🚀 go-pugleaf

Geoff Gass <glg@tanzenmb.com> wrote:
>Adam H. Kerman <ahk@chinet.com> wrote:
>>Geoff Gass <glg@tanzenmb.com> wrote:
>>>Bruce Esquibel <bje@ripco.com> wrote:

>>>>No real point to this message, but feel like posting it.

>>>>There was some discussion recently about the Uverse service from AT&T and
>>>>areas where ONLY the internet part of it was available, no phone or
>>>>cable/video service.

>>>>It's just marketing.

>>>>They appear to have re-badged DSL, calling it Uverse. 

>>>confirmed.  I just did the check availability at my place, same thing,
>>>"Uverse is available!!", but not TV or phone, just internet and it's the
>>>same old DSL packages they've always had.

>>Not phone? Amazing.

>>They told me different in my area, that if I changed to Uverse, I'd get
>>phone that way, too, so VoIP which I didn't want (not at AT&T's rates).

>like bruce said, they're rebranding the plain old DSL as Uverse in areas
>that do not have the new stuff yet.  This was not the "uverse" DSL packages,
>it was the same old DSL packages they've had forever but available on the
>uverse page.

Not at the rates of speed he talked about. In my area, I had DSL a year
earlier than Uverse, before the Uverse box was stuck on top of a line
pole or on the back wall of a large apartment building. The 6 meg service
was not available through DSL. I have no idea where the device in the field
is that I'm provisioned from.

Maybe it depends on the neighborhood, but where I am, it's different equipment.