Follow Slashdot stories on Twitter

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
×
Communications The Internet

AT&T Quietly Introduces $10/Month DSL 258

prostoalex writes "As part of the deal with the FCC to approve the AT&T/BellSouth merger, AT&T started selling, but not advertising, a $10-per-month DSL service in 22 states, AP has learned. 'The service provides download speeds of up to 768 kilobits per second and upload speeds of up to 128 kbps, matching the speeds of the cheapest advertised AT&T plan, which costs $19.95 per month in the nine-state former BellSouth area and $14.99 in the 13 states covered by AT&T before the acquisition.'"
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

AT&T Quietly Introduces $10/Month DSL

Comments Filter:
  • Other problems (Score:2, Interesting)

    by Anonymous Coward on Monday June 18, 2007 @07:35PM (#19558487)
    DSL is available in my area, but not my prefix. So I'd have to change my phone number to get it. OK, I could probably deal with that, but then they'd charge me for the line change too. So I stay with cable for now. DSL would probably be cheaper per month, but I just hate dealing with the phone company soooo much....
  • Random thought. (Score:5, Interesting)

    by iamdrscience ( 541136 ) on Monday June 18, 2007 @07:38PM (#19558523) Homepage
    I've had Comcast cable internet and it's like $60-70 a month around here. It was alright, but my big beef was the upload was only 40kB/s. How hard would it be to get like six of these lines and rig them up so that I have almost 100kB/s upload bandwidth for the same price?

    And then the real question, if they can offer me that service for that price, why the fuck won't anybody just sell me a cable or DSL line with more upload bandwidth? I would be willing to pay more.
  • For voip?? (Score:5, Interesting)

    by Tmack ( 593755 ) on Monday June 18, 2007 @07:53PM (#19558697) Homepage Journal
    FTFA:

    However, at 768 kbps, the download speed may be too low to appeal to the relatively sophisticated customers who use the Internet for phone calls

    I would be more concerned about the 128k upload than 768 down. I mean, you do want to be able to talk to the other party right? That being said, even 128k is enough for 2 POTs lines using standard compression (64k/DS0), though the VoIP packet overhead would probably force a higher compression to actually use 2 lines at the same time. It sounds nice and all, until you compare price/kbs against other countries and remind yourself again, that the US is still falling off the backend of the broadbandwagon. Its cheap, and ideal for people like my parents, who would only be downloading emails and the occasional video or picture page forwarded by me or other family members. The upstream is a bit weak compared to other offerings, but I wouldnt get this service if I were serious about gaming anyways (yes, you can play WoW over it, even over 56k modem, just not very well and if it gets into a complex scene, forget about it).

    Tm

  • Up to? (Score:2, Interesting)

    by haut ( 678547 ) on Monday June 18, 2007 @09:13PM (#19559325)
    Ever notice how high speed internet connections are always sold as "up to" so-and-so speed? That doesn't mean anything to me - I want to know the lowest it can go and the typical up/down speeds. I'm just glad my salary isn't an "up to".
  • Manhattan still doesn't have fast enough broadband to rival a Swedish village. You tell me if it's a fair comparison.
  • by kaaona ( 252061 ) on Monday June 18, 2007 @10:57PM (#19560231)
    My home and residential neighborhood were built in 1973. A state highway with the highest traffic flow in Illinois (Il-159) passes just 200 yards from my home. The Metro East area across the Mississippi River from St. Louis, MO has a population of well over 200,000 yet since 1992 I've been unable to order anything but POTS from Illinois Bell, Ameritech, SBC, and now AT&T. "Not currently available" is the perennial status. The cold hard truth is that AT&T refuses to upgrade its physical plant from the classic copper-based exchange-centric service model. Oh, for years they've made widely-publicized promises of universal broadband service to the Illinois legislature, then refused to install the fiber-connected satellite equipment needed to expand DSL coverage beyond the 16,000-odd cable feet radius limits around their existing dial central offices (exchanges). A pin map shows that AT&T offers DSL service ONLY within those areas served by their existing copper cable plants, and they don't give a damn about investing in the infrastructure needed for universal service. They just keep milking that ol' copper cable plant for all it's worth.
  • Re:Worthless (Score:3, Interesting)

    by loraksus ( 171574 ) on Tuesday June 19, 2007 @12:31AM (#19560961) Homepage
    When I was on Verizon DSL, the DSL service went down with power outages. Comcast seemed to go down if there was a power outage halfway around the city.
    A UPS isn't going to do shit for you in either of those cases unless you can sneak into the CO and plug your bank into it...
  • Re:Other problems (Score:2, Interesting)

    by gavink42 ( 1000674 ) on Tuesday June 19, 2007 @03:53AM (#19562199)
    I hadn't thought about your very good point. Even if that's the case, there's still no reason to require a phone number change. The existing number could be ported into the new CO (local number portability).

    If the original poster explained the situation to a supervisor, any extra fees could probably be waived.
  • I have (Score:2, Interesting)

    by kurtis25 ( 909650 ) on Tuesday June 19, 2007 @08:09AM (#19563335)
    I have ATT (one other choice in the area is accounts managed by Comcast so internet alone would run $80 a month). The trick is to get the lowest possible phone line you only get a few calls a month with it which is fine (you can use vonage, grandcentral or other such services). They of course will jerk you around and try to sell you more phone service than you need. I got signed up with no problems but the installation tech didn't show up during his 4 hour window. So I called told them I was going back to work and he couldn't show up until after 4 and he needed to call before he came. He didn't call when he showed up but he did call to ask why I wasn't there for my appointment. I told him to call his office they had a message for him. I eventually got the installation fee waved after a few trips between billing, customer service and a large conference call with people from 3 different departments. Back when I signed up they were offering a cash card to offset the installation fee (so yes I got free installation and the card) when I signed up I was told I would get a $100 card. When I got the form for the card it was only for $50 I called and complained. They said they would credit my account for $50 (I made the CS worker stay on the line while I checked my online bill). I filled the card form out mailed it in and eventually received a $100 card (plus the credit). When I signed up they said I could combine my billing with my Cingular phone and monthly discount. When I called to get that they said they couldn't since I didn't actually have an ATT phone number, I protested and they said I still had a Bell number it hadn't been switched to ATT. That call ended in a conference call between them, me and Cingualr, they could do nothing. A few weeks later I was at the Cingular store so I asked, they lady there said she couldn't help that ATT in our state couldn't combine and she was receiving about 10 complaints a day.

The use of money is all the advantage there is to having money. -- B. Franklin

Working...