer support and it's great.  Woe unto those that ever have to deal with them.  This system is broken and the idea that I can choose to go with a "better" provider is a fallacy.  In many places they are monopolies.  So what choice do you have?

 

Caveat emptor and choice can only exist when there is real choice, with a much larger number of provider choices.


JefferMC wrote:

So... caveat emptor, do your research, etc... Right?


Good advice.

 


There are only really two bad choices available.  What additional research is available?  When the line are working, you never have to deal with customer support and it's great.  Woe unto those that ever have to deal with them.  This system is broken and the idea that I can choose to go with a "better" provider is a fallacy.  In many places they are monopolies.  So what choice do you have?

 

Caveat emptor and choice can only exist when there is real choice, with a much larger number of provider choices.

Re: Uverse is not really optical cable?

17 of 23 (1,048 Views)
0
(0)
  • Rate this reply
View profile
Sep 6, 2013 11:23:35 PM
0
(0)
Scholar

docbombay wrote:

So if AT&T isn't "technically" a monopoly; and if they are not "actually" lying, I'm not sure what the problem is.  The OP was concerned about speed and distance, and a reasonable answer was provided.  The only AT&T employees here are clearly identified as such in their signatures--the rest of us are just subscribers, albeit with widely varying degrees of technical knowledge.  Some of the less technically inclined members (like myself) who lack the technical background have done their due diligence, applied critical thinking skills and selected a provider.  This forum is a great source of information, but it is up to the individual to make choices.  Misunderstandings and disappointment are unfortunate, but they most often arise from a failure to do one's homework before buying--caveat emptor, as JefferMC says.  There is no grand scheme by AT&T to deceive anyone--the information is there for the asking.  Switching providers is the other alternative.  By the way, I think I prefer "Community Excellence Apologist" to "Fanboy."  Smiley Wink

 

docbombay


The whole point of marketting is to deceive.  You can only do due dilligence research up to a point.  Not everyone can know exactly what to ask or search for when they do research.  People are not machines that think alike, nor are they perfect, so there's no way that one person's research will match 100% with another.

 

It shouldn't all be left up to a consumer to do all the research.  There is an certain expectation of minimun standards, especially of not being blatantly mislead.  As you said, everyone has different levels of technical knowledge.  You may have known enough to make the right searches to find out what you want, but not everyone does.  It's not necessarily because they're dumber or incompetent.  Some people just have different skill sets and expertise.  You wouldn't necessarily expect a plumber to know how to fix a computer or know exactly what tools to use to do the job and vice versa.  Not everyone know to look in this forum.  I made my choice well before I ever discovered the forum.  I only came here after I started to search for a way to post a complaint/suggestion to fix the tech support structure.


docbombay wrote:

So if AT&T isn't "technically" a monopoly; and if they are not "actually" lying, I'm not sure what the problem is.  The OP was concerned about speed and distance, and a reasonable answer was provided.  The only AT&T employees here are clearly identified as such in their signatures--the rest of us are just subscribers, albeit with widely varying degrees of technical knowledge.  Some of the less technically inclined members (like myself) who lack the technical background have done their due diligence, applied critical thinking skills and selected a provider.  This forum is a great source of information, but it is up to the individual to make choices.  Misunderstandings and disappointment are unfortunate, but they most often arise from a failure to do one's homework before buying--caveat emptor, as JefferMC says.  There is no grand scheme by AT&T to deceive anyone--the information is there for the asking.  Switching providers is the other alternative.  By the way, I think I prefer "Community Excellence Apologist" to "Fanboy."  Smiley Wink

 

docbombay


The whole point of marketting is to deceive.  You can only do due dilligence research up to a point.  Not everyone can know exactly what to ask or search for when they do research.  People are not machines that think alike, nor are they perfect, so there's no way that one person's research will match 100% with another.

 

It shouldn't all be left up to a consumer to do all the research.  There is an certain expectation of minimun standards, especially of not being blatantly mislead.  As you said, everyone has different levels of technical knowledge.  You may have known enough to make the right searches to find out what you want, but not everyone does.  It's not necessarily because they're dumber or incompetent.  Some people just have different skill sets and expertise.  You wouldn't necessarily expect a plumber to know how to fix a computer or know exactly what tools to use to do the job and vice versa.  Not everyone know to look in this forum.  I made my choice well before I ever discovered the forum.  I only came here after I started to search for a way to post a complaint/suggestion to fix the tech support structure.

Re: Uverse is not really optical cable?

18 of 23 (1,046 Views)
0
(0)
  • Rate this reply
View profile
Sep 7, 2013 5:46:28 AM
0
(0)
ACE - Master
Edited by oufanindallas on Sep 7, 2013 at 5:48:48 AM

willchen wrote:

If someone doesn't like the services that are provided they are free to change their isp/cable provider. No one is forcing anyone to stay. 

This is rather dismissive and somewhat fallacious in a mostly monopoly, sorry, duopoly system that we have.  Both are really bad providers when it comes to tech support.  A choice between two equally bad providers is not a real choice.

 

I agree that when it's working, it's great!  I had no problems for many years until they replaced a dead switch at the C.O.  When they did that, I started having continuous service interuptions and AT&T tech support has taken over a month to diagnose.  It would have taken longer if I didn't figure out the procedure by eventually asking the right questions.  This points to a problem with their tech support infrastructure that I would like fixed.  From what I've seen so far several other people have had worse exeperiences.  If they had know what to ask, they could have gotten a real resolution sooner.  Nobody should have to reverse engineer someone's tech support stucture to get real help.

 

Rather than be dismissive of people's problems when they become irate, or just pointing them to a canned bandage response, I'm trying to get that infrastructure fixed. 

 

For 95% of AT&T's millions of customer, the system works just fine.  Are they perfect, shoot no, but no one company is.  Even the company I work for that prides itself on fantastic customer care has a few bad apples.  The few times I've called customer service or technical support in the 4 years I've had UVerse, I've had my issues resolved the first time and very professionally. 

 

Everything that I've seen so far on this forum points to a broken infrastructure and all you can do is apply a bandage to an open wound. 

 

You are basing your opinion on your experience.  I'm sorry that you haven't had the best luck, but your situation is the exception and not the norm.  People don't go online to say, hey, everything is working great.  What you find are those that have a bad experience will go online and complain.  Do a google search for Comcast, Time Warner, Direct TV, Dish Network, Charter complaints and you will find more pages than you can read. 

 

I haven't had time to go through all the past postings, but I've gone back at least a week, so far.  This forum and customer care structure is an attempt to placate irate customers after the system failed.  This should be an unnecessary system.  It's a symptom of AT&T structural failure at Tech Support.  I'm trying to get to someone that can fix that.  I will keep contacting AT&T through as many channels as necessary to find the right people that can effect change.

 

In this very short time that I've been on here, I've only seen you dismiss complaints and point people to the PM band-aid to get your community award points.  Good for you on being able to generate those canned responses and getting those points.  If you know how I can contact the right people please point me to them.  If you don't want to read the diatribes, then don't respond to them.  Politely point people to the forum rules and continue to generate the canned responses.  You're not helping AT&T with those dismissive responses.

 

Are the majority of my responsed canned in the customer support section, absolutely, you know why, because this is a peer to peer forum and none of us have access to any customer information.  We cannot access accounts for billing issues, we cannot send a technician to your house to fix an issue.  Sending a PM to Customer Care is a last resort method when normal channels have failed. 95% of AT&T customer never need to go that route as their issues are corrected the first time via a phone call to either technical support or customer service.  Even the few employees that are on these forums do not have access to your (the customers) information or cannot dispatch a technician, they will tell you to PM Customer Care as well.

 

The manager that did read my PM misread my much shorter message and left for an early weekend.  Until then I will keep posting what I believe to be a fix that will eventually help AT&T and its customers long term.  Customers should not have to put up with such a broken system.

 

 

All I've seen you do in the short time you've been here is post the same thing in every post. 


 

” Auto racing, bull fighting, and mountain climbing are the only real sports … all others are games.”- Ernest Hemingway

willchen wrote:

If someone doesn't like the services that are provided they are free to change their isp/cable provider. No one is forcing anyone to stay. 

This is rather dismissive and somewhat fallacious in a mostly monopoly, sorry, duopoly system that we have.  Both are really bad providers when it comes to tech support.  A choice between two equally bad providers is not a real choice.

 

I agree that when it's working, it's great!  I had no problems for many years until they replaced a dead switch at the C.O.  When they did that, I started having continuous service interuptions and AT&T tech support has taken over a month to diagnose.  It would have taken longer if I didn't figure out the procedure by eventually asking the right questions.  This points to a problem with their tech support infrastructure that I would like fixed.  From what I've seen so far several other people have had worse exeperiences.  If they had know what to ask, they could have gotten a real resolution sooner.  Nobody should have to reverse engineer someone's tech support stucture to get real help.

 

Rather than be dismissive of people's problems when they become irate, or just pointing them to a canned bandage response, I'm trying to get that infrastructure fixed. 

 

For 95% of AT&T's millions of customer, the system works just fine.  Are they perfect, shoot no, but no one company is.  Even the company I work for that prides itself on fantastic customer care has a few bad apples.  The few times I've called customer service or technical support in the 4 years I've had UVerse, I've had my issues resolved the first time and very professionally. 

 

Everything that I've seen so far on this forum points to a broken infrastructure and all you can do is apply a bandage to an open wound. 

 

You are basing your opinion on your experience.  I'm sorry that you haven't had the best luck, but your situation is the exception and not the norm.  People don't go online to say, hey, everything is working great.  What you find are those that have a bad experience will go online and complain.  Do a google search for Comcast, Time Warner, Direct TV, Dish Network, Charter complaints and you will find more pages than you can read. 

 

I haven't had time to go through all the past postings, but I've gone back at least a week, so far.  This forum and customer care structure is an attempt to placate irate customers after the system failed.  This should be an unnecessary system.  It's a symptom of AT&T structural failure at Tech Support.  I'm trying to get to someone that can fix that.  I will keep contacting AT&T through as many channels as necessary to find the right people that can effect change.

 

In this very short time that I've been on here, I've only seen you dismiss complaints and point people to the PM band-aid to get your community award points.  Good for you on being able to generate those canned responses and getting those points.  If you know how I can contact the right people please point me to them.  If you don't want to read the diatribes, then don't respond to them.  Politely point people to the forum rules and continue to generate the canned responses.  You're not helping AT&T with those dismissive responses.

 

Are the majority of my responsed canned in the customer support section, absolutely, you know why, because this is a peer to peer forum and none of us have access to any customer information.  We cannot access accounts for billing issues, we cannot send a technician to your house to fix an issue.  Sending a PM to Customer Care is a last resort method when normal channels have failed. 95% of AT&T customer never need to go that route as their issues are corrected the first time via a phone call to either technical support or customer service.  Even the few employees that are on these forums do not have access to your (the customers) information or cannot dispatch a technician, they will tell you to PM Customer Care as well.

 

The manager that did read my PM misread my much shorter message and left for an early weekend.  Until then I will keep posting what I believe to be a fix that will eventually help AT&T and its customers long term.  Customers should not have to put up with such a broken system.

 

 

All I've seen you do in the short time you've been here is post the same thing in every post. 


 

” Auto racing, bull fighting, and mountain climbing are the only real sports … all others are games.”- Ernest Hemingway
*The views and opinions expressed on this forum are purely my own. Any product claim, statistic, quote, or other representation about a product or service should be verified with the manufacturer, provider, or party.

Re: Uverse is not really optical cable?

[ Edited ]
19 of 23 (1,009 Views)
0
(0)
  • Rate this reply
View profile
Sep 7, 2013 8:32:56 AM
0
(0)
Scholar

For thase 95%, great for them.  Their issue was simple and the canned response works.  Woe to the 5%, then?  Tough luck?  You get what you pay for?  Are you telling me that those 5% don't matter?  I certainly know that the other companies have the similar problems.  I'm not with those other companies.  I happen to have AT&T.  It's troublesome to quit too.  You have to deal with 2 companies with bad tech support.  I'd rather deal with just the one and possibly fix the one issue that I believe will help make it better.

 

Just deal with it?  Well, I am.  If I can make my own future experience and that of others, better, I'm going to do it.  I'm not going to settle for poor support experience.

 

I see a specific probliem with the way support calls are handled.  Judging by the some of the complaints I see on this board, others are having a similar problem.  So yes, I'm repeating myself about the issue to each of the posts that I see similar to mine in the hopes that people see what I see.  If they do, then I know I'm right about that issue.  I believe there is a perfectly valid solution to my problem that seems to fit many others in the tech support area.

 

Is it opinion?  Maybe.  I don't have quite enough data to fully support my hypothesis.  As more people post their experiences, and as I read farther back to past experiences, I see a pattern.  That pattern is a poor Phone Call Center support structure that can't serve people with more complex problems. That scripted response, can only work for very simple matters and provides a roadblock to customers that need escalation sooner.  Customers shouldn't have to contact a separate complaint/customer care department to get to the correct person for escalation or resolution.  I just wasn't expecting that pattern to reveal itself so quickly and obviously.  And, this can be fixed rather simply.  Customers don't work for AT&T, so they don't know how to navigate their support structure.

 

 

The post I've responded to are the most recent ones and I believe they have encountered the same problem.  If you see that same pattern, please help me out.  I'm also trying to get through to the call center to get the fixed.  So yes, I will repeat myself.  I'm working on the same specific issue.  I'm not trying to solve everything else, becase I don't know the solution to everything else.

For thase 95%, great for them.  Their issue was simple and the canned response works.  Woe to the 5%, then?  Tough luck?  You get what you pay for?  Are you telling me that those 5% don't matter?  I certainly know that the other companies have the similar problems.  I'm not with those other companies.  I happen to have AT&T.  It's troublesome to quit too.  You have to deal with 2 companies with bad tech support.  I'd rather deal with just the one and possibly fix the one issue that I believe will help make it better.

 

Just deal with it?  Well, I am.  If I can make my own future experience and that of others, better, I'm going to do it.  I'm not going to settle for poor support experience.

 

I see a specific probliem with the way support calls are handled.  Judging by the some of the complaints I see on this board, others are having a similar problem.  So yes, I'm repeating myself about the issue to each of the posts that I see similar to mine in the hopes that people see what I see.  If they do, then I know I'm right about that issue.  I believe there is a perfectly valid solution to my problem that seems to fit many others in the tech support area.

 

Is it opinion?  Maybe.  I don't have quite enough data to fully support my hypothesis.  As more people post their experiences, and as I read farther back to past experiences, I see a pattern.  That pattern is a poor Phone Call Center support structure that can't serve people with more complex problems. That scripted response, can only work for very simple matters and provides a roadblock to customers that need escalation sooner.  Customers shouldn't have to contact a separate complaint/customer care department to get to the correct person for escalation or resolution.  I just wasn't expecting that pattern to reveal itself so quickly and obviously.  And, this can be fixed rather simply.  Customers don't work for AT&T, so they don't know how to navigate their support structure.

 

 

The post I've responded to are the most recent ones and I believe they have encountered the same problem.  If you see that same pattern, please help me out.  I'm also trying to get through to the call center to get the fixed.  So yes, I will repeat myself.  I'm working on the same specific issue.  I'm not trying to solve everything else, becase I don't know the solution to everything else.

Re: Uverse is not really optical cable?

20 of 23 (974 Views)
0
(0)
  • Rate this reply
View profile
Sep 7, 2013 9:10:54 AM
0
(0)
Guru

willchen wrote:

For thase 95%, great for them.  Their issue was simple and the canned response works.  Woe to the 5%, then?  Tough luck?  You get what you pay for?  Are you telling me that those 5% don't matter?  I certainly know that the other companies have the similar problems.  I'm not with those other companies.  I happen to have AT&T.  It's troublesome to quit too.  You have to deal with 2 companies with bad tech support.  I'd rather deal with just the one and possibly fix the one issue that I believe will help make it better.

 

Just deal with it?  Well, I am.  If I can make my own future experience and that of others, better, I'm going to do it.  I'm not going to settle for poor support experience.

 

I see a specific probliem with the way support calls are handled.  Judging by the some of the complaints I see on this board, others are having a similar problem.  So yes, I'm repeating myself about the issue to each of the posts that I see similar to mine in the hopes that people see what I see.  If they do, then I know I'm right about that issue.  I believe there is a perfectly valid solution to my problem that seems to fit many others in the tech support area.

 

Is it opinion?  Maybe.  I don't have quite enough data to fully support my hypothesis.  As more people post their experiences, and as I read farther back to past experiences, I see a pattern.  That pattern is a poor Phone Call Center support structure that can't serve people with more complex problems. That scripted response, can only work for very simple matters and provides a roadblock to customers that need escalation sooner.  Customers shouldn't have to contact a separate complaint/customer care department to get to the correct person for escalation or resolution.  I just wasn't expecting that pattern to reveal itself so quickly and obviously.  And, this can be fixed rather simply.  Customers don't work for AT&T, so they don't know how to navigate their support structure.

 

 

 

 The post I've responded to are the most recent ones and I believe they have encountered the same problem.  If you see that same pattern, please help me out.  I'm also trying to get through to the call center to get the fixed.  So yes, I will repeat myself.  I'm working on the same specific issue.  I'm not trying to solve everything else, becase I don't know the solution to everything else.


It seems there is agreement that the existing customer support system works well for the large majority of customers, but that there is a minority of customers with more involved situations that require escalation beyond Tier 2.  You state that there is a fault with the customer support system, that there is a valid solution, and that it is simple.  You make this same case in multiple posts that vary somewhat, but are essentially the same.  But, as far as I can see, you do not ever state that solution in specific terms.  Maybe I am missing something, but nowhere in your posts have I seen any exact or specific suggestions you might have that could be constructive.  

 

While I have had very good overall customer service experience with U-verse, I concede that the call centers are not perfect.  But the system works for the majority of subscribers, and I do not see any indication in your posts as to just what steps you would take to repair the system for the minority.  At the risk of being blunt, your posts impress me as being more reminiscent of a manifesto than of a call for help, or constructive criticism.  So if you have specific, constructive suggestions, please post them.  If I have missed them, please direct me toward them.  You are certainly entitled to post opinions within forum guidelines, but the repetition without specifics is not really solving anything.

 

"Everything should be made as simple as possible--but not simpler."
--Albert Einstein

willchen wrote:

For thase 95%, great for them.  Their issue was simple and the canned response works.  Woe to the 5%, then?  Tough luck?  You get what you pay for?  Are you telling me that those 5% don't matter?  I certainly know that the other companies have the similar problems.  I'm not with those other companies.  I happen to have AT&T.  It's troublesome to quit too.  You have to deal with 2 companies with bad tech support.  I'd rather deal with just the one and possibly fix the one issue that I believe will help make it better.

 

Just deal with it?  Well, I am.  If I can make my own future experience and that of others, better, I'm going to do it.  I'm not going to settle for poor support experience.

 

I see a specific probliem with the way support calls are handled.  Judging by the some of the complaints I see on this board, others are having a similar problem.  So yes, I'm repeating myself about the issue to each of the posts that I see similar to mine in the hopes that people see what I see.  If they do, then I know I'm right about that issue.  I believe there is a perfectly valid solution to my problem that seems to fit many others in the tech support area.

 

Is it opinion?  Maybe.  I don't have quite enough data to fully support my hypothesis.  As more people post their experiences, and as I read farther back to past experiences, I see a pattern.  That pattern is a poor Phone Call Center support structure that can't serve people with more complex problems. That scripted response, can only work for very simple matters and provides a roadblock to customers that need escalation sooner.  Customers shouldn't have to contact a separate complaint/customer care department to get to the correct person for escalation or resolution.  I just wasn't expecting that pattern to reveal itself so quickly and obviously.  And, this can be fixed rather simply.  Customers don't work for AT&T, so they don't know how to navigate their support structure.

 

 

 

 The post I've responded to are the most recent ones and I believe they have encountered the same problem.  If you see that same pattern, please help me out.  I'm also trying to get through to the call center to get the fixed.  So yes, I will repeat myself.  I'm working on the same specific issue.  I'm not trying to solve everything else, becase I don't know the solution to everything else.


It seems there is agreement that the existing customer support system works well for the large majority of customers, but that there is a minority of customers with more involved situations that require escalation beyond Tier 2.  You state that there is a fault with the customer support system, that there is a valid solution, and that it is simple.  You make this same case in multiple posts that vary somewhat, but are essentially the same.  But, as far as I can see, you do not ever state that solution in specific terms.  Maybe I am missing something, but nowhere in your posts have I seen any exact or specific suggestions you might have that could be constructive.  

 

While I have had very good overall customer service experience with U-verse, I concede that the call centers are not perfect.  But the system works for the majority of subscribers, and I do not see any indication in your posts as to just what steps you would take to repair the system for the minority.  At the risk of being blunt, your posts impress me as being more reminiscent of a manifesto than of a call for help, or constructive criticism.  So if you have specific, constructive suggestions, please post them.  If I have missed them, please direct me toward them.  You are certainly entitled to post opinions within forum guidelines, but the repetition without specifics is not really solving anything.

 

Re: Uverse is not really optical cable?

21 of 23 (964 Views)
0
(0)
  • Rate this reply
View profile
Sep 7, 2013 10:31:05 AM
0
(0)
Scholar

Thanks for highlighting those bits into bite sized sound bites.  The more relevent portions of are the bits that you haven't highlighted.

 

AT&T can be improved, so I'm going to do my best to fix it for the problem I had experience with.  I believe this is a forum.  I am just airing my issues just as others have.

 

Regards to all those who love the status quo.

Thanks for highlighting those bits into bite sized sound bites.  The more relevent portions of are the bits that you haven't highlighted.

 

AT&T can be improved, so I'm going to do my best to fix it for the problem I had experience with.  I believe this is a forum.  I am just airing my issues just as others have.

 

Regards to all those who love the status quo.

Re: Uverse is not really optical cable?

22 of 23 (937 Views)
0
(0)
  • Rate this reply
View profile
Sep 7, 2013 3:22:50 PM
0
(0)
ACE - Master

willchen wrote:

Thanks for highlighting those bits into bite sized sound bites.  The more relevent portions of are the bits that you haven't highlighted.

 

AT&T can be improved, so I'm going to do my best to fix it for the problem I had experience with.  I believe this is a forum.  I am just airing my issues just as others have.

 

Regards to all those who love the status quo.


Can it be improved, sure, but it's not "broken" as you state. When something works for 95% that's a pretty darn good system.  Are their exceptions, yep, but the system is not broken.  And yes, this is a forum, a peer to peer forum.  Even the AT&T community managers will tell you to send a PM to Customer Care so you addressing Mariana would in a direct question in another post is only going to get  you so far. 

” Auto racing, bull fighting, and mountain climbing are the only real sports … all others are games.”- Ernest Hemingway

willchen wrote:

Thanks for highlighting those bits into bite sized sound bites.  The more relevent portions of are the bits that you haven't highlighted.

 

AT&T can be improved, so I'm going to do my best to fix it for the problem I had experience with.  I believe this is a forum.  I am just airing my issues just as others have.

 

Regards to all those who love the status quo.


Can it be improved, sure, but it's not "broken" as you state. When something works for 95% that's a pretty darn good system.  Are their exceptions, yep, but the system is not broken.  And yes, this is a forum, a peer to peer forum.  Even the AT&T community managers will tell you to send a PM to Customer Care so you addressing Mariana would in a direct question in another post is only going to get  you so far. 

” Auto racing, bull fighting, and mountain climbing are the only real sports … all others are games.”- Ernest Hemingway
*The views and opinions expressed on this forum are purely my own. Any product claim, statistic, quote, or other representation about a product or service should be verified with the manufacturer, provider, or party.

Re: Uverse is not really optical cable?

23 of 23 (909 Views)
Share this post
Share this post