AT&T continues 1Gbps FTTP rollout across US

40

news AT&T has announced the expansion of its ultra-fast all-fibre broadband service into more parts of the USA, with the aim of vastly expanding availability by the end of 2016.

The telco said its service for homes and small businesses is now available in parts of Atlanta, Los Angeles, Kansas City and Oklahoma City, while the ‘Business Fiber’ service has now grown in Chicago, Dallas, Miami and San Francisco,

The firm’s service offers speeds of up to 1Gbps by providing fibre to the premises (FTTP) for homes and small businesses.

“As a result of these cities’ pro-investment policies, AT&T is proud to bring blazing fast
Internet to these communities,” said AT&T Georgia President Bill Leahy, discussing the Atlanta expansion. “Because of their strong leadership, the residents in these communities will be poised for continued growth, allowing them to better compete in a global economy.”

In a statement, the firm said it will continue to expand its 100% fibre ‘GigaPower’ network to new locations, with the plan being to eventually triple availability by the end of 2016.

AT&T added that its service is now available to over 1.6 million locations across 21 of the nation’s largest cities, and that it has plans to take ultra-fast broadband to parts of 35 more areas – 56 metros in total.

“Ultimately, we plan to reach more than 14 million residential and commercial locations with fiber”, said the company.

AT&T suggested that 1Gbps enables users to download 8,000 word processing documents in 1 second, a two-hour high-definition video in 36 seconds, or backup a 1 terabyte hard drive in 2.5 hours.

The Australian Government is currently advocating a multi-technology mix (MTM) for the National Broadband Network, which its says offers better value.

However detractors have said that rolling out 100% fibre in some areas and a fibre/copper mix (FTTdp) elsewhere does not ‘future proof’ the NBN, and may mean that a full fibre deployment will have to be started as soon as the current rollout is over.

40 COMMENTS

  1. “However detractors have said that rolling out 100% fibre in some areas and a fibre/copper mix (FTTdp) elsewhere does not ‘future proof’ the NBN, and may mean that a full fibre deployment will have to be started as soon as the current rollout is over.”

    Ugh… I think you need to amend this, as it implies that the MTM is Fibre in areas and FTTdp for the rest, which is not at all what the MTM is. (Unless you know something we don’t? ;-) )

  2. “However detractors have said that rolling out 100% fibre in some areas and a fibre/copper mix (FTTdp) elsewhere does not ‘future proof’ the NBN, and may mean that a full fibre deployment will have to be started as soon as the current rollout is over.”

    FTTdp? FTTdp would be fine, it allows for cheap and easy future upgrades. The “detractors” have a problem with FTTN because it is a dead end require an expensive new rollout for any future upgrade. NBN co mouth pieces try to defend FTTN by mentioning FTTdp and GFast is like trying to defend buying a bike by reporting the top speed of new cars.

  3. Malcolm said no one needs connections that fast. AT&T must be a bunch of idiots wasting money.

    • Yeah ol’ Malcolm knows better because he supposedly invented the internet remember? Every other person and telco couldn’t possible know better than Malcolm and his party.

  4. AT&T’s U-verse subsidiary was formed a couple of months after NBNCo. Acknowledging the expense and diifficulty inherent in FTTH deployments AT&T (like most of North America) choose FTTC/N deployment. The upgrade began in 2006, passing ~2m customers by 2009. Today they have ~30m serviceable premises.

    AT&T’s recent investment focus (as with Verizon) has been LTE.

    A perfect example of the savings utilising a multi-mix of technologies. FTTP announcement here to a small portion of (their high value) customers.

    Comparison to NBNCo welcomed.

    • “Comparison to NBNCo welcomed.”

      Yeah, sure.

      Telstra had the perfect opportunity to get government subsidies to build out a FTTN network using their copper, in the first round of NBN tenders. They screwed it, bigtime, putting in a non-conforming bid, and basically threatening to take their bat & ball and go home if they weren’t given protection against competition.

      Following this, a panel of telecommunications network experts recommend the government take the long view, and build a FTTP network, that would do two things: 1) provide ultra-fast broadband to 93% of the country, with the balance well served by fixed wireless and new high-speed satellites, and 2) remove the Telstra roadblock to communications development in this country.

      So, yeah, we could have had a nation-wide FTTN network several years ago as well, if Telstra hadn’t played silly buggers.

      Now, we’re not going to get FTTP, either, because Malcolm & Tony don’t want it (for Reasons they choose not to divulge, but to which the location of their MTM policy launch – Fox Studios – may provide some clue).

      • @bw true Conroy’s expression of interest was a disaster: Trujillo vs Conroy show, Conroy KO-ed.

        What little we know of the expert panels adjudication (their reports were never released) and their recommendation (NBNCo) has shown to been a far more expensive failure. Their conclusion that access to the CAN was required for any FTTN upgrade remains one the most expensive obvious conclusion of of all time.

        However Trujillo has retired and replaced by Thodey by the time NBNCo was even formed. Thodey announced his inclination to work with the govt of the day; evidence by the renegotiation of Conroy’s $13.8b contract. How did Conroy engage?

        Turnbull bought into the NBN policy fantasy. The comparatively poor performance of the GBE solution to many telco upgrades is a stark reminder of the relative incompetence of public sector delivery. Sadly taxpayers will be footing a massive bill, with potential for much more if the inevitable additonal cost and delays of FTTH remain unacknowledged.

        • Sadly taxpayers will be footing a massive bill, with potential for much more if the inevitable additonal [sic] cost and delays of FTTH remain unacknowledged.

          Which is fine, we already pick up the tab for highways, why not the information superhighway?

          • Fuel excise more than covers the cost of roads. NBNCo loss this year alone will be greater than $2b on $300m revenue. What a joke.

          • Fuel excise more than covers the cost of roads. NBNCo loss this year alone will be greater than $2b on $300m revenue

            If that’s true, why do we have toll roads? Which is why Infrastructure Australia said:

            The current level of public sector expenditure
            – especially in the transport sector, which
            remains largely funded by government rather
            than user charges – may be unsustainable

            I suspect you’re only telling half the story as usual.

        • Yes how was it renegotiated NBN now covers the cost of remediation and asbestos. But it was at no extra cost lol

        • It wasn’t just vs Conroy.

          Telstra had plenty of opportunity under the Howard Government as well.

        • Richard seriously,… do you intentionally make shit up on the fly, wilfully attempt to unsuccessfully rewrite history or just lie?

          “@bw true Conroy’s expression of interest was a disaster: Trujillo vs Conroy show, Conroy KO-ed.”

          So again for about the 3rd time I’ll set you straight… don’t mention it.

          Firstly, the initial (supposed – ahem) Telstra FTTN roll out pre RFP, was going to occur while JWH was PM, but Telstra reneged, leaving the ACCC to release a press release saying they were perplexed, at them doing so.

          This lead to a vindictive (some might say) plan for WiMAX in the bush (an even sillier plan than FTTN in 2016) by Coonan/JWH, which bypassed Telstra.

          In the meantime, Telstra refused to switch on ADSL2 (whilst other countries were already rolling out fibre) and OPEL was a dismal failure never achieving a thing.

          So Coonan Ko-ed.

          It wasn’y until Rudd was elected that Conroy saw OPEL as the farce it was and canned it and negotiated with Telstra for the switching on of ADSL2… So love him or hate him (yes he’s Labor so you hate him) Conroy managed to do what Coonan/Howard couldn’t, which I still find very strange TBH considering Sol’s links to the GOP…

          Anyhoo…I digress

          Telstra then paid their (iirc $25m) to be part of the RFP process but submitted a non-compliant bid… so using Dick talk Conroy 25m vs. Sol 0

          But granted and agreed… Telstra achieved their outcome which was SFA/the status quo…!!!

          It demonstrates clearly that your flawed logic of markets will deliver is, well flawed, as Telstra were obviously to everyone but ideologue fools, never interested and were only wanting to keep the copper based obscene profits.

          Their so called competitors/wholesalers were no better… G9/Terria members FOS also wanting the status quo, to keep accessing the copper, slightly undercutting Telstra and looking like the good guys.

          It was this compulsion to cling to retrograde technologies (that sans improvement, would continue to be obscenely profitable) whilst the rest of the world advanced, that necessitated the NBN…

          So please keep dreaming, distorting and lying, whilst sitting in your ideological L(l)ibertarian safety bubble, that markets would have or Telstra this or Conjob that, because frankly, sorry Dick, you have NFI.

          You’re welcome

    • Verizon started their fiber upgrade at about the same time, they now have about 20 million “serviceable premises” and they are more profitable than AT&T. They have converted over the high value half of their fixed line footprint, and are gradually moving over the other half.

      NBNcos performance left a lot to be desired, but they were starting from scratch and were sent back to the drawing board just when they were starting to get their act together.

      You are starting to sound like the black knight of Monty Python fame.

      • @d Verizon FiOS fibre network build was a all but abandoned back in 2011 (except for areas attracting billions in govt subsidies), announcing a redirection of their capex spend into wireless . A reminder of obvious pitfalls in over investing in any particular technology; most of their deployed fibre utilise long abandoned standards.

        As with AT&T their CAN continues to be a major revenue earner. The relative performance of the two’s fixed line internets services a devastating business case for FTTH.

        • Yet in 2015 stated the reason of going form copper to FTTP was due to the 60% reduce ion the running cost.

          • Right they fooled you. The 60% reduction equates to under $100 pa, not close to recovering capex differential. Then we’ve covered these numbers before; sorry too complicated.

          • lol Richard can you link me there cost of FTTN and FTTP. But then the SR had by 2027 MTM would cost the same as FTTP so that’s not $100pa is it.

        • I give up. While ever there is a single strand of copper used for telecommunications, you will be quoting it’s existence as proof you were right.

          • Indeed David,

            Which is why I regularly ask him why we didn’t just reuse the iron wires and not waste money and time rolling out the very copper he now clings to.

            Of course he can tell me exactly why in hindsight the iron wires weren’t reused. But as is the case with most blinkered, ultra conservative, bean counters, foresight simply isn’t part of their arsenal.

            However, I’m sure in years to come once fibre is eventually rolled out (thanks to the retrograde move to, as Richard even mentioned, circa 2006 FTTN) and good old hindsight again returns… just like the iron wires, Richard and his H U G E ego will tell us all exactly why the copper needed to be replaced.

            And having seen him flatly deny an important previous claim (until posted and then the squirming began…lol), I’m sure Richard and that ego will probably have the audacity to again attempt to re-write history to suggest it was all his idea to replace the copper and roll out fibre, in the first place…

            :/

          • Right, asingle example;-)

            The FTTHers geniuses could display even a basic knowledge, just bile.

            Proof I was right all around, squealers demanding it’s not discussed. Just like ZDNet, how funny.

          • Ok again for all the dummy (yes singular)…

            You have never been right yet Dick, so try to quell the massive EGO even for a few seconds and join us all here in reality…

            You said MTM would be successful bzzt… many $b’s blown, many years behind…

            It’s a dismal failure… the worst construction disaster in Oz’ history… which you claimed as your own baby

            Everyone but you (the opposition, even the PM and NBN CEO) have said FTTP is the end goal. So no matter what FTTN costs, FTTP will be required.

            Not recognising what even the #1 naysayer admitted, that it took two years of SFA to transition to FTTN.

            Saying reuse was wise… but not factoring complete lack of maintenance of the 5 mins to midnight copper, remedial, replacement, upgrades, maintenance of copper and HFC… (or perhaps vastly underestimating)…

            HFC needs another $1.6B and copper has blown out 10x in just 6 months to $641m on top of the annual OPEX..

            Then there’s the extra power costs.

            Not to mention the lesser ROI as the higher speeds simply aren’t available and what was lost in those two years of stagnation.

            Then of course we have the old shh never mention the B in cBa, trick… Remember your own link from previous you now completely distance yourself from, which claimed that a doubling in BB speed increased GDP by 0.3% .. and most importantly every doubling thereafter increased GDP by a further 0.3% incrementally.

            So the faster the better… but you are happy with slower?

            At some point even a complete fool would ask if the trade offs for such retrograde and obsolete copper based BS is worth a few dollars less (initially) and a few months sooner (maybe)…

            Tell me again (with hindsight) why weren’t the iron wires good enough Dick, but with (lack of) foresight, why the copper wires are…?

            GO

            You’re welcome.

          • Addendum:

            Never factoring that “the slower [sic] FTTP” was a start up/from scratch and always trying to desperately and disingenuously compare the “quicker [sic] FTTN/MTM”, which has simply ridden on FTTP/NBN’s groundwork, backhaul, contracts etc, in terms of timeframes.

        • Verizon FiOS fibre network build was a all but abandoned back in 2011 (except for areas attracting billions in govt subsidies), announcing a redirection of their capex spend into wireless . A reminder of obvious pitfalls in over investing in any particular technology; most of their deployed fibre utilise long abandoned standards.

          More like another example of private enterprise fail…

    • “Comparison to NBNCo welcomed.”

      Well one mismatch is they already owned the copper networks in question & given their relative ages said Cu Networks have already paid for themselves (possibly several times over).

      • @sm true, any FTTN/HFC upgrade would’ve required engaging with the incumbents; Conroy’s failure.

        As the ACCC concluded (if LLU hadn’t proven it) the majority of Australian’s live within commerically viable areas for telcos. Rather than overbuild these areas with a massively inefficient GDE, subsidies could’ve been directed towards the smaller non-viable (predominantly regional) areas.

        Look to majority of developed country’s upgrades for a workable model.

        NBNCo by comparison remains an expensive folly. Not even high value areas have seen an upgrade in 7 years due to the govts threat to overbuild. An economic tragedy .

        • true, any FTTN/HFC upgrade would’ve required engaging with the incumbents; Conroy’s failure.

          How so? Conroy did try to engage, the incumbent’s application was a joke, and duly rejected as such.

    • AT&T has announced the expansion of its ultra-fast all-fibre broadband service into more parts of the USA, with the aim of vastly expanding availability by the end of 2016.

      Just trying to correct the record there…or something, Richard? Your post makes no sense whatsoever in the context of an article stating they are expanding their fibre rollout.

      Comparison of Richard to a banana welcome.

    • AT&T’s upgrade began in 2006 says Richard…

      Wow about the time most here were probably saying FttN (or more commonly referred to as, soon after, FRAUDBAND) would be fine.

      But err, look again Richard… it’s now 2016…

      So whilst we were at the forefront and constructing nationwide FttP just a few years back, we have since been the only country ever (AFAIK) who moronically reversed this to FTTN/2006-ish tech, whilst the rest of the world moves well ahead of right where we were, with FTTP…

      Absolutely ridiculous.

      But it gets worse.

      We see the inferior backwards MTM go from blunder to blunder and massive cost blow outs ($29.5B to as much as $70B) and ongoing roll out blow outs (to all by 2016 now 2020 and counting). So not was it only ridiculous to go “backwards” but the backwards inferior debacle, is now without doubt the largest construction disaster in our history…

      Thanks so much Richard, for “your” “could have been commissioned to write MTM” as it ticked all your boxes, complete and utter failure…

      But keep desperately trying to excuse it… because umm, it makes us all laugh to see your lame excuses while we can actually see the reality which is the MTM clusterfuck.

      You’re welcome.

Comments are closed.