MyDogHsFleas
Premium
join:2007-08-15
Austin, TX
 ·AT&T U-Verse
 ·AT&T Southwest
| Any info on why?
It seems strange that they would kill an established brand and infrastructure for a byob voip product, only to introduce another one shortly thereafter. Why go through this transition?
Are they looking to kill the CallVantage infrastructure for some reason (too expensive, not scaleable, wrong architecture, ...???) Are they trying to introduce a different set of technology? If so why not do it under the CallVantage branding and ordering/provisioning/support scheme?
Do they simply want to re-launch the same infrastructure with a different brand??
Or is there some other twist I'm not seeing? I'm pretty puzzled at this move. |
|
morbo
Complete Your Transaction
join:2002-01-22
00000
clubs:
 ·Charter Pipeline
·AT&T Southwest
| said by MyDogHsFleas  :It seems strange that they would kill an established brand and infrastructure remember cingular? people liked that company.
remember sbc? although not liked to the same level, that name and corporate attitude was definitely liked more than at&t.
forget all the $ spent on branding and general marketing. let's just turn everything back into at&t.
add callvantage to the list. kill it. resurrect it in a more horrible form. |
|
Matt
Gone playing Dragon Age Origins
Premium
join:2003-07-20
Jamestown, NC
·North State Commun..
| reply to MyDogHsFleas
said by MyDogHsFleas :It seems strange that they would kill an established brand and infrastructure for a byob voip product, only to introduce another one shortly thereafter. Why go through this transition? To eventually force all the CallVantage customers to a higher tier and/or not have a point of comparison for the newly introduced, higher priced tier?
My guess is they'll say there is a technical issue, which I completely believe. I think they'll use that justification to roll out a cheaper product, using less expensive equipment, at a higher price point.
--
Linux Haters Unite! |
|
en102
Canadian, eh?
join:2001-01-26
Valencia, CA
·RoadRunner Cable
·DSL EXTREME
1 edit | reply to MyDogHsFleas
Probably under a new brand.
Call Vantage was originally designed for business.
This 'new' one, I suspect will be a cheap imitation of Call Vantage (and probably more difficult to get support on) product, with completely different ToS.
Personally, I'd be happy if AT&T brought out something similar to femtocell or T-mobile's service
--
Canada = Hollywood North |
|
scots
Can we have Twinkies?
Premium
join:1999-12-06
Raleigh, NC
·AT&T U-Verse
 ·ooma
·RoadRunner Cable
·AT&T CallVantage
| reply to MyDogHsFleas
AT&T made a statement (I believe it was around a year ago) that CallVantage was having "capacity issues." They never went into any detail as to what exactly that meant, or what would/could be done about it (if anything). It may be easier and/or more cost effective for them to come up with something new than to try to expand and/or fix CallVantage's "capacity issue." I hope that whatever they replace it with works as well as CallVantage does. It's been the best VoIP service I've used, and I've never had any problems with it. |
|
MyDogHsFleas
Premium
join:2007-08-15
Austin, TX
·AT&T U-Verse
·AT&T Southwest
| reply to morbo
said by morbo :said by MyDogHsFleas :It seems strange that they would kill an established brand and infrastructure remember cingular? people liked that company. agree -- but that really was just a rebranding. it was still cingular, just with a different name.
remember sbc? although not liked to the same level, that name and corporate attitude was definitely liked more than at&t.
Disagree -- SBC was hated, AT&T had a generally positive branding. Only here in dslreports.com does insane AT&T hatred fester. Check it out in the real world.
forget all the $ spent on branding and general marketing. let's just turn everything back into at&t.
add callvantage to the list. kill it. resurrect it in a more horrible form.
??? well that has not at all informative. I was looking for INFORMATION. That was pretty much just some random spew. |
|
MyDogHsFleas
Premium
join:2007-08-15
Austin, TX
·AT&T U-Verse
·AT&T Southwest
| reply to en102
scots, en102 -- good posts
I do remember them now complaining about "capacity limits" but they brought out Release 2 of their infrastructure to fix that. CV now has two completely different sets of servers, old and new. In fact I have one TA on the old, and one on the new.
I also recall now that CV was originally designed as a business offering. IBM, which is good buddies with AT&T, provides CV to their home office employees (of which I am one).
Maybe it will be femtocell linked to AT&T Wireless (nee Cingular) using your broadband as an alternative backhaul. That would actually be really sweet. No more multiple phones and phone numbers for me and my family! Too good to actually be true, I fear. |
|
morbo
Complete Your Transaction
join:2002-01-22
00000
clubs:
·Charter Pipeline
·AT&T Southwest
| reply to MyDogHsFleas
rebranding is killing the established brand, especially when you aren't tweaking the brand but renaming it after old ma-bell.
who says at&t had a more positive branding than sbc? the reason they went to at&t was people were more aware of the name at&t over sbc. not it had a more positive view from the public. the public doesn't forget the old monopoly days. everyone does know who at&t is though.
in addition, the at&t wireless brand that was milked in its final months of all that was good (customer service, call quality, etc.) the at&t name was trashed for several months if not longer, while the corporate structure essentially sold out the consumers.
even if you disagree with the sbc comments, just look at how they took the cingular brand and threw a sack of crap on top of it, renaming it 'at&t wireless'. |
|
EPS
join:2008-02-13
Hingham, MA
| Cingular wasn't renamed at&t wireless- the legal name of the wireless company was changed to "AT&T Mobility LLC", but the only brand they want you to use is at&t, without any descriptor- which probably works better in places like here where there's no landline at&t to deal with.
I always found it funny that Cingular bought the old AT&T Wireless (which DID use that name), spent tons of money to say "AT&T Wireless is now Cingular", and then very shortly after had to spend tons of money to say "Cingular is now 'the new' at&t". |
|
en102
Canadian, eh?
join:2001-01-26
Valencia, CA
·RoadRunner Cable
·DSL EXTREME
| reply to MyDogHsFleas
I suspect so as well... while it would be great to see something similar to what Sprint has (use your existing phone, unlimited over a home based device through broadband), I suspect that AT&T would rather sell something more like T-Mobile's answer... another line, tied in through cellular infrastructure, but over broadband connection. AT&T likes extra numbers (looks good having extra 'subs'), while Sprint's solution aims at less overall 'lines' technically with a more mobile aimed solution, similar to UMA.
--
Canada = Hollywood North |
|
markofmayhem
join:2004-04-08
Pittsburgh, PA | What's this Sprint product called? I can't find it and would love to use my home phone over broadband charged to my cell phone like T-Mobile. |
|
hottboiinnc
ME
join:2003-10-15
Cleveland, OH
·Time Warner Cable
·buckeye cable
| reply to EPS
By changing the legal name of the company it they did rebrand it. How? They do NOT use the name Cingular anymore except on their wireless network when you search for GSM carriers for signal. That's it. Everything else says ATT. cingular.com goes to wireless.att.com thats is a rebrand. Their commericals say ATT Wireless. NOT Cingular.
They rebranded the company weather you want to agree or not. Rebranding is when you change the name of a company and no longer use the old one in marketing or any other form. |
|
not
@swbell.net
| reply to MyDogHsFleas
there are several reasons
not scalable.
not easily upgradeable.
older architecture.
older network.
older ordering/provisioning/support
not fully e911 compliant.
not IMS compliant.
new platform already has more customers than callvantage.
new platform will have more features than callvantage. |
|
djrobx
join:2000-05-31
Valencia, CA | quote:
new platform already has more customers than callvantage.
Does that mean the new platform is U-Verse Voice? How else would that be possible? |
|
dot_null
Premium
join:2004-06-28
Kennesaw, GA
·Callcentric
·Comcast
·VoiceStick
·AT&T Southeast
| reply to markofmayhem
It's called the AirRave. There is a host of information about it on HowardForums: »howardforums.com
--
A little off center & loving it! »www.euphoricarythmia.com/ |
|
fiberguy
My views are my own.
Premium
join:2005-05-20
| reply to MyDogHsFleas
AT&T did NOT have a good name with people.. in the real world it wasn't well liked. It only had one thing going; it had name recognition. As a company, AT&T was was not consumer friendly.. they violated law after law... and they didn't do much innovating for years. They purchased a good cable conglomerate and gutted and fillet it and left those customers to rot.
I'm sorry to disagree with you but AT&T was a horrible company.. even outside BBR. (And I don't agree with BBR very often) |
|
KrK
Heavy Artillery For The Little Guy
Premium
join:2000-01-17
Tulsa, OK
·AT&T Yahoo
·AT&T DSL Service
·Cox HSI
·AT&T Southwest
| reply to EPS
Great time to plug the great Steven Colbert piece on AT&T... 
»www.youtube.com/watch?v=I6nuwQmhrZ8 |
|
phonebrain
@charter.com
| reply to en102
The play to go with BYOB is already the way I use Callvantage. I is NOT My understanding that anything but the LAST MILE of Callvantage goes over the PUBLIC net as that would be SKYPE! And its worked without a pop, snap or crackle for 4 years- and I am a SW network engineer for more than 20 years.
The IP rides in the DOCSIS frame for the last mile on a shared media (public net) but once in the CO it is routed onto an ATT VPN which is ATT Backbone-maybe they tell U-verse people that to calm them. QOS is not needed in cable in last mile much as its such a fat pipe-with video recently I have had some upstream congestion maybe during a peak 20 mins. a day...usually not bad but tells you they need to fix DOCSIS to do some prioritization in the VOIP gateways and from the CO to the CPE. Anyway point here is I can not GET ATT DSSL as I am in VZ land but I CAN GET CALLVANTAGE AND I CAN GET ATT WIRELESS so the customers ATT would want would be to STEAL VZs cellular customers especially the ones already lost to Callvantage or Vonage as hey are RIPE for the picking. OF COURSE THAT WOULD BE VIA FMC
and yes Femtocells would do it--ONE PHONE for Cell and home...
and likely unlike T-Mobile they would not use DUAL MODE hand sets but the iPhone could takk direct to femto tower. Finally iPhone operation when in HOME mode runs ENHANCED FEATURE SET due to the faster and CHEAPER BACKHAUL. Home calls are al free as are premium features that are more when "wandering" that is moving outside of a hot spot in the ATT network..
once at work...a picocell device could then take over and offer free calling within your office net--later..for now I see a DOUBLE PLAY Move
to retain and expand STICKY CELL SERVICE and to admit as well DSL is a lame way to deploy so expand business as we lay fiber and pay for it via cells etc.
Saying BEST EFFORT confuses people--the only BEST EFFORT for VOIP is when its over DSL if the traffivc is not tagged as VOIE in the TOS feild
from the DSLAM (if its IP--or if ATM tagged CBR) then its BEST EFFORT, purely an issue from the CO to the CPE---as far as from CO to
the core---come on boys-CALLVANTAGE AINT GOING OVER THE PUBLIC NET
NOR IS U-VERSE --they are both mapped next hop to the ATT IP BACKBONE...
otherwise the calls would be FREE LIKE SKYPE_-even SKYPE has paid calling where they go over say LEVEL 3s network and do so EXACTLY in way I say via routing to LEVE:L 3s VPN.....
otay...
phonebrain |
|
SolarPup
IT Geek-Dawg
Premium
join:2002-03-07
The Pound
clubs: | reply to KrK
That's friggin hilarious! |
|
hmm
@swbell.net
| reply to djrobx
said by djrobx : quote:
new platform already has more customers than callvantage.
Does that mean the new platform is U-Verse Voice? How else would that be possible? The new platform is an IMS VoIP platform. Currently the only product being sold on this platform is U-Verse Voice. |
|
