Comments on: AT&T's Slowing Down on U-verse

By: CJ

CJ — Tue, 29 Dec 2009 08:17:00 +0000

Well, I'll contribute here from the consumer's end. It was not ready to market when it did. My U-Verse Phone Salesman was way short of reality. Installation Day I told the miffed installer to yank it! 7 days/8 installers later they finally made all of it work. Then came three sets of no phone service for ten days at a time; let go of cell from spending much $$$ on calls over UV! Nobody mentioned my AT&T DSL email address would NOT be accessible later after they set me up with my UV ID mail address so I loose important business whichever one their system picks up as THE UV mail. Therefore, can't put it on auto payment. The list goes on & on. In short, it's been a Royal Pain.

By: Tech head

Tech head — Fri, 31 Jul 2009 03:55:26 +0000

To point out an error, a good deal of uverse techs are union members who are involved in the current labor negotiatiomns. If CWA strikes then most of the U-verse techs will be out on strike along with the techs who handle pots and their office workers.

By: UverseTEch

UverseTEch — Sun, 28 Jun 2009 00:09:43 +0000

Uverse could be a great product I have so many great suggestions for them. A move away form microcrap is the the first, I mean how hard would that be? Fttn does not ruin uverse. They have gone about things wrong and now are bleeding money and back peddling. The slow down of the economy could have been the best thing for At&T/Uverse …But they played their cards wrong. Now Its time to pay up.

By: Phoneman

Phoneman — Sun, 07 Jun 2009 14:30:24 +0000

I work for AT&T as a technician and uverse is on board for “full steam ahead.” The problem is no one is at the helm.

By: Is AT&T preparing to ditch the fixed line business? |

Is AT&T preparing to ditch the fixed line business? | — Fri, 05 Jun 2009 22:58:42 +0000

[...] AT&T has slowed the pace of its U-verse build. We initially  expected AT&T to pass 11M incremental homes in 2009 but scaled back our  expectations to 7M after the company pushed out its build-out plans. We now  expect the company to pass just 4-5M new U-verse homes in 2009, down from  9M in 2008. (Gigaom) [...]

By: T-imp

T-imp — Fri, 05 Jun 2009 19:55:08 +0000

There’s other factors in the U-verse deployment besides costs and the server requirements. The pending union strike would cause the U-verse contractors to be used for basic landline work. More importantly, the copper upgrades is facing high resistance in city governments. The corner neighborhood nodes are unsightedly; and the yard boxes are hokey with green plastic covers. City managers are viewing Verizon as a healthy competitor to cable for advancing the community’s technology. AT&T is perceived as a revenue predator exploiting the residents. And AT&T continues the telephone company marketing. Their new small business bundle was announced as including CallerID. Who is going to buy IPTV from a company still focused on landline calling features?

By: Bean

Bean — Fri, 05 Jun 2009 19:53:19 +0000

Anyone know if they are slowing down in Michigan? I’ve been waiting for it to pass my house. Though after reading some of the comments here, maybe it’s better if they don’t.

By: Gadgetress

Gadgetress — Fri, 05 Jun 2009 19:34:04 +0000

Verizon FiOS is slowing down too, at least in Southern California http://bit.ly/v1vyk

By: Oh no! U-verse rollout slowing down - Alt+Save with the Gadgetress - OCRegister.com

Fri, 05 Jun 2009 18:53:42 +0000

[...] From a report at GigaOm, UBS Research analyst John Hodulik told clients that AT&T has scaled back the number of homes [...]

By: DailyWireless » Blog Archive » Friday Links: U-Verse, MID Devices, Clearwire

Fri, 05 Jun 2009 15:34:44 +0000

[...] Gigaom reports that AT&T is slowing down on the roll out of U-verse. [...]

By: Ma Bell and Its Vanishing Phone Lines

Ma Bell and Its Vanishing Phone Lines — Fri, 05 Jun 2009 15:17:29 +0000

[...] I find more surprising is that AT&T is slowing down its U-verse rollout. From the looks of it, people actually like this product (mostly because they hate their cable [...]

By: Alex

Alex — Fri, 05 Jun 2009 15:06:52 +0000

@Russ

Yes, you’re 100% correct. This was part of a horse trade deal.

Microsoft IPTV platform doesn’t even allow for transcoding. I really thought someone was kidding me when they told me this. But, this is not a joke as I had to shelf an offering to them…

By: Om Malik

Om Malik — Fri, 05 Jun 2009 14:34:21 +0000

Oh this reminds me of a contortionist trying to untie himself after finding itself contorted. ;-)

By: Om Malik

Om Malik — Fri, 05 Jun 2009 14:33:27 +0000

I agree with you. For the longest time I asked them about this very question and they always maintained that it would work. I think on this one Verizon made the right bet. What do they say – penny wise, pound foolish.

By: Eideard

Eideard — Fri, 05 Jun 2009 14:24:18 +0000

Beancounters still don’t listen to nerds.

By: Russ

Russ — Fri, 05 Jun 2009 13:21:55 +0000

Many video savvy folks told AT&T MSFT wouldn’t scale – and at least a few folks within AT&T agreed. But the deal was done at the ~ CEO levels of AT&T and MSFT, so the AT&T managers had to tow the line….

Now AT&T is trying to figure out how to make MSFT IPTV work with Apple mobile strategy..hmm