$10 DSL

[patric]

I read the article about AT&T being required to offer their Lite DSL plan for $10, but didnt give it much thought until an AT&T telemarketer called from Canada selling DSL.

Never mind Im on the dont-call-list, or that I already have DSL.
I asked the salesman of this was about the $10 deal, and after a short pause he volunteered "if you qualify."

"I have a phone" I said, trying to not be too obvious.
...at least that's what the articles I've read say you have to have (since they dont yet offer "Naked DSL" which is DSL-only service with no phone).

"Oh, that's just for low-income families" he said.
He was wrong, and I let him know I knew that.
He ended the call.

If you go to the AT&T Web site, a page describing DSL options doesn't mention it, but clicking a link for "Term contract plans" reveals it. It's also presented to customers who go into the application process.

If you're currently a dial-up user, or want to drop expensive cable modem, Id consider ordering this service just to spite them.  The court apparently said they have to lock in the price for 2 1/2 years, and anyone in the AT&T "footprint" is eligible (this does include Tulsa).


http://arstechnica.com/news.ars/post/20070618-att-launches-10-dsl-it-hopes-no-one-signs-up-for.html

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/19305115/

[NellieBly]

Unfortunately, I am already at their mercies, paying 19.95/month. So I am not eligible.

[Conan71]

$10 DSL...uh, nevermind you guys are talking about broadband. []

[sgrizzle]

yeah you have to have phone, sign a contract and be a new subscriber. I am a slave to cox currently  and not that interested in switching. I haad dsl and it went down at least 5 times a week and customer service was horrid.

[YoungTulsan]

If you want good DSL, go with Tulsaconnect (the guys at the bottom of the forum page).  I had the most consistent reliable connection when I used them for DSL, although you are still at the mercy of Bell/AT&T's physical lines.  Cable seems to be more reliable from the actual lines.

I started off with SWBell DSL in 99, which was awesome at first for the novelty of high speed internet.  Then Cox came along and it looked to be cheaper for a faster speed.  So I switched to Cox.  Back in 02 or so, their network was horrible, with the connection dropping constantly.  Like it would literally hiccup every minute, where you could be browsing the internet just fine, but couldnt hold a connection to a server in a communication program.  I wanted a reliable connection so I switched to Tulsaconnect.  I was paying more for "less" speed, but it was 100% reliable, and the service was awesome too.  A live, technically competent and proficient person would answer the phone on the first ring.  If all I needed was a DNS server or something I could cut thru the BS, call up and be like hey I need the DNS number...  Here it is... done in 30 secs.  So I definately recieved value for my dollar.

Then I moved to BA in 04, which has/had a notoriously crappy phone company (At least at the time) Valor.  So while DSL was an OPTION, it wasn't really an option.  Not gonna go through them.  So I went back with Cox since it was basically the only option.  Over those two years they really made progress on having a stable connection and providing consistent speeds.  Over the last 3 years Cox has been problem free and the speeds have even increased.

So I cant really talk bad about Cox these days, but if you DONT go through cable and decide to use DSL, go with Tulsaconnect.

[sgrizzle]

To expand on the above statements, SBC and COX have been fighting over expanding and improving their systems. To this end, they often times put something into production before it's really 100% ready. They rate the internet and push connections to speeds as fast as they could "probably go" instead of using speeds they are 100% sure with.


SBC was running DSL over copper when it first came out. Reliability and speeds were very hit and miss. Many commercial providers would run DSL over and ISDN line which is higher quality than the standard home phone line. To fix these problems, SBC ran fiber throughout the city and now they use fiber which is capable of higher speeds and much more reliable.

Valor (now windstream) offers DSL but this is the old GTE system and GTE was very behind on maintenance and upgrades so tey have been playing "catch up" for years.

Using coax like Cox does gives the possibility for ever increasing internet speeds but these same cables are also pushing around 275 channels and phone service as well. Cabling and splitters seem to adversely effect cable more than dsl connections.

[bugo]

quote:Originally posted by YoungTulsan

If you want good DSL, go with Tulsaconnect (the guys at the bottom of the forum page).  I had the most consistent reliable connection when I used them for DSL, although you are still at the mercy of Bell/AT&T's physical lines.  Cable seems to be more reliable from the actual lines.

Do you have to have a telephone if you use them?  If so, do you have to get that phone line from AT&T?  I need to get internet access but I hate AT&T and you have to pay your bill by direct withdrawal if you use them, which I would rather not do.

[Conan71]

quote:Originally posted by sgrizzle

To expand on the above statements, SBC and COX have been fighting over expanding and improving their systems. To this end, they often times put something into production before it's really 100% ready. They rate the internet and push connections to speeds as fast as they could "probably go" instead of using speeds they are 100% sure with.


SBC was running DSL over copper when it first came out. Reliability and speeds were very hit and miss. Many commercial providers would run DSL over and ISDN line which is higher quality than the standard home phone line. To fix these problems, SBC ran fiber throughout the city and now they use fiber which is capable of higher speeds and much more reliable.

Valor (now windstream) offers DSL but this is the old GTE system and GTE was very behind on maintenance and upgrades so tey have been playing "catch up" for years.

Using coax like Cox does gives the possibility for ever increasing internet speeds but these same cables are also pushing around 275 channels and phone service as well. Cabling and splitters seem to adversely effect cable more than dsl connections.

I didn't know the Southern Baptist Convention had gotten into telecom. []

When DSL first came into the area, I lived too far from, what was it, a switch or switching station?  I finally got Cox out of necessity for my home at the time.  

When I had my own business, I stuck w/ Cox and had pretty good service.  If we had an outage,  I went to the front of the line since I was a commercial customer.  As I remember we had some IP issues initially.  My business was mostly  internet-based retail.  If I was down for any length of time it was a PITA.

Where I work now, we have DSL and it's been pretty reliable, though it does go down every now and then.