Teacher
•
33 Messages
AT&T Fiber U-verse Picture Quality
I was a customer of DirecTV from around 2005 until 2015...was generally very happy. I got them because at the time (and even today) they were pioneers of HDTV. The only reason I decided to jump ship was because of the constant outages due to rain (in Florida we get rain just about every day during the summer).
When leaving DirecTV I decided to switch over to Comcast. Their prices were cheaper for me (my community has a special rate with them) and I was very impressed with the X1 software. One major downside, a LOT less HD channels than DirecTV and slightly inferior HD picture quality form that of DirecTV, although it was acceptable.
A few months ago AT&T came by community and started digging the necessary conduit for fiber. I was thrilled that I would now be able to get insanely fast internet PLUS fiber-based IP TV Service. I'd heard great things about FIOS TV, with many people saying that it's by far the best HD picture quality anywhere. Figuring that AT&T would be using fiber to run internet to my home (just like FIOS), I was excited at the possibility of having TV service with outstanding HD picture quality (just like FIOS). Or so I thought.
I've had the service for now two weeks and I have to say that I am extremely disappointed at the HD quality. I cannot watch any sporting event without being overwhelmed by all the compression artifacts. It's like they are overcompressing their streams.
To see if it was just me or if this was all in my head, tonight I signed up for the 7 day trial of DirecTV Now on my Apple TV and started watching a basketball game on there. I tuned into that same basketball game on U-Verse and it confirmed by biggest fears.... It is NOT me...the HD quality of U-Verse is terrible. Whereas on DirecTV Now you can clearly see edges, on U-Verse those same edges (like around the bodies of people on the court), looke blurry and fuzzy. Blacks look like dark greys.
I can totally understand why AT&T would feel the need to overcompress their signal for customers on the traditional, DSL-based U-Verse....I get it....that service has bandwidth limitations. But for someone who's on fiber, where there are no real bandwidth limitations, they should reduce the compression considerably and make it more like DirecTV or FIOS (or even Comcast).
So my question: Is there a plan to separate the customers with fiber from those with the legacy U-Verse internet service so that they can provide a better signal to those customers who are lucky enough to get fiber? Is AT&T doing anything to help improve the signal for those who can get fiber? Are there any plans? I feel like I have a massive pipe coming into my house with just a small trickle of water going through it. And I don't want to even think about going back to DirecTV....too many outages.
Bernardo
beatfan4
Scholar
•
153 Messages
7 years ago
There will be those here who will tell you to adjust your settings or that you don't know what you're talking about.
However, all you say is true. Just wait until it's snowing or confetti is raining down. Looks like colored smudges. I just left U-verse after 8 years and although the quality inproved dramatically over time, it still is nowhere near broadcast or the Google fiber signal I now have.
0
0
bernpass
Teacher
•
33 Messages
7 years ago
I can totally understand the predicament that AT&T is in...they were "late" to the fiber game, choosing instead to go with a fiber/copper hybrid for their high-speed post DSL services. So they had to develop a television platform that could accommodate the limitations of that slower platform. So I get that they had to overcompress the signal to allow for people to view TV and still keep some of their internet speeds. This is why Google Fiber and FIOS don't have this issue...they were built from the ground-up as 100% fiber-to-the-home systems, never having to accommodate older, slower technology.
What I don't understand (and they MUST do something about this) is why fiber customers have to live with the limitations of their legacy systems. Yes AT&T Fiber customers are given a bigger hard-drive for the DVR and are allowed 6 streams instead of 3 or 4. But that's just about the only difference. They have to increase the bandwidth that they allocate to each channel and upgrade the streaming accordingly...that's far more important to me than having 6 streams available instead of 4.
I just saw the Google Fiber TV page and one of the things they say on there is:
"Fiber TV is delivered through a fiber connection. A bigger pipe means less compression and a higher quality image. Our network has the bandwidth to bring you HD in all its glory."
This is PRECISELY what I expected from AT&T Fiber-based TV....and they need to do something about it. Doesn't make sense that a $35/month streaming service (DirecTV Now) would look so much better than their own TV offerings.
If they are going to start being aggressive about pushing AT&T Fiber (which I suspect they are since I'm starting to see tons of advertising everywhere), they need to make sure that customers are not disappointed, as I am, when they turn on their TV....and now....pushing DirecTV satellite is NOT a viable alternative (why the heck would I want an ugly satellite dish that goes out whenever it rains when I have fiber coming into my house?).
Bernardo
0
0
JefferMC
ACE - Expert
•
35K Messages
7 years ago
Your expectation is not a committment upon AT&T. I hope that AT&T will continue to provide any terrestrial multicast streaming option similar to the current U-verse TV.
0
0
bernpass
Teacher
•
33 Messages
7 years ago
Not sure what you mean by "Your expectation is not a committment upon AT&T." It SHOULD be a commitment to listen to and try to accommodate those people (their customers) who visit these forums. After all, satisified customers are the way to grow.
Bernardo
0
0
AdamG620
Tutor
•
1 Message
7 years ago
0
Lombarla
Contributor
•
1 Message
6 years ago
We recently relocated to the US and I purchased a new Tele and ordered uVerse at the same time. I've been thinking for 8 months I made a poor TV choice (2017 Samsung - hard to go wrong) but this clarified everything for me. I noticed over the air broadcasts via attenae was way crisper a few weeks back. It's a real shame.
0
0
skeeterintexas
ACE - Expert
•
27.7K Messages
6 years ago
Broadcast TV is not only free...it's better.
0
0
_xyzzy_
Expert
•
15K Messages
6 years ago
There is always less compression OTA than through any cable system. Of course IMO that may change over the next three years (channel re-packing) as more sub-channels are created now that half of our public airways have been auctioned off to the wireless companies.
0
0