AT&T expands gigabit business fibre at cities across US

41

news AT&T is giving a speed boost to its Business Fiber internet services in a long list of US markets, including San Francisco, Miami and Dallas.

Business customers in those areas can now experience download and upload speeds of up to 1 Gbps, the firm said, providing they occupy an ‘AT&T Fiber Ready’ building.

According to AT&T, Internet speeds of 1Gbps will allow a business to download 8,000 word processing documents in one second, download a two-hour high definition video in 36 seconds, or backup/restore a one terabyte hard drive in 2.5 hours.

AT&T said it has been investing in high-speed Internet in urban and rural areas using “the latest” wired and wireless technologies and has greatly expanded its fibre footprint over the past few years, both to consumers and businesses.

“[W]ith AT&T Business Fiber being deployed to many multi-tenant office buildings across the state, we are quickly expanding the number of businesses in urban and rural areas alike that have access to Gigabit connections,” said Mayo Flynt, President of AT&T, Mississippi.

The announcement is the fruition of a commitment made back in 2014 that AT&T would deploy Fibre to the Premises (FTTP) infrastructure in 100 major US cities in the US.

At the time, the move directly contradicted statements by the then-Communications Minister Malcolm Turnbull that the telecoms giant was focusing on the Coalition’s preferred Fibre to the Node model.

In other news, AT&T has also announced the nationwide launch of U-verse Business Voice over AT&T Business Fiber – a voice over IP (VoIP) phone service that delivers voice services over the Internet rather than over a traditional phone line.

Using VoIP, customers get many standard calling features, plus other functionality not found on traditional landline phones.

SHARE

41 COMMENTS

  1. “Ridiculous of AT&T. In the year 2016, 25 Mbits should be enough for everyone.” – Malcolm Turnbull*

    *satire

  2. Since ATT’s announcement of their GigaPower service in 2013, targeted (high value) expansion program has covered ~1.6m premises (less than 1/30th of their ip network).

    ATTs GigaPower press releases are in response to Google Fibre’s competing press releases (neither have much coverage; G ~100k customers). Comparisons with Australian monopoly wholesale provider and the exclusion of all private telco investment since 2007 welcome.

    • “the exclusion of all private telco investment since 2007 welcome.

      Of course it would be 2007 wouldn’t it. Because that’s when Labor initiated the NBN.

      Uh oh, here comes another confected attack on the original NBN again, courtesy of Richard.

      Why not before 2007 Richard? HFC investment had all but stalled thanks to Telstra winning Cable Wars, and no other provider presented itself. Australian broadband had stagnated, with the only upward movement being Internode challenging Telstra for ADSL2 functionality … when surprise surprise … Telstra managed to turn on ADSL2 on in their exchanges just weeks afterward.

      The Australian market and the American market are two very different entities (although the AT&T pre-Baby Bell breakup was a overwhelming monopoly like Telstra).

      • 2007 would be when private sector investment halted due to the incoming’s govt policy to overbuild any competing network (reversal of previously bipartisan competition policy). The “confected attack” is undeniable reality.

        Local loop unbundling and the competitive xDSL and servicing dark fibre markets a success. Competition generating variety of services (consumer and business) with excellent value. OpenNetworks, AAPT, Neighbourhood Cable, TransACT, PIPE Networks but a few you missed. Trujillo was an impediment, but had said adios before NBNCo was even formed. Incoming CEO wanted to work with the govt (Conroy didn’t re-engaged).

        Telstra’s 2nd HFC upgrade threatened with mobile spectrum restrictions by Conroy when his incompetent GBE revenue model looked like it was going to be undermined. Wonder why I keep returning to the original policy to explain the folly we’re witnessing (chuckles). 8th year, $20+b sunk (value less than half), ~25% complete.

        • Lol Richard trying to rewrite history again

          So private sector $B investment halted now not dried up. Due to the best NBN policy claimed by you.

          Spectrum threat was nothing to do with HFC upgrade otherwise provide a link to your claim.

          The policy you could have written is valued at half of what it cost not FTTP value.

        • “2007 would be when private sector investment halted”

          No Richard. It’s the other way round. If private sector investment hadn’t have halted, the NBN wouldn’t have been needed in the first place.

          Private sector investment halted before 2007, because nobody could go toe to toe with Telstra wholesale for the last mile. Optus tried and failed, and so the sector stagnated.

          Once again, let me point you toward “Wired Brown Land” for the evidence of this.

          “Local loop unbundling and the competitive xDSL and servicing dark fibre markets a success”

          If you mean that years of court cases landing at Telstra’s door from various ISP’s and the ACCC are a success, then I guess you could say it was. It didn’t need to be that way though, not in a healthy competitive market.

          “Competition generating variety of services (consumer and business) with excellent value. OpenNetworks, AAPT, Neighbourhood Cable, TransACT, PIPE Networks but a few you missed. ”

          Just let me know when I can order a fibre connection from any of those at home OK? *chuckles*

          “Telstra’s 2nd HFC upgrade threatened with mobile spectrum restrictions by Conroy when his incompetent GBE revenue model looked like it was going to be undermined”

          Telstra decided to play hardball. They got spanked with the only thing they understand … their wallets. And that “incompetent GBE model” continues today. Might I suggest you go to town on Turnbull/Morrow for that one if you consider it that bad?

          “Wonder why I keep returning to the original policy to explain the folly we’re witnessing”

          Considering the elements you keep parroting are mostly still in place today, despite the MTM/Coalition being dominant for 3 years now … I would question your assessment of it. It’s not like Malcolm or Bill couldn’t have done something about them if they were that bad.

          • @m NBN wasn’t “needed” it was another badly constructed Conroy/Rudd policy thought bubble (originally $4.7b not a cent more); many (successful) alternatives to what we have today.

            Competition policy unbundled the local loop, granted infrastructure access. Many players entered the market, consumers the big winner from the competition (as they had been since Optus entrance).

            Continued improvements required, technology continues its advance. Non-commerical regional areas needed to be addressed. Performed since Hawke via competition policy, carrier licenses and the later ACCC.

            Fletcher’s (ex-Optus) book was about limiting Telstra market power, not creating yet another monopoly supplier. The three amigos had left, incoming management wanted to re-enage. Wholesale separation achieved in historically like markets (UK & NZ). A missed opportunity to progress with the only company in Australia able to deliver (Conroy’s arrogance expensively highlighted).

            You can order a fibre connection from many suppliers. I’ve done it for years. Cost prohibitive for residences, business coverage solid. NBNCo business product offerings a laugh (8th year).

            That the ““incompetent GBE model” continues today” is called out by myself. Wait for the next AR! However performance is significantly improved over Quigley’s dysfunction. The source of the policies major failures predates Sept 2013. You, like most here, see only the Quigley takedowns, fantasise about new management comparative failures (eg Quigley’s greater transparencies; nothing but goggle it).

          • Richard got to love how you contradict your self.

            “incoming management wanted to re-engage”. Yet Conroy had to make the spectrum threat becuase they didn’t

          • @jk see contradictions because he doesn’t know what he’s talking about. Spectrum threat (you now acknowledge; I see no correction to your original post) was made against whom and when? When was the new management appointed?

          • “@m NBN wasn’t “needed””

            Really? Because the Coaltion had tried for years to sort the market out (“Wired Brown Land” once again), and failed, mostly thanks to Telstra’s bullish tactics, and in some cases … flat out lies (and called as such by Paul Fletcher).

            “(originally $4.7b not a cent more”

            Explained by the RFP process, which either couldn’t deliver, or in Telstra’s case, excluded itself.

            Mind you, that $4.7 billion was a number that the government already had, because Telstra themselves gave it to them (see “Wired Brown Land” again).

            “Many players entered the market”

            You mean many retail players. No fixed line infrastructure players Richard. Optus tried, and Telstra neutered them. It’s remained that way ever since, until NBNCo pushed back with it’s Wireless/FTTH/Satellite rollout.

            “consumers the big winner from the competition”

            Paying the Telstra fixed line tax with every monthly payment, at least until Naked DSL came along, and didn’t Telstra howl about that one, even then for physical fixed line problems, who did your ISP have to deal with? That’s right, usually Telstra, because most of the last mile copper was STILL owned by them.

            “Continued improvements required, technology continues its advance.”

            Pity it didn’t, unless you count Telstra’s (at the time) next big cash cow. 2G/3G. There was no fixed line improvements at all. We were still sweating the last inch of what copper could easily give us.

            “Fletcher’s (ex-Optus) book was about limiting Telstra market power”

            No it wasn’t, although that was addressed as part of it. It was about Telstra’s insistence that it maintain it’s dominance over Australian telecommunications.

            “The three amigos had left, incoming management wanted to re-enage.”

            If you’ve read it, you’ll know that the book dealt with quite a number of years before the three amigos had even set foot in the place.

            “wholesale separation achieved in historically like markets (UK & NZ).”

            Which wasn’t happening was it?

            “A missed opportunity to progress with the only company in Australia able to deliver”

            Rubbish. Telstra wasn’t the “only” one that could do it. They might have been the only one that could have done it for $4.7 billion, but we’ll never know, thanks to Sol Trujillo’s brinkmanship.

            “You can order a fibre connection from many suppliers. I’ve done it for years”

            Sure, I can … at $1000 a metre from the exchange. When I’m 4.2 km from that, how does that help me, or to speak broader, faster broadband connectivity for average Australians? Y’know, the sort of thing that advances a country? Isn’t that called nation building?

            “Cost prohibitive for residences, business coverage solid.”

            Really? I guess you haven’t spoken enough to business. Here’s a personal example right now. I work in Qld Government. We have quite a number of depots all around the state, some of which are only staffed by 1-2 people. We still have to utilise consumer DSL, and wireless connectivity in order to allow those depots to connect. And a lot of these are not remote, they’re in major regional towns. So no, business coverage is not “solid”.

            “NBNCo business product offerings a laugh. ”

            That’s a laugh on it’s own, considering business products weren’t even on the original agenda. Don’t you remember the uproar from business in the early stages of the NBN when ISP’s were aghast that they’d lose their business connections revenue because businesses were going to go straight to NBNCo? Where NBNCo stated that they had no plans to.

            So if you’re looking for business connectivity, how’s about you look at competing networks Richard. Like the providers you posted earlier. The NBN was meant to be “the network of last resort”. Whether that suits business or not is not something they care about.

            By the way, do you actually know the difference between a “business connection” versus a “consumer connection”. They’re closer than you think.

            “That the ““incompetent GBE model” continues today” is called out by myself”

            Excellent … so your criticism of Malcolm Turnbull’s continuing with it is … where exactly?

            “However performance is significantly improved over Quigley’s dysfunction.”

            Remember Richard … it’s a thimble.

            https://delimiter.com.au/2016/07/13/telstra-kicks-off-recruitment-program-deal-nbn-hfc-contract/?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+Delimiter+(Delimiter)#comment-753105

            “The source of the policies major failures predates Sept 2013.”

            Never stopped Turnbull before though did it? Perhaps because he might consider them sound? Perhaps because they’re not really that bad?

            “You, like most here, see only the Quigley takedowns, fantasise about new management comparative failures”

            I’ve already proved you wrong by stating what I considered mistakes elsewhere. Can’t remember which Delimiter article it is, but it’s only been the last week or so.

            “Quigley’s greater transparencies; nothing but goggle it”

            You still can’t find them?

          • Private sector investment halted before 2007, because nobody could go toe to toe with Telstra wholesale for the last mile. Optus tried and failed, and so the sector stagnated.

            Yeah, exactly Murdoch, that’s the way I remember it too. The only time anything happened nationally was when Telstra did something, and they only did something when it would hurt other players.

            Remember the HFC rollout….

            https://www.accc.gov.au/system/files/Optus%20Appendix%20I%20-%20Telstras%20Overbuild%20of%20the%20Optus%20HFC%20Network%20-%20public%20version%20-%20May%2008.pdf

          • @m what specific passages in “Wired Brown Land” are you referring to. Is this like your google something challenge?

            No not retail, many infrastructure players emboldened by competition policy. Including wireless and satellite. LLU gave copper access; prices regulated.

            Conroy’s expression of interest was incompetently conducted. Trujillo / Conroy stand-off, but again said adios before NBNCo even formed.

            ““Fletcher’s (ex-Optus) book was about limiting Telstra market power”

            No it wasn’t, although that was addressed as part of it. It was about Telstra’s insistence that it maintain it’s dominance over Australian telecommunications.”
            Saying exactly the same thing.

            “Which wasn’t happening was it?”
            Ah, it had happened!

            “Sure, I can … at $1000 a metre from the exchange.”
            You’ve never ordered a connection have you?

            “I work in Qld Government.”
            Say no more…

            “By the way, do you actually know the difference between a “business connection” versus a “consumer connection”. They’re closer than you think.”
            Ah no, seriously?

            The quality of the “debate” is tragic. Must be someone with some experience of the technologies being discussed. 8 years now.

          • “@m what specific passages in “Wired Brown Land” are you referring to. Is this like your google something challenge?”

            Not at all. Nor do I plan on typing the whole book. I do however, have the book at home, so if you’d like to give me context on what to refute, I’ll look up some examples. Given that a lot of your rhetoric spans many different facets of what the book covers though, I don’t plan on posting at length what’s in it. What I can do is ask you to educate yourself on it if you haven’t read it. It’s quite illuminating.

            “No not retail, many infrastructure players emboldened by competition policy. Including wireless and satellite. LLU gave copper access; prices regulated.”

            A blanket statement that didn’t adequately correct broadband on much scale at all throughout Australia. There were a few select instances, to be sure (for example South Australia’s WiMAX), but the ability to compete with Telstra’s fixed line across Australia did not exist Richard.

            “Conroy’s expression of interest”

            It was a Request for Proposal Richard.

            “… incompetently conducted.”

            Conducted by acknowledged experts in the field. You’re simply incorrect Richard, despite what your opinion of them is.

            “Saying exactly the same thing.”

            No it wasn’t Richard. The difference is that you referred to it as “limited”, with the implicit meaning that the government was the instigator. That’s incorrect. Telstra instigated this, the government responded.

            “You’ve never ordered a connection have you?”

            I tried to, that’s the price I was quoted from Telstra. Not counting the trenching, that part I also had to source myself.

            “Say no more…”

            Why is that Richard? Your opinion of government employees a little less? That’s OK, I used to be that one-eyed when I worked in the private sector. Now I’ve seen both sides, I can appreciate the advantages and disadvantages of being in both.

            “Ah no, seriously?”

            Yes, seriously.

            “The quality of the “debate” is tragic.”

            You’re telling me.

            “Must be someone with some experience of the technologies being discussed. 8 years now.”

            Which technologies are you referring to Richard? Because I don’t see you trying to discuss technology at all. You’re simply partisan fingerpainting (again) to entertain your fantasy of “Coaltion/MTM = good, Labor/NBN = bad”.

            The reality is, both are shades of grey, which extremists like yourself can’t entertain, because (I’ll put it in your terms) it might actually mean you have to give credit to a “side” you’ve “picked” that you dislike.

          • @richard – I live in a pretty decent sized city. Wollongong if you hadnt been paying attention. Remind me again when my connection was going to be better than 6 Mbps with competition driving innovation.

            FYI, I live 800m from the exchange, I can see it from my front gate. I’m not someone complaining about my speed while I live 2 suburbs away.

            So, when were Telstra or even Optus going to roll out HFC, FttN, or even make my copper loop shorter so I could get the 20 Mbps the people living around me enjoyed?

            Competition failed, thats why Rudd called Telstra’s bluff and started the whole NBN thing. And it will fail again, now they only care about profit.

          • @ Richard…

            I think this simple comment of your’s, I kindly completed for you, sums you and your backwards, cult theory (disproved cult theory at that) and insular POV perfectly…

            “Continued improvements required, technology continues its advance.”

            …so let’s keep using obsolete copper!

            ROFL…

            You’re welcome

        • “Local loop unbundling and the competitive xDSL and servicing dark fibre markets a success.”
          So much of a success, government was required to step in and provide its citizens a working broadband network nationally.

          “Competition generating variety of services (consumer and business) with excellent value. ”
          Last time I had access to these services, I was getting 3Mbps for $60/month. I’m now getting 33 times that service for only twice the cost.

          Please explain.

          “Telstra’s 2nd HFC upgrade threatened with mobile spectrum restrictions”
          I notice you keep saying this despite being asked for Citation. One can only assume at this point that you are full of shit. Not a surprise.

    • Richard

      You’ve got your wires crossed halfwit!!

      1. “AT&T Business Fiber” is NOT “AT&T GigaPower”
      2 The service is only available to one of 600,000 businesses residing in AT&T Fiber Ready Buildings.

      “Since ATT’s announcement of their GigaPower service in 2013”

      AT&T Fiber Ready Buildings project was announced in 2012, halfwit!
      https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mmqGPjqw1Kg

      Meanwhile AT&T are deploying GigaPower to expand U-Verse in 100 cities across the the U.S.

      AT&T also has SmartCity deployment plans in New York City

      Keep up the blatant ignorant lies Backwater Boy!!

      • Sorry, responding to the second part “The announcement is the fruition of a commitment made back in 2014 that AT&T would deploy Fibre to the Premises (FTTP) infrastructure in 100 major US cities in the US. [see link]”

        Business fibre service availability in Oz widespread, pay a few thousand for a connection & sign a contract. I didn’t think it worth commenting on.

        Since you’ve decided to jump in with your typically eloquent abuse perhaps you’ll finally correct your “light to bits is layer-2” and “there will be nothing left [of old US old telephone networks] by 2020” insights?

        • Upgrading U-Verse (FTTN) to Gigpower (FTTH) on their service area.

          Keep humping your dead pig retard!!!

          • Lol humping dead things is a conservative special, you can’t expect them to just stop it and be reasonable.

        • “light to bits is layer-2”

          Let is all know when you understand FTTH technology, the functions of the end user equipment and PON compatible modems

          I won’t hold my breath for a retard!

          • Stetson slipping Rizz, did you post that abuse held up in traffic on the Golden Gate Bridge.

            ROFL

          • @ alain,

            You really are a strange and obviously burnt (by me, as you are obviously compelled to mention me, err always) poor, sorry individual aren’t you?

            You’re welcome.

  3. “Sorry, responding to the second part “The announcement is the fruition of a commitment made back in 2014 that AT&T would deploy Fibre to the Premises (FTTP) infrastructure in 100 major US cities in the US. [see link]””

    OFF TOPIC

    “Business fibre service availability in Oz widespread, pay a few thousand for a connection & sign a contract. I didn’t think it worth commenting on.”

    Residential and Business Plans on Gigabit fiber in the U.S. are over the same infrastructure. i.e. EPB Chattanooga, Google Fiber, Sonic Fiber (there are more than 30 other telcos deploying FTTH services and more than 70 ISPs)

    ““there will be nothing left [of old US old telephone networks] by 2020” insights?”

    AT&T, Verizon, CenturyLink and many others petitioned the FCC in 2012 to commence the retirement of the telephone system as per the National Broadband Plan

    https://gigaom.com/2012/11/07/heres-atts-14b-plan-to-kill-its-copper-network-and-leave-rural-america-behind/

    The FCC’s “IP Transition” rules and regulations have been debated in Congress since 2014 and passed into law more than a year ago.
    http://transition.fcc.gov/cgb/consumerfacts/ip-transition.pdf

    I have posted this and other information many times. It’s seems that it’s impossible to penetrate your density which is higher than reinforced concrete.

    Richard (or is it Reality)! You are thicker than 2 planks!!!!

  4. AT&T announced the Fiber Ready Buildings project to multi-tenant office buildings in 2012. It was in conjunction with the Obama Adminstration’s Green Building initiative launched in 2010

    https://www.greentechmedia.com/articles/read/president-obama-gets-green-building-for-the-21st-century-3571

    AT&T Business Fiber customers have access to extensive technologies such as security, network services such as Internet, private networking and cloud-based services which ride on the fiber network and…..
    1. Symmetric and asymmetric speeds ranging from 25 Mbps – 300 Mbps, with future plans to reach 1 Gbps
    2. Bandwidth that supports business critical applications such as cloud, backup, storage, video conferencing, various customized business applications and more;
    3. Firewall protection via a Fiber Broadband Gateway device;
    4. Prices starting as low as $50 per month for 25 Mbps asymmetric service.

    One of the first businesses to receive AT&T Business Fiber was GameStop Corporation in Austin Texas support the company’s GameStop Technology Institute and to deliver IT infrastructure improvements to it’s bricks & mortar retail stores.

    • So you can copy and paste great lumps of stocking filler, we have established that.

      What is the relevance of a private infrastructure rollout cherry picked areas of the USA for their customers only to a Government backed national NBN rollout in Australia where all ISP’s access the same NBN Co wholesale pricing at the same speed tiers across all NBN infrastructure types?

          • There is no answer to the fools question because the points are fictitious.

            It is very obvious that Richard (Reality) doesn’t know a scrap about broadband in the U.S.

            Perhaps if he Googled the correct keywords and spelt OPTICAL FIBER correctly, read U.S. National Broadband Plan and understand the roles of the Federal Communications Commission he might get some hits to solve his own problem.

            But there’s a problem. It is obvious that Richard is illiterate so we can’t expect much result unless he is spoon-fed at the Old Folks home.

    • @mm except you (and the dozens that stalk every post), probably not.

      Sadly I don’t have your eloquence (nor “retard” posts above) nor the “light to bits layer-2”, “node provisioned at full capacity”, “no reserved provisioned fibre”, “8mbps uplink capacity”, Quigley more transparent google something, business and consumer connections basically the same, insights of some (rofl). Maybe Brisy line boy can return with his suicide taunts?

    • I dunno, I read about five posts as I skipped everything Richard wrote and everyone wasting their lives responding to him. Life’s too short (but kudos to those who have the patience to refute his trolling BS – I just have other things to do with my life).

  5. Watching Australian’s playing political hop-scotch regarding their telecommunications network is nothing short of amusing. In the U.S. the problem with political conservatives barely exists and never a Republican -vs- Democrat point scoring issue.

    You might want to bare the following in mind:

    Chattanooga GigCity is a town in the State of Tennessee which is governed by the Republicans (Governer Bill Haslam (R).

    Tennessee is also regarded as Home of the U.S. Tea Party

    Conservatism is not the problem!

    LMAO!!!

Comments are closed.