AT&T's 'Expansion' of 1 Gbps to 100 Cities is a Big, Fat Bluff

Re:AT&T's 'Expansion' of 1 Gbps to 100 Cities is a Big, Fat ... by xhrpost on Monday April 21, 2014 @02:36PM (#7622768)

They run fiber to their Uverse nodes and then apparently tell their salespeople to sell this as a feature. I remember one telling me the benefits of a "fiber optic signal" somehow going to my house over copper. I still ended up switching later on since they're cheaper than my local cable provider, though network performance doesn't seem to be as good.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:AT&T's 'Expansion' of 1 Gbps to 100 Cities is a Big, Fat ... by cones688 on Monday April 21, 2014 @03:39PM (#7623170)

> benefits of a "fiber optic signal" somehow going to my house over copper

This is what is sold in the UK a lot, its called fibre to the cabinet (FTC) and does indeed make a difference, if your cabinet is on the street corner (100m) that beats the 1 mile maybe to the actual exchange as a lot of internet speed is dictated by the decay one gets with copper signals.

[0] http://www.thinkbroadband.com/guide/fibre-broadband.html

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:AT&T's 'Expansion' of 1 Gbps to 100 Cities is a Big, Fat ... by JonFish85 on Monday April 21, 2014 @03:34PM (#7623147)

Maybe they're using Monster cables, for a better digital signal? (Kidding, hopefully obviously)

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:AT&T's 'Expansion' of 1 Gbps to 100 Cities is a Big, Fat ... by deeviant on Monday April 21, 2014 @03:41PM (#7623185)

Nay, ATT would need 2x the GDP of the entire universe to acquire enough Monster Cable for that.

[ Parent | on HN ]