I wonder what the "launch of our next generation TV platform means." Could that be the receiver that will be able to do both U-Verse and DirecTV?
The actual DSLReports article quasi-speculates on this (I don't recall if they directly linked to supporting evidence or not).
Basically, AT&T now appears to be looking for a way they can move everything to as an efficient pathway to the premises as possible, and may be attempting to create a new customer infrastructure that "does not care" (to characterize how they may be marketing the equipment) exactly what pipe the packets use to reach the final destination.
Of course, this is the ultimate pipe-dream that every carrier attempts to promise -- "we'll give you a box and you'll receive whatever you want, however you want it."
What's so [almost] ironic about all of this is the recent experience I had with a tech who was servicing a pedestal in our neighborhood. I approached him (he was working on another call) and asked him what the deal was with U-verse coming out to us (we live merely miles from a town on the east side of Atlanta), given that U-verse was already spotty throughout our town. He mentioned that the only infrastructure out our way was a DSLAM for DSL and no VRADS for U-verse to speak of. He also mentioned that our area was essentially packed with phone subscribers (kind of funny considering we, as an example, are completely off landlines for phone). He said we'd have better luck with AT&T running fiber versus waiting for U-verse. I said I agreed and would be continuing to feed the evil beast that is Comcast (can't complain too much about 90Mbps broadband, the service of which is really good).
I really don't know what AT&T is up to. However, given that their customer support for wireless is completely different and significantly better (in my experiences) than their support was for when we had DSL, I'll have to bias my view on the unlikelihood of all of this getting pulled off.
We'll see.
Disclaimer: Long T
