I'm looking forward to my Fiber from TDSTelecom providing 2Gbps Up/2Gbps down and it's not remotely that expensive.
Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
AT&T Bringing $180/Month 5-Gigabit Internet to 70 Cities
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
I was looking at how AT&T cells and lines are set up when I happened onto this gentleman’s YouTube video the makes use of cellmapper.net. It’s actually fascinating to find there is a wealth of information for examination of all the cell telecoms coverage including 5G coverage for possible home services. As you watch you’ll see the video is not just about the two 5G home internet boxes.
Last edited:
Chances are if you clicked on internet availability, that’s the dsl availability not fiber. The att site is a bit misleading and even though I have att fiber now, when I click internet availability is says it’s not available at my address. If I route through the menus and go to internet fiber, then it shows up properly.
Wow and I pay Cox 82.99 for 150 megabits down. (Including the absolutely trash $10/month “panoramic Wi-Fi” device rental I’m letting them rob me of since I can’t decide on a good, future-proofed modem that doesn’t break the bank).
It's great for uploading Ultra HD video, and off-site backups! Most people don't need it though...
Funny, living in a village with 1500 inhabitants in Switzerland I am using a cellular plan. Costs zero as I get an extra sim card with my phone subscription. 850Mbit/200Mbit over 5G with no cap, no limits. So yes you can have decent cellular if you live in the right place.
Interesting. It sort of sounds like TDS, which is expanding huge in the Midwest with fiber. They sent us loads of ‘promos’ that they were coming to our neighborhood for install, but our neighbors three blocks to the west of us will not receive that same offer, only they have to be stuck with likes of shady Spectrum.
Gamer needs reliable low latency network, not 8000000Gbps network that has a 1s latency and gets disconnected every 5s.
Gotcha beat! Crazy thing is I am in the SF metro area... I guess my street just doesn't have the cables laid.
Attachments
It depends on the part of the city, and they’re adding more areas from time to time.
I’m in San Diego and on AT&T’s 1gbps fiber, and it’s fabulous. No, I don’t need 1gbps downloads (much less 2gbps or 5gbps), but its worth it because:
- I never have to worry about download speeds, it’s just not an issue any more. Everything transfers basically instantly. Even large PS5 games only take a few minutes.
- It’s a symmetric connection, 940mbps down and up, where my previous was 100mbps down / 10mbps up (symmetric makes online backup much more reasonable).
- There’s no cap on how much you transfer (the old cable service had a cap - I never hit it, but came close on occasion and had to keep it in mind).
- I get 4ms ping times to the machines in the office.
- The old above-ground cable lines had weather-related problems once in a while, while the shiny new fiber lines are super reliable.
- It was about the same price as the old cable service (it was considerably cheaper with the introductory price for the first year, now it’s… I think still a few dollars less - and comes with HBO Max bundled in, lowering the effective price a bit more).
AT&T today announced the launch of upgraded AT&T Fiber plans, which support speeds of up to 5 Gigabits for some customers. There are two separate plans, one "2 GIG" plan and one "5 GIG" plan, available to new and existing AT&T Fiber subscribers.
According to AT&T, the new plans are available to nearly 5.2 million customers across 70 metro areas including Los Angeles, Atlanta, Chicago, San Francisco, San Diego, Los Angeles, Raleigh, Miami, and Dallas, with a full list available on AT&T's website.
AT&T Fiber 2 GIG is priced at $110 per month plus taxes, while the highest-speed AT&T Fiber 5 GIG plan is priced at $180 per month plus taxes.
AT&T is enacting a new "straightforward pricing" policy, which means there are no data limits, no equipment fees, no annual contract, and no "deals" that will see prices increase at 12 months. These high-end plans include AT&T ActiveArmor internet security, "next-gen WiFi support," and HBO Max access.
With the launch of these new multi-gigabit internet plans, AT&T is calling itself the "fastest major internet provider." AT&T intends to continue to expand its faster connection speeds to additional customers, with plans to cover 30 million customer locations by the end of 2025.
Article Link: AT&T Bringing $180/Month 5-Gigabit Internet to
AT&T today announced the launch of upgraded AT&T Fiber plans, which support speeds of up to 5 Gigabits for some customers. There are two separate plans, one "2 GIG" plan and one "5 GIG" plan, available to new and existing AT&T Fiber subscribers.
According to AT&T, the new plans are available to nearly 5.2 million customers across 70 metro areas including Los Angeles, Atlanta, Chicago, San Francisco, San Diego, Los Angeles, Raleigh, Miami, and Dallas, with a full list available on AT&T's website.
AT&T Fiber 2 GIG is priced at $110 per month plus taxes, while the highest-speed AT&T Fiber 5 GIG plan is priced at $180 per month plus taxes.
AT&T is enacting a new "straightforward pricing" policy, which means there are no data limits, no equipment fees, no annual contract, and no "deals" that will see prices increase at 12 months. These high-end plans include AT&T ActiveArmor internet security, "next-gen WiFi support," and HBO Max access.
With the launch of these new multi-gigabit internet plans, AT&T is calling itself the "fastest major internet provider." AT&T intends to continue to expand its faster connection speeds to additional customers, with plans to cover 30 million customer locations by the end of 2025.
Article Link: AT&T Bringing $180/Month 5-Gigabit Internet to 70 Cities
One key advantage of living in Asia is that I pay 20% of this AT&T charge for 10Gbit fiber.
Point well taken. 6E will be more than enough for most people of course there are always exceptions
Price is simple but high, considering they’re selling something the majority of people doesn’t need or want
For a household who really need these speeds?
I can get 1/1 gbps ($57 per month, no data cap and price include taxes) but I only pay for 250/250 mbps ($37 per month, no data cap and price includes taxes) and have never felt I needed more. And to be fair it's rarely I saturate the bandwidth I have available.
EDIT:// I don't live in the US, I just converted what I pay for my internet to USD so people can relate to how it is in other places.
I can get 1/1 gbps ($57 per month, no data cap and price include taxes) but I only pay for 250/250 mbps ($37 per month, no data cap and price includes taxes) and have never felt I needed more. And to be fair it's rarely I saturate the bandwidth I have available.
EDIT:// I don't live in the US, I just converted what I pay for my internet to USD so people can relate to how it is in other places.
ITT: people asking why anybody needs these speeds and people in second/third world countries saying they only pay a nickel for these speeds.
This is what I hate about the super-duper capitalism of the US. The people and companies are more worried about the bottom line than giving a high quality product/service. I’m all for making some profit so you can reinvest to grow and improve themselves, but they don’t. They just give the C-level execs millions in bonuses and kick the rest of us to the curb. And we’re okay with it.
I'm stuck with Mediacom, one of the worst ISPs around. I pay $99 a month for 300mbps down. Uploads usually are around 40mbps. Probably the worst feature is their stingy data caps. And as soon as I hit around 75% of my cap they start injecting banners warning me I'm getting close.
The only other competitor is AT&T DSL and it only offers around 18mbps. So like most Americans I have very few options.
The only other competitor is AT&T DSL and it only offers around 18mbps. So like most Americans I have very few options.
I live in Phoenix, AZ... and I only have 2 providers. Cox and Centurylink. Cox is overpriced with data caps ($50 add-on for no data cap) and barely a gigabit (over coaxial) available (and it is not symmetrical... you only get 30Mbps up), and Centurylink only offers 40Mbps DSL at my address. Both refuse to add more fiber to the city because of cost. Those greedy companies better not touch a dime of the broadband money from Biden's infrastructure bill that passed a couple months ago.
Companies definitely cherry pick where to upgrade broadband, and not in a good way. They tend to choose neighborhoods/areas that are gentrifying and increasing in home values. Here in a California suburb, we only had up to 200 Mbps with shoddy service that would go down with high winds.
In the past 2 years since the pandemic our home value went up by $300k, and suddenly this year we got notice of Fiber installation. Like clockwork, they were out microtrenching our neighborhood and had the line installed in days.
It's okay if you don't understand it. Those of us who do will happily upgrade when available.
I'm soon to get a 10G router, a 10G switch, an 802.11ax WiFi access point, and a few 10G PCI-e NICs for some desktops, essentially upgrading my infrastructure to support 10G. This will allow my servers and PCs to communicate/transfer data even faster, and will allow my UnRAID server to serve more, and faster. Then when I have the upgraded FTTH from AT&T, I'll be able to support more and faster connections (inbound and outbound) from my home without any issues.
Also, 802.11ax has a theoretical maximum of close to 10G. Of course, nothing in reality will see those speeds on any existing wifi devices any time soon, but that's irrelevant to people who are interested in such things.
It's okay if these speeds aren't for you. They don't have to be. But it doesn't make it any less relevant for the rest of us.
I've never had an issue. In fact, in my time living outside the US and paying much lower telco rates, my service and reliability have been much better.
I think it just goes to show how much US telcos are lining their pockets and how little they actually reinvest into the networks & service. In just a couple decades AT&T has gone from struggling to rapidly expanding and buying up massive, billion dollar multi-media companies, just as an example.