I'm fine with AT&T no longer supporting landlines if they start supporting fiber to every household. US broadband is a joke compared to many other parts of the world.
On the other hand you have "cable is the future, I love copper" Germany
AT&T applies to end obligation to service landlines in California
51–60 of 217 posts
Re: AT&T applies to end obligation to service landlines in California
#52Earlier quoted context omitted.
Citation needed. The US is #8 in median speed for home broadband and #13 in mobile. Considering that anything above 15mbps is enough for 4K Ultra Netflix I think the US is doing just fine. https://www.speedtest.net/global-index/united-states
Christ do you remember 15mbps? those were dark days.
I'm grateful for 5mbps when traveling.
Re: AT&T applies to end obligation to service landlines in California
#53If anyone is wondering about first reponders' use of land lines, that necessity is to be alleviated with the United States setting aside some spectrum in 700MHz back in 2012.
Do a search for "band 14" - here is something to look at: FirstNet
https://www.firstnet.com/coverage/band-14.html
[My household used to be required to have a land line ages ago and I still pay (slight) attention to things in this space. I do not have first-hand experience any more with such matters.]
Re: AT&T applies to end obligation to service landlines in California
#54I'm fine with AT&T no longer supporting landlines if they start supporting fiber to every household. US broadband is a joke compared to many other parts of the world.
I wonder if that's because the USA is that stupid, or if it's just not as population dense as other countries with faster speeds? According to this statistic, it's not very dense, meaning it's super expensive to build broadband. Because it's pretty much a question of physical area covered, not number of people serviced. This stat says the USA is on the lower end of density https://data.worldbank.org/indicator/EN.POP.…
New Zealand is way lower than the US on that measure - almost half the density - yet around 87% of households here have access to FTTP with speeds of up to 800Mbps/500Mbps (you can get a slower plan for lower cost, but the lines all support at least that). Around 40% have actually connected, mostly because people don't have a reason to change from VDSL2.
That metric isn't the right one to look at.
Re: AT&T applies to end obligation to service landlines in California
#55My wife keeps a land line because of superior voice quality for calls to her family. I find it handy because I can give a number to businesses when they demand one. We never answer that phone (it has been silenced from ringing). AT&T has no broadband service in my area - they offer only DSL and I live in a fairly rich area of silicon valley. The problem is that my utilities were put underground when the house was bui…
> give a number to businesses
> never answer that phone
Yes. A long time ago had to give a landline number to school, to have a discussion with them 6 months later on why they expected us to ever pick it.
We only ever used that line for international phone calls, and after cancelling it it basically made no difference in our life, except the savings. We give our mobile numbers when asked for landline, bullshit numbers to spam companies, block the ones that still get a real number, and ask relatives to call us on any other reliable service (international call quality was garbage anyway)
Re: AT&T applies to end obligation to service landlines in California
#56I'm fine with AT&T no longer supporting landlines if they start supporting fiber to every household. US broadband is a joke compared to many other parts of the world.
On the other hand you have "cable is the future, I love copper" Germany
Helmut Kohl right?
Germany seems to be a prime example of how privatization can't work for infrastructure. Having the road ripped up every time another provider wants to add fiber is insane.
Re: AT&T applies to end obligation to service landlines in California
#57I'm fine with AT&T no longer supporting landlines if they start supporting fiber to every household. US broadband is a joke compared to many other parts of the world.
At least every home that has copper should get fiber.
The excuse that the US is too big or we can't do it is bull. You did it before for electricity and telephone. It just requires competency, money and an infrastructure that isn't for profit.
Don't get me wrong, the services provided on the infrastructure can definitely be for profit but not the glass itself.
Re: AT&T applies to end obligation to service landlines in California
#58Didn't they get paid too much by the government to install those lines?
And don't they (and Comcast) have special rights to the phone poles? iirc, Verizon can't use them to install 5G micro-cell towers. (This was in California)
Re: AT&T applies to end obligation to service landlines in California
#59Earlier quoted context omitted.
When some branches brought mine down in a storm, I cut mine off on the house side, spooled it up secure with electrical tape, and hung it low on the pole on the street side. Probably shouldn't disconnect it at their box but past there it's yours if you own the house.
Legally I believe it is there equipment up to the cable modem. I would bet what you did is technically illegal depending where you are. Additionally, unterminated lines to a coax network can cause RF interference, and you may actually have created a detectable problem for other people in your area.
I remember Comcast sniffer trucks driving around looking for these... do they still do that? Is it required by the FCC?
Re: AT&T applies to end obligation to service landlines in California
#60The companies that used to make phone switches (Nortel, Lucent) went out of business over 2 decades ago and they are unmaintainable. Building modernized VoIP-based landlines that still offer the 48V analog POTS interface would be phenomenally expensive, and the market of Luddite little old ladies like Pereira who cling to landlines is just not large enough to make it financially viable, unlike the market for broadban…
Holding people to obligations they themselves have taken on seems like a reasonable thing to do, but what do I know.
TFA even illustrates why it is necessary. Pereira got her landline cut without a suitable replacement in place:
>Pereira has relied on her landline for 58 years. She got a cell phone for the first time last year when her landline got disconnected, but she lives in a dead zone for cell phones. CBS13 had a hard time getting in touch with her because the call kept dropping.
Stop defending telcos weaseling out of their obligations when they have taken public funding for decades in order to provide a utility.