Jump to content
  • Welcome!

    Register and log in easily with Twitter or Google accounts!

    Or simply create a new Huddle account. 

    Members receive fewer ads , access our dark theme, and the ability to join the discussion!

     

AT&T purchases T-Mobile


Dpantherman

Recommended Posts

Sprint screwed us over several years ago. We left them for TMo. Verizon, here we come.

same happened to me. except I left them for Verizon.. ;)

im getting the DirecTV, Att phone and internet package next year. Most of my family has at&t, so i won't need to pick a plan w/ alot of minutes.

I would agree AT&T is pretty badass.. I would never in my effing life get TWC ever again. Once you leave them, you'll never go back. I understand there are people out there who are satisfied with TWC, but for those that actually enjoy getting the most that you pay for, DTV or ATT is the way to go.

I feel like DTV has caught up with ATT in a few of these bullet points below, but I don't have DTV, so I can't verify everything as of late. I also don't have HD channels with ATT (yet)..

DTV has an insane amount of HD channels (over 200+ available -vs- TWC's pooty 40..) ATT? not sure..

on my ATT setup, I can record 4 shows at the same time (-vs- TWC's pooty 2). So I can record 3 shows and watch a 4th.. or record 4 and watch on my DVR a 5th, as long as I'm using the DVR playback and not on live TV..

Also, ATT has a universal DVR setup, where I can stop my show in one room and pick it up in another.. DTV can do this as well now, IIRC.. Ask a TWC guy about this and they suddenly forgot how to speak in english..

As for the internet...

I've had Roadrunner for many years.. I've downloaded a lot of poo over those years..

TWC is slower than ATT..

I know, I know.. On paper, that isn't factual. You can hide their pooty product on paper, but the actual reality of the situation is TWC is not as fast as ATT..

there are a few reasons this could be the case..

one thing I can say is when I download 200mbs.. TWC could take half a day, while ATT is done in 15 minutes.. It is well known fact that TWC throttles down your internet after 15 minutes..

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Fwiw, the speed thing is more based on region and utilization than on carrier. Right now, TWC has a lot more customers than ATT for Internet useage in the Carolinas, but as ATT picks up more customers, I wonder if their infrastructure will keep up?

I switched to ATT from Road Runner because of cost and support, but I haven't noticed a difference in speed. ATT does have a smaller and more efficient modem though.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Fwiw, the speed thing is more based on region and utilization than on carrier. Right now, TWC has a lot more customers than ATT for Internet useage in the Carolinas, but as ATT picks up more customers, I wonder if their infrastructure will keep up?

I switched to ATT from Road Runner because of cost and support, but I haven't noticed a difference in speed. ATT does have a smaller and more efficient modem though.

there are a few reasons why I think the speed is better with my ATT connection than when I had TWC, but I'll fail to explain it well...

I think it has to do with how ATT setup their transformers (and must be within 3,000ft to receive service) -vs- the nature of how cable works and how many people are typically on it in a given area... Since DSL works better the closer you are to the signal, perhaps thats why mine turned out this way..

the results are all I can truly point to..

Link to comment
Share on other sites

there are a few reasons why I think the speed is better with my ATT connection than when I had TWC, but I'll fail to explain it well...

I think it has to do with how ATT setup their transformers (and must be within 3,000ft to receive service) -vs- the nature of how cable works and how many people are typically on it in a given area... Since DSL works better the closer you are to the signal, perhaps thats why mine turned out this way..

the results are all I can truly point to..

I use to know how DSL and Cable Internet worked, but its been so long since I looked at any of it, I have forgotten most of it. I know that DSL connections have to be within a certain distance of a trunk. I thought it was 3000 meters, but it might be feet.

If memory serves, in flat out speed, cable is a little faster, but tends to suffer more as utilization increases. Thats probably why my RR connection was very fast, as I live in a neighborhood with a lot of old people, and they probably didn't use the Internet for downloading and streaming as much as younger people do.

Regardless, I am happy with both. I don't do a lot of streaming or downloading though. I do work from home a lot though with a VPN into the office.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I use to know how DSL and Cable Internet worked, but its been so long since I looked at any of it, I have forgotten most of it. I know that DSL connections have to be within a certain distance of a trunk. I thought it was 3000 meters, but it might be feet.

If memory serves, in flat out speed, cable is a little faster, but tends to suffer more as utilization increases. Thats probably why my RR connection was very fast, as I live in a neighborhood with a lot of old people, and they probably didn't use the Internet for downloading and streaming as much as younger people do.

Regardless, I am happy with both. I don't do a lot of streaming or downloading though. I do work from home a lot though with a VPN into the office.

pretty much what I was thinking.. along with the same premise, if you are in a HIIIIIIIIIIGHLY populated area.. people will notice their picture looks really stretched out, which is a major downside to having cable..

I also like that AT&T gave us (well her) a wireless router. I figured we'd have to pay for it and do a rebate or something, but they gave it to us. Works really well too.

yeah, big fan, they even set up the network (sharing), and anything that keeps me from playing with teh intrawebz, the better..

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.


  • PMH4OWPW7JD2TDGWZKTOYL2T3E.jpg

  • Topics

  • Posts

    • Evero has his faults, but even in that loss, the team only gave up 20 points. Your post gets to the heart of the matter. We are not a talented team on defense at this time. Some of our younger guys may develop w/more playing time, but for now we have no impact players at LB or EDGE. We could really use a ball-hawking S on the back end as well. We have exactly two players that have to be accounted for on every play, D. Brown, and J.Horn. Mike Jackson has been solid. The other starters would probably be backups on most the upper echelon NFL teams. We really can't expect this team to a Top 10 defense with such a lack of talent. All things considered I've been somewhat impressed with how much better they have played this year.   https://www.teamrankings.com/nfl/stat/opponent-points-per-game   https://www.teamrankings.com/nfl/stat/opponent-average-team-passer-rating We are in the top 15 in terms of points allowed per game (22.6) and top 12 in defensive passer rating (88.9). And, we are doing this without a formidable PASS RUSH. Even our rushing defense has improved. We are #16 in rushing yards allowed per game (116) compared to 179 per game last season. https://www.teamrankings.com/nfl/stat/opponent-rushing-yards-per-game I wouldn't cry if Evero moved on after the season, but his defense isn't the biggest worry for our team.
    • The funny part is she looks older and not in a good way...
    • How about some line help, both sides, first. Trade XL before talking about a 1st round WR 3 years in a row. Or a TE or...drum roll...a QB to pair with a vet.  And if it's not a speedy route guy with hands then just hard pass. 
×
×
  • Create New...