AT&T completes 100-Gigabit Ethernet field trial using new Cisco gear, proves it does care

Remember those network investments that AT&T was talking up just days before Time Warner slipped over an offer for help? Looks as if the firm wasn't kidding around, but there's still nothing here that should get you excited about more available bandwidth in the coming days. Utilizing that fancy new Cisco router, the carrier recently completed a live network environmental trial of 100-Gigabit backbone network technology (far more hasty than that 40-Gigabit stuff that's around today), but we're told that the tech isn't expected to be ready for "commercial deployment" until the "next few years." 'Course, we suspect we should be struck by the notion that the internet may actually have the proper infrastructure to keep on keepin' on once Hulu really does take over the world, but for now, we'll just have to extract a bit more joy from those vague "little things" in life.

[noob4u Posted Mar 10th 2010 9:38PM]

Hell yes!! I think there LTE service is gonna be the best this time around

[think before you react Posted Mar 11th 2010 5:35AM]

@noob4u
I'm not sure, I love AT&T because it's what's best for me where I live. Others like VZW because it's best for them where they live. I think there will always be a war over whose is best and all the other BS. All I care about is super speed broadband and LTE coming to me from some carrier and a reasonable price. I can't wait until I can download a 1080p movie in a few minutes like I do an mp3!

[emopoops Posted Mar 11th 2010 5:39AM]

@noob4u what does that even mean?

[JoeRodricks Posted Mar 11th 2010 6:02AM]

If they're moving to 100 Gigabit parts, they must be getting rid of those old, slow 40 Gigabit parts. I'll take 2 please.

[JustEric Posted Mar 11th 2010 5:21PM]

@JoeRodricks Sorry, Joe...they're going to donate them to Verizon so they can upgrade their network.

[noob4u Posted Mar 11th 2010 6:22PM]

@think before you react

ATT has been considerable beefing up there network for the last couple of years basically to be the fastest network with HSPA+ and LTE...i do believe they might get there act together this time around

[pika2000 Posted Mar 11th 2010 5:35AM]

'the tech isn't expected to be ready for "commercial deployment" until the "next few years."'
Translation: "The tech is ready, but we're going to trickle them bit by bit as long as possible, and keep increasing our rates at the same time."

[Colrath Posted Mar 11th 2010 5:41AM]

@pika2000 Be careful, pika. That kind of language brings to mind a black bag and some concrete blocks.

[bub505 Posted Mar 11th 2010 5:52AM]

AT&T also sells commercial networks to businesses, not just mobile services. I really do think that this announcement relates to that part of their business.
Also, Verizon Business has been running 100g ethernet in a commercial environment using Nortel hardware between Paris and Frankfurt since the end of last year....
Just my 2 cents.

[jmcburna Posted Mar 11th 2010 6:14AM]

See the article about 2 or 3 spaces down the page. Looks like we are paying for this too. Whatever happened to risk in business? There is no risk anymore for corporations. If you flop, you get absorbed or move on to cashing in on grants and paying yourselves dearly to introduce another "necessary" flop to consumers. Look up Aristotle and read some political thought. This can't last forever. Thanks for putting more speed up there so we can pay for it AT&T. I hope it melts down before we get stuck paying the bill....oh wait, we already have. Hope it melts anyway.

[hh83917 Posted Mar 11th 2010 6:38AM]

Nice, but the only thing I want to know is when can we get consumer type FTTN with Download/upload speed comparable to the Verizon FIOS FTTH.

[Techsan Posted Mar 11th 2010 10:37AM]

@hh83917 Does Verizon have "consumer type FTTN with Download/upload speed comparable to the Verizon FIOS FTTH"?

[admlshake Posted Mar 11th 2010 7:34AM]

Now all the need to do is run the fiber to peoples houses and not just the trunk in their area.

[Andrew U Posted Mar 11th 2010 8:37AM]

Too bad Hulu will not take over the world. It only works in the US.

[KAL326 Posted Mar 11th 2010 9:35AM]

Forget Google on their messily 1GB connection. How do I get this run to my house? Uverse Super Ultra Max tier maybe?

[Captain Underpants and the Bring Posted Mar 11th 2010 12:16PM]

@KAL326 that would be AT&T multiverse.

[donv69 Posted Mar 11th 2010 10:28AM]

Shouldn't the next speed boost be at least 200 Gigabits. I know 100 Gigabits is a alot, but won't consumption by the time it is released be relatively the same as now with the 40 Gigabits.

[AM321CAN Posted Mar 11th 2010 1:37PM]

seeing as no one really uses gigabits or megabits. Let's just stop using them, because the average user only understands GB and MB. So wtf is 100 gb in GB please, and never use this gb/mb terminology again. K thanks.

[VampireHunterZ Posted Mar 11th 2010 1:47PM]

@AM321CAN It's just an artificial way to make the number look big. 100 gb is 12.5 GB. What I really want to know is what does this mean for Uverse. I could use more bandwidth especially upload speed.

[THJ Posted Mar 11th 2010 4:37PM]

@AM321CAN divide by 8

[KAL326 Posted Mar 12th 2010 10:11AM]

@VampireHunterZ Upload increase would be nice, but they have things set to heavy on the download side because they want you to use all their services TV and Phone. Internet only users get the shaft on QOS rules for video services that aren't being used are still applied to internet only users. People complain a lot more if their video cuts out, but internet they can blame on everybody else if it hickups. Also the FTTN/VDSL route only allows higher sync rates under shorter distance then even DSL had. FTTP or high upload isn't happening.