Slashdot Mirror
AT&T Quietly Introduces $10/Month DSL
prostoalex writes "As part of the deal with the FCC to approve the AT&T/BellSouth merger, AT&T started selling, but not advertising, a $10-per-month DSL service in 22 states, AP has learned. 'The service provides download speeds of up to 768 kilobits per second and upload speeds of up to 128 kbps, matching the speeds of the cheapest advertised AT&T plan, which costs $19.95 per month in the nine-state former BellSouth area and $14.99 in the 13 states covered by AT&T before the acquisition.'"
...oversubscribing on a small amount of bandwidth and end up clipping real-world performance down to ISDN or dial-up levels on a regular basis?
Dealing with AT&T is just not worth it for cheap Internet Service. Even if it were free, I don't think I'd go for it. Besides, if it goes anything like my experience getting phone service from them, that $10 will really be $25 a month with all the extra fees and surcharges they are sure to add on.
So let's review. It forces people who don't have a line with AT&T, and presumably don't want one, to get one -- upping the price. And people who already have service with them, can't get it.
Nice work, FCC, nice work. This is a 'concession'? What did you have to give them? (Besides your bank account numbers, to deposit the cash.)
"Ladies and gentlemen, my killbot features Lotus Notes and a machine gun. It is the finest available."
The article mentioned that it was difficult to locate information about the service. Does anyone know if the FCC has the power to not only force them to offer the plan, but also to make it (reasonably) accessible? I'm not talking about posting it on every billboard, but hey, it looks like they're banking on people not knowing about this service.
I'm a student. I write iPhone apps.
To get ATT DSL, you need to sign up for a 1 or 2 year contract, pay an installation fee, and buy their landline service.
Because anybody with a clue is using VoIP by this point, these terms basically mean their $10 DSL costs $35 (=$10 for DSL + $25 for worthless phone service) PLUS the amortized cost of installation and the effective cost of an illiquid 1-2 year contract.
Note: Last time I priced DSL, these were the requirements. They may have changed, and if so, feel free to correct me. Until T unbundles their services, though, I'm sticking to cable.
A slashdotter who didn't build his own computer is like a Jedi who didn't build his own lightsaber.
DSL is available in my area, but not my prefix. So I'd have to change my phone number to get it. OK, I could probably deal with that, but then they'd charge me for the line change too. So I stay with cable for now. DSL would probably be cheaper per month, but I just hate dealing with the phone company soooo much....
Sure 768k is underspeed for some purposes, but that's plenty fast for most people's day to day usage: web, email and a bit of youtube. 768k is a huge step up from dial up.
Engineering is the art of compromise.
I've had Comcast cable internet and it's like $60-70 a month around here. It was alright, but my big beef was the upload was only 40kB/s. How hard would it be to get like six of these lines and rig them up so that I have almost 100kB/s upload bandwidth for the same price?
And then the real question, if they can offer me that service for that price, why the fuck won't anybody just sell me a cable or DSL line with more upload bandwidth? I would be willing to pay more.
I just ordered it for someone today that already had POTS.
Got the 1.5Mbps package for $20/month. Did it online,
which probably helps.
The catch is that you also have to purchase a DSL modem ($50)
or a combo DSL Modem/Router ($80), plus another $27 for S&H.
And you'll definitely want to skip the $200 technician option
to install it for you.
You are being MICROattacked, from various angles, in a SOFT manner.
A quantity of states is provided in numeric form, but how about a list?
Procrastination -- because good things come to those who wait.
Its there for anyone signing up, as its on their page.
:(.
I'm still stuck on crappy dialup or one way services.
lol: You see no door there!
I would be more concerned about the 128k upload than 768 down. I mean, you do want to be able to talk to the other party right? That being said, even 128k is enough for 2 POTs lines using standard compression (64k/DS0), though the VoIP packet overhead would probably force a higher compression to actually use 2 lines at the same time. It sounds nice and all, until you compare price/kbs against other countries and remind yourself again, that the US is still falling off the backend of the broadbandwagon. Its cheap, and ideal for people like my parents, who would only be downloading emails and the occasional video or picture page forwarded by me or other family members. The upstream is a bit weak compared to other offerings, but I wouldnt get this service if I were serious about gaming anyways (yes, you can play WoW over it, even over 56k modem, just not very well and if it gets into a complex scene, forget about it).
Tm
Support TBI Research: http://www.raisinhope.org
At&t also quietly forgets to mention that all of your traffic is being spied on and sold privately. Enjoy!
http://www.bellsouth.com/consumer/inetsrvcs/inetsr vcs_agreement_plans_pop.html right there on their website, thanks consumerist!
Does the name Pavlov ring a bell?
If your using dialup currently and its doing the trick, this isnt a bad option. it mght be a few bucks cheaper and a lot better.
Sure, if you want to do gaming, or 'warez' it migt hurt, but how many average people really need more bandwidth then this? If its still around, I might even consider it when i drop my real broadband after the big squeeze starts across the industry and i cant use my line for what i want anyway. Why pay extra just to be throttled and filtered?
---- Booth was a patriot ----
* shrugs *
:D
I use AT&T DSL, and it works great. I didn't pay any installation fee. And it doesn't cost nearly what cable does.
Besides, your statement that anyone with a clue uses VOIP is a little ridiculous. Like all blanket statements, it's absolutely false
Seriously, why do you say that? Personally, I prefer POTS to VOIP. If nothing else, POTS has proven reliability. It's certainly much simpler than VOIP. When it comes to essentials like telephone service, the simpler the better; it has fewer failure points. How could you possibly argue that something that relies on a high speed internet connection and a working PC is better than a simple POTS line and then imply that anyone who has POTS is clueless?
blah blah blah
I've had Ameritech or SBC or ATT DSL for over seven years now. Here's what it costs for May 2007: Telephone (excluding calls & Call-Waiting): $16.08, DSL Basic:$14.99. Tonight's line test: 1313kps download / 313kps upload. Other than the fact that the DSL charge will go up to $19.99 upon renewal, it's done nothing but get less expensive. My only grip is that on the rare occasion when I have to call customer service, I have to deal with some off-shore help center. I always demand level two support immediately.
www.itjerk.com
FYI, there are two VoIP codecs which are common: G711 is relatively uncompressed, and when Ethernet overheads are included, comes out to about 80K per stream (yes, much more than POTS). G729a is highly compressed, and runs about 8K. There is a significant MOS score difference between the two codecs, and many IP Telephony add-ons (lots of voice mail, for instance) requires G711.
-David
Need Geek Rock? Try The Franchise!
Ever notice how high speed internet connections are always sold as "up to" so-and-so speed? That doesn't mean anything to me - I want to know the lowest it can go and the typical up/down speeds. I'm just glad my salary isn't an "up to".
I use irony whenever I can, but my shirts are still wrinkled...
Oh god, here we go again with the geographic dispersion argument. Stop it already. Even in densely packed urban areas in the US we still can't get broadband as fast as they do in other developed nations. So your argument is crap. We deserve better after all the hundreds of dollars per capita we've thrown at the telecommunications companies through our tax dollars. Don't forget that.
Manhattan still doesn't have fast enough broadband to rival a Swedish village. You tell me if it's a fair comparison.
In Repressive Burma, it's not just your connection that dies. slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=314547&cid=20819199
My home and residential neighborhood were built in 1973. A state highway with the highest traffic flow in Illinois (Il-159) passes just 200 yards from my home. The Metro East area across the Mississippi River from St. Louis, MO has a population of well over 200,000 yet since 1992 I've been unable to order anything but POTS from Illinois Bell, Ameritech, SBC, and now AT&T. "Not currently available" is the perennial status. The cold hard truth is that AT&T refuses to upgrade its physical plant from the classic copper-based exchange-centric service model. Oh, for years they've made widely-publicized promises of universal broadband service to the Illinois legislature, then refused to install the fiber-connected satellite equipment needed to expand DSL coverage beyond the 16,000-odd cable feet radius limits around their existing dial central offices (exchanges). A pin map shows that AT&T offers DSL service ONLY within those areas served by their existing copper cable plants, and they don't give a damn about investing in the infrastructure needed for universal service. They just keep milking that ol' copper cable plant for all it's worth.
I have ATT (one other choice in the area is accounts managed by Comcast so internet alone would run $80 a month). The trick is to get the lowest possible phone line you only get a few calls a month with it which is fine (you can use vonage, grandcentral or other such services). They of course will jerk you around and try to sell you more phone service than you need. I got signed up with no problems but the installation tech didn't show up during his 4 hour window. So I called told them I was going back to work and he couldn't show up until after 4 and he needed to call before he came. He didn't call when he showed up but he did call to ask why I wasn't there for my appointment. I told him to call his office they had a message for him. I eventually got the installation fee waved after a few trips between billing, customer service and a large conference call with people from 3 different departments. Back when I signed up they were offering a cash card to offset the installation fee (so yes I got free installation and the card) when I signed up I was told I would get a $100 card. When I got the form for the card it was only for $50 I called and complained. They said they would credit my account for $50 (I made the CS worker stay on the line while I checked my online bill). I filled the card form out mailed it in and eventually received a $100 card (plus the credit). When I signed up they said I could combine my billing with my Cingular phone and monthly discount. When I called to get that they said they couldn't since I didn't actually have an ATT phone number, I protested and they said I still had a Bell number it hadn't been switched to ATT. That call ended in a conference call between them, me and Cingualr, they could do nothing. A few weeks later I was at the Cingular store so I asked, they lady there said she couldn't help that ATT in our state couldn't combine and she was receiving about 10 complaints a day.