jrb531 wrote:
My argument does not fall apart and you know it. Attempting to muck up my posts by casting me as a loon may or may not work but I'll explain for others as I'm sure you full well already know what I'm talking about.
Line noise and interfearence increase on copper wire based on distance. The farther the copper run, the more issues. To combat this you add both error checking (1) (basically resending bad packets) and limiting the bandwidth spectrum used.
My point is simple... Lets for the sake of discussion say that AT&T had "unlimited" bandwidth to our homes and that there was ZERO limitations.
1. Would people be limited to 1,2 or 3 channels of HD?
2. Would people be limited to the present internet speeds?
3. Would the current video need to be as compressed as it is now?
(2) 4. Would free VOD still be in SD?
(3) AT&T is pushing the limits of their bandwidth (IE stressing the system) in order to try and compete with other pay TV providers who are not bandwidth starved (Verizon with Fiber, Dish and Cable) and the example would be a 4 cylinder car that is suped up trying to compete with an eight cylynder car. Sure the smaller engine can keep up a bit but it's going to work harder and be under MUCH more stress vs the engine that was designed from the start to be able to handle the extra workload.
So try and make me sound like some kind of nutjob (4) all you want because it's your job to promote AT&T - facts or not but this will not change what Uverse can do and what it cannot do.
If AT&T cared more about stability and less about bandwidth and bottom line they would have kept everyone at the 25mps profile. (5) We can all see in our routers how the bump from 25 to 32mps dropped stability. SO far it's still above the minimum tolerances but (as my point in the prior post) there is now "less" margin for error. In perfect conditions everything is fine... in non-perfect condiditons Uverse can fall apart.
1. Completely incorrect. There is no resend of bad packets, errors are corrected by forward error correction (FEC) which does not involve a retransmission. This incorrect information is yet another example of how you make stuff up when you don't know the actual facts.
2. Lack of VOD in HD has nothing at all to do with any bandwidth limitation, it has to do with AT&T's business decisions to not make it available. Pay-VOD in HD is very available and uses the same bandwidth. Another example of how your generalizations lead to inaccurate statements.
3. You are not anywhere near qualified to judge whether the VDSL system is "stressed" or not because you don't understand how it works. Nevermind that the entire notion that the system is "stressed" is a farce in the first place. This is a digital system. It either works as designed or it doesn't due to a hardware fault. There is no "stress" here so this entire paragraph of yours is made-up claptrap.
4. If you wish to assign a name to yourself, I won't stop you. But I'm not getting personal here, I'm just refuting your inaccuracies and vague half-truths. I don't "promote" AT&T. I promote facts. Something most of your posts are lacking in.
5. You have absolutely no evidence whatsoever of this supposed "drop in stability". I have an entire database of line statistics that show that barring a hardware problem, this system works properly and as designed. This is what's called evidence, something else your posts lack. It leads to a supposition of fact. A fact is something that remains true, even when your posts ignore them.
Make no mistake jrb, I will call out your inaccuracies in your posts every time you post them. I won't let you or anyone else get away with this propaganda campaign you have against scientific facts. Here's a list of what is actually true:
1. AT&T has more national HD channels than any other provider. Evidence.
2. Nearly 75% of the people connected to U-Verse have or qualify for the 32 Mbps profile, with 3 simultaneous HD channels. Another 10-15% have or qualify for 2 simultaneous HD channels. Evidence.
3. AT&T is about to increase the number of simulteneous HD channels by one for everyone. Evidence.
4. Pair bonding is officially deployed, which extends useful range of U-Verse service to 4000-5000 feet. Evidence.
5. Evidence exists that cable companys' HD quality is no better than U-Verse's. Evidence. So even if they have larger bandwidth available, it is doing no good. Plus, it raises the question that if they have all this bandwidth available, why did they have to increase compression?
Feel free to provide any concrete facts that support your position. So far, there are none. Or will you simply post more opinionated, slanted, agenda-driven propaganda?
texasguy37
