05-20-2013 1:19 AM
howdy yall i moved here to Tennessee three years ago from California and i am used to having a fast internet connection but currently i have a flex ip T-1 internet connection and its costing way to much its running my pocket book dry and i live dead center in a four maybe six mile gap with no dsl lines here and i wanted to try and see when dsl will be installed here i mean $455.66 a month for internet is not cool for residentral not office or buisness purposes can some one please help me on this please thanks
Solved by: Go to Solution.
05-20-2013 9:55 AM
Unluckily, ATT's plan was to leave 10-20% of ATT users out of luck for any type of residential DSL.
There are plans to provide service through ATT's 4G LTE wireless system, so if it's there, you might want to watch it for it.
In the 25 percent of AT&T's wireline customer locations where it's currently not economically feasible to build a competitive IP wireline network, the company said it will utilize its expanding 4G LTE wireless network -- as it becomes available -- to offer voice and high-speed IP Internet services. The company's 4G LTE network will cover 99 percent of all in-region customer locations. AT&T's 4G LTE network offers speeds competitive with, if not higher than, what is available on wired broadband networks today. And in many places, AT&T's 4G LTE service will be the first high speed IP broadband service available to many customers.
Please NO SD stretch-o-vision or 480 SD HD Channels
Need Help? 1-800-288-2020, After he gets acct info, press # a bunch of times, get a menu from Mr. Voice recognition
Your Results May Vary, In My Humble Opinion
I Call It Like I See It, Simply a U-verse user, nothing more
02-11-2014 8:23 AM
I think AT&T is missing the point. It's not that we all just want high speed internet, we want it at a reasonable cost as well. Providing a wireless solution is great for rural customers, but it's lower speed, higher cost with data limits (which really screws you if you want to work from home and need to transfer a lot of data/files). Make it the same relative cost as a wired solution and remove the data limits and then you would have the basis to say your providing a good service to the rest of the country that you decided to just forget about. I hate to think someone said.. "ahh screw it, we did a decent job getting to the majority of folks, the rest can just use wireless if they really want a high speed solution" but it sure seems like it.
I see so many posts on here where folks have identified "low hanging fuit" for AT&T to install a DSLAM they may have removed where they upgraded to a U-verse setup somewhere else. Maybe I'm missing something, maybe it's not that easy to recycle older equipment..??? We do it all the time with automated machinery at my work. Satisifies a need and saves the company money.
We live in area where there is no broadband solution other than wireless or satellite. There are about 50 homes (nice homes, $200k+) that would benefit from at least DSL if not U-verse. There is no cable available either (so no competition). It would be easy pickens for the AT&T to upgrade the local equipment and easily pay for it within months. The really frustrating thing is we are within 1 mile of the city limits. We moved 7 miles closer to the city from where we had DSL for years... go figure.
So now AT&T totally lost our business about a year ago. We now have Verizon wireless for phone and internet. I occasionally check for DSL or U-verse, but it clearly is a waste of time based upon AT&Ts direction.
02-11-2014 11:59 AM
11-24-2014 1:32 PM
I have a rural area apartment. I ordered U-Verse Elite ("up to 6mbps") and got the DSL modem with it. The speeds were so slow (less than 1mbps) that I canceled U-Verse and got a 4G LTE access point instead and added it to my pre-existing shared data plan. The download speeds are 20-30mbps on the 4G. Much better as long as I watch the data usage and don't go over my plan allotment. It's still expensive though.