I had been a Charter Cable customer for many, many years (OK, a customer of Charter, and then all the prior names the cable company in my area had before Charter bought them). I had been with them so long that I was a beta tester for broadband cable service when it was first rolled out in this area - a LOOONG time. All this time we have had every channel offered by Charter, plus 10Mbit broadband. This also included HD service and a DVR, which my family and I LOVE. I can't imagine watching TV without a DVR (or HD) anymore.

Overall I wasn't DISsatisfied with Charter, but I wasn't that thrilled. Even though the actual DVR box itself, a MOXI box, has been updated quite a bit since first released, Charter hasn't updated their version of it in a long time. The last thing that was updated on the MOXI box was the ability to add an external USB drive (which I promptly did, because the internal HD was only 80GB - and that's not many HD shows). My other small beef with Charter was that the broadband throughput (downstream) that was advertised was nowhere near what the real throughput was. I supposedly had 10Mbit service, but I was lucky to get 6Mbit on any given day. Since I work from home (and now run my business from here), I really need all the bandwidth I can get.

Recently I had seen ads for a new offering from AT&T, called U-Verse. U-Verse is a new bundled offering from AT&T that provides cable TV, broadband internet, VoIP phone, and cell phone. You can choose to get all of this in a big bundle, or parts thereof to suit your needs. We only need cable TV and broadband, so that's all we purchased. Here's my first impressions of each of these offerings.

Cable TV
U-Verse cable TV is offered at many different levels, with or without HD, and with or without a DVR. We signed up for the "U-450 Max Double Pak", which includes the following (according to their website):

Enjoy all the benefits of fiber optics – a crystal-clear picture along with digital video recording (DVR), access to over 105 High Definition channels, Video on Demand, and top-choice programming—all at a competitive price.

U-watch
** Total Home DVR – Record on 1 DVR. Play on any TV in your home
** 100% digitally delivered television
** Dolby surround sound
** Parental controls – multiple ways to control your family's programming

U-demand
** No waiting in line, no late fees, no checking the mail
** Latest box office, sports, special events and premium content
** Pause it in one room, watch it in another

U-browse
** Picture-In-Picture channel surfing
** Search by actor, movie title or director
** Customizable program guide

U-record
** Record whatever you want, whenever you want, wherever you are
** Record up to 4 programs at once (unique to industry)
** Record remotely from a PC or even a mobile phone

U-interact
** U-bar – personalized information bar with sports scores, weather, news headlines, and stocks on screen
** Yellowpages.com TV – access to information (e.g., local pizza delivery), games and directories

Overall, a nice service. Modern, clean interface, and very useful. The channel lineup is HUGE compared to Charter - easily 1.5x - 2x the number of channels offered by Charter, and there are a TON of HD channels when compared to Charter (maybe 20 on Charter, over 350 on U-Verse). The channel layout is also intuitive - different channel "types" are grouped together (i.e. local channels, sports channels, etc.), and the HD version of a channel can be accessed by simply adding 1000 to the channel number. So, the NFL Network is 630 in regular TV, and 1630 in HD.

Speaking of the NFL Network, Charter was one of the cable companies that refused to deal with the extra cost of the NFL Network, so it wasn't offered. This was a real PITA to me, because I am an NFL fanatic.

The way the DVR works is nice too - not sure if you noticed in the marketing text I quoted, but you can watch DVR content on any TV in the house - this is a VERY nice feature.

Speaking of TVs, let me explain how the system works - and my only real gripe with it.

Geek Info
AT&T U-Verse is IP TV - the TV signals are sent via IP to the home, and then the tuners convert the signal into TV on the fly. The upside of this is that all of the content is very clean, and looks great; the downside is that the TV information sent to your house is NOT "normal" TV signals, you MUST have a converter box on each TV in order to watch TV. When we were with Charter we could hook up extra TVs in our home and they could get "basic" cable - about 75 channels - without the need for any converter box; with U-Verse you must have a converter box to convert the IP TV signal to "regular" TV.

The way the signal is delivered to the home is interesting as well. The U-Verse offerings are sent to the AT&T "box" outside your home, at the curb, optically; and then the signal is sent from that box to the outside of your home via the twisted pair cable that runs from that box to your house. There a converter is installed that converts the signal from the twisted pair to the coax cable running through your home, where the various U-Verse boxes interpret the signals as needed for the offering (i.e. TV, broadband, etc.). I thought this was pretty ingeneous.

The Downside
I have found only one real and glaring problem with the way U-Verse works, and this problem probably wouldn't even BE a problem for most families. When I was first sold U-Verse, and in fact the way it is marketed in general, indicates that there are 4 tuners inside the DVR - 2 HD and 2 "regular" TV. This means that you can record up to 3 shows and watch live TV, or 4 shows and watch something already recorded. Sounds great, right? Not so fast. What this really means is that there are only 4 tuners available for the ENTIRE house.

BTW, when I say "tuners" I am speaking theoretically; since this is IPTV there really aren't "tuners" per se, but instead are a part of the software used to manage the TV lines/channels.

I (mistakenly) thought that there were the four "tuners" in the DVR box for recording/watching shows, and then a single tuner in each of the "satellite" converter boxes at each of the other TVs in your home. Nope. All of those satellite boxes are simply "slave" boxes to the main box, and all share the same 4 tuners with each other and the DVR. Well, for a large family like me who has 4 TVs, this means that if all 4 TVs are running then nothing gets recorded - and two of the signals are non-HD. This last part isn't that big of a deal to us, as we only have 2 HD TVs in our home. However this limitation overall is a serious restriction for large families like mine.

I called AT&T today and asked them about this limitation. I wanted to find out if I could get, say, an extra DVR and gain an additional 4 tuners; turns out it doesn't work that way. There are only 4 TV "lines" that run to each home, so it doesn't matter how many tuners you have, it is how many lines/channels run into the home. I then asked if they plan on addressing this in the future. While the technician was speaking anonymously, he said that other complaints have been made concerning this limitation and that it is seriously being considered as an enhancement in the near future, so stay tuned.

My family and I talked about this limitation, and they all agreed that the benefits outweigh the inconveniences, so overall we're still very happy with the TV portion of U-Verse. Now let's take a quick look at the broadband feature.

Broadband Internet
Another offering that can be bundled as a part of your U-Verse package is broadband internet. Here are the various offerings, once again from the U-Verse site - the downsteam and upsteam speeds are listed in parens, in Mbits:

Our industry-leading AT&T U-verse High Speed Internet provides the protection and amazing speed you need, along with the convenience of built-in wireless home networking. Includes a dynamic IP address, online photo storage, up to 10 additional email accounts, pop-up blocker, and much more.

Max 18 (18 down/1 up)
Push speed to a new high for video streaming and video conferencing capabilities. Plus have the speed required to download multimedia files like movies and music or uploading huge files without getting bogged down.

Max (10 down/1.5 up)
Serious speed for serious Internet users. Perfect for downloading multimedia files like movies and music or uploading other huge files.

Elite (6 down/1 up)
Perfect for gamers and business owners. Supports multiple-users, high-resolution graphics, large attachment uploads, desktop video, and even hosting a website!

Pro (3 down/1 up)
Great speed at a low price! Pro offers almost twice the speed of our Express level. Designed for simultaneous use of web surfing, email, animation-rich commerce, audio and video streaming, gaming on demand, uploading and downloading large files, and other bandwidth intensive applications.

Express (1.5 down/1 up)
Enjoy benefits like email and the ability to download music at speeds much faster than dial-up!

I signed up for "Max" service, which is 10Mbit down/1.5Mbit up. I checked my real-world speed, and I must say I'm impressed:



The speed difference is noticeable as well; my entire family has commented on how much faster the internet "feels" while they use it.

The equipment installed with U-Verse is nice as well. It is made by 2Wire (model: 3800 HGV-B). This unit is actually a combination of a few units - the modem, a router, a firewall, and a wireless router (and if you used AT&T VoIP, it would serve as that router as well). The unit supports 802.11 a/b/g


2Wire 3800HGV-B - front


2Wire 3800HGV-B - back

The unit is extremely easy to set up, especially if you're used to dealing with wireless routers. The interface is very intuitive, and I was able to configure and secure my unit in less than 10 minutes (including restarts of the unit when changes were made).

U-Verse uses VDSL instead of traditional cable protocols; however the VDSL is delivered to the modem via coax cable instead of twisted pair (traditional phone wiring), since everything is sent over coax inside the home from the converter box mounted on the outside wall of the home. For those of you who aren't sure of the differences between ADSL/ADSL2 (what most people know of) and VDSL/VDSL2, here's a quick primer (modified from BroadbandInfo.net:

• ADSL stands for Asymmetric digital subscriber line. It is the weakest and slowest of the forms of DSL. ADSL speeds will never surpass 8 Mbps downstream and only 1 Mbps upstream. The unbalanced rate of receiving and sending data is what makes the system asymmetrical. The range for ADSL can reach around 15,000 feet from the central office.
• ADSL 2 is similar to ADSL and typically the modems can be interchangeable. The difference is that ADSL 2 offers a downstream rate of up to 25 Mbps, while the upstream rate remains the same as regular ADSL, at 1 Mbps. The range of 15,000 feet from the central office also remains the same.
• VDSL is a different type of DSL that can offer customers up to 100 Mbps downstream and 50 Mbps upstream. The range from the central office is 5,000 feet, more limited than ADSL and ADSL 2. VDSL is mostly used in very densely populated and condensed cities in Asia because of its lack of distance.
• VDSL 2 is currently the most advanced version of all DSL connections. Not yet offered in most areas of the country, VDSL 2 offers a symmetrical upstream/downstream rate of 100 Mbps, with a range from central office of 12,000 feet. VDSL 2 offers the very fastest speed, with a strong distance range, for a highly desired service around the world.

Conclusion
So far, my family and I are extremely pleased with AT&T U-Verse. The service offers state-of-the-art technology in IP TV and VDSL, and the depth, breadth, and quality of the offerings in this package are quite impressive. I am slightly disappointed in the TV line limitation for each home, but I think this is a problem we can work around until an enhancement is added to the service. Overall I am very glad my family and I made the switch from Charter to U-Verse, and I look forward to continuing to explore all that this service has to offer.

Here's a writeup at Wikipedia about AT&T U-Verse, in case you're interested.

I'll check back in a couple of months and let you know my impressions after I have lived with this service for awhile.

Posted by Rocky Oliver At 10:35 AM Location - Flowery Branch, GA | Permalink | Comments (6)

As many of you know, I live on a peninsula on a lake near Atlanta called Lake Lanier. It is a beautiful place, and I really do love living and raising my family here.

One day I was driving over Buford Dam, which is the earthen dam that was constructed to create Lake Lanier. It generates power for the city of Atlanta, controls the flow of the Chatahoochee River through Georgia and into Alabama and Florida, and overall is very beautiful. Anyway, while driving over the dam I was struck with how steep the river-side of the dam (i.e. the side that isn't submurged). The dam itself is 192 feet tall, and the steep incline of the river side of the dam is breathtaking when looking down to the river below. The river side of the dam is sloped at a pretty steep angle - I would say at least 60degrees, and maybe even a bit more than that. The river side of the dam is covered in fescue grass - so the obvious question (ok, obvious to a geek) is, "How do they cut the grass on the river side of Buford Dam?"

The Wrong Answer
Unfortunately many engineers/architects/problem-solvers would approach solving this problem by wholeheartedly beginning to design some complicated lawn-mowing monstrosity. It would probably be very expensive, hard to operate, not very safe, prone to failure, and require specialized training to operate and maintain. Ugh.

Let me ask you: Does that sound like a good solution?

While this is an unusual example, the pattern is repeated quite often, every day, by many (most?) Problem Solvers in software design and development shops. Problem Solvers are quick to eagerly design some engineering monstrosity that (attempts to) solve the problem - and quite often has a few extra "bells and whistles" added in anticipation of problems you "may" (however unlikely) have.

Sound familiar?

Luckily the person who solved this particular problem was willing to look at all facets of the problem, and consider a wide variety of possible solutions - and a great solution was found. Let's get back to my little story....

The Elegant, Simple Solution
As I drove over Buford Dam I was struck with the question of how in the hell did they mow that grass? And then the solution became apparent.

OK, maybe "apparent" isn't quite the right word. The solution walked out from behind some trees on the side of the dam. Actually a small herd of solutions, to be exact.

Mountain Goats. The solution to the grass-cutting problem on Buford Dam is a herd of Mountain Goats.

Think about it. This solution is really quite elegant in it's appropriateness and simplicity:

• It is a solution that is particularly designed to solve the problem at hand.
• If uses resources appropriately - It cuts the grass at the appropriate height, so it continues to grow and doesn't die.
• It doesn't require special training or handling.
• It is very low maintenance.
• It is completely safe and is, in fact, environmentally friendly.

Lessons from this story apply in our world as well. I think that many of us in IT make the mistake of always looking to design something "new", "high tech", or "groundbreaking" - when quite frequently the best answer is simple, elegant... and often right in front of us. Our customers come to us for the right, best answer, and we are responsible for finding it. In order to do this we need to take the time to get outside of our techie think mode on occasion, take a step back, and look at the problem from different angles so we can look for the best solution - a solution that is "just right", or good enough.

Time for me to wander off on a diversion, at least for a little bit.

Time for a Diversion
As I have been thinking about simple solutions, "Good Enough" solution architecture (more on that in a bit), and so on I have began to formulate this concept that there is a range, or spectrum, of software applicability to the given problem. Take a look at the image below, and let me explain a bit further.

On the far left of the X-axis is our problem with "No Solution". Since this is "No Solution", you'll see that, along the Y-Axis, this takes 100% of our work effort - which makes sense. Then, as we love along the X-axis, you can see that there are various solutions, and their relative levels of effectiveness. A "Pretty Good" solution drops the work required down to 45% or so; and then there is the perfect "Just Right" solution that achieves the lest amount of work possible (in this example), 25% (assuming you can't get a solution that requires 0% work).

And then we begin to slide to the other side of "Just Right", where the solutions become more and more over-engineered. A "Little Overboard" isn't too bad - it still saves a bunch of work as it requires only 60% of the original work used with "No Solution". But as the possible solutions become more and more over-engineered, eventually the worst-possible-scenario solution is reached - the "God Help Me" solution - which not only requires as much work as "No Solution", but it actually requires MORE work than originally required (in this case 130%)!!

The causes of this excessive work are varied, but usually revolve around a solution with too many configuration settings, too many moving parts, too much babysitting required, too much maintenance required, too vast a dataset size created, and so on. You get the idea.

The "God Help Me" solution types are all too prevalent in IT today, and even within the IBM/Lotus market. I hate to say this, but many facets of IBM are often the creators of incredible "God Help Me" solutions - some earlier incarnations of Websphere come to mind, as well as some of the solutions in the now-defunt (thank god) "Workplace" strategy. SAP is a very visible example as well, as anyone who has worked with SAP can attest.

So our goal, as IT professionals, is to attempt to create solutions as close to "Just Right" as possible - or at least between "Pretty Good" and "Little Overboard". If we're able to land in that zone with our solutions, then we will be serving our customers honorably, and not causing them more problems than we solve.

OK, enough with the diversion; let's get back to the main story, but keep this diversion in mind, because it does apply to the big picture.

Good Enough Solution Architecture
The concept of Good Enough solution architecture is fairly simple. Basically, Good Enough solution architecture states that the best solution is one that simply addresses the specified problem at hand, and nothing more. If more features are needed or additional issues arise and need to be addressed, then these items will be made apparent by your user base during the usage of the solution. During the initial design and development of the solution, the solution architecture should never be enhanced unless the enhancement directly services the stated goal of the solution. But, then, what is this "stated goal"?

Before you begin defining the design of your solution you need to derive a simple, common-language statement of the problem at hand. This definition should be no more than a couple of sentences - a paragraph or two at most - and should clearly express the problem. After the problem is simply stated, then create a "Goal" for the project, one that is based on the problem statement. The Goal should also state, in common language, what the project should accomplish. The Goal should be measurable, because this Goal is what will be used to decide if the project is successful.

Incidentally, when I say that the Problem and Goal statements should be in "common language", this means that these statements should be communicated more in the way actual normal people talk, and less the way we geeks talk (i.e. no "geek speak"!). These statements should definitely be technology agnostic as well - meaning that they shouldn't mention any technologies, platforms, etc. AT ALL, because this isn't how normal people talk. Keep in mind that you can define all the techie stuff later, when you're actually designing the solution.

There's one more thing I want to add to this "common language" talk. Please don't try to blind your clients with your brilliance (or baffle them with your bullshit!). They hired you (or, in the case of corporate developers, they've picked you for this project), so they already think highly of you. Blowing them away with language and jargon that they don't understand will simply make them feel uncomfortable at best, and piss them off at worst. It is better to let your work speak to your brilliance, especially in the elegant simplicity of your solution.

Lawn-mowing goats come to mind...

Conclusion, for Now
Later on I'll write another article that describes some ideas around how you get from Problem and Goal to Simple Solution; but for now I would like for you to think about the concepts I've introduced in this article, and let me know what you think, concepts and techniques you use that are similar (or different!) than these, and so on. We'll have a good discussion, and later on I'll publish the followup article to this one.

In the meantime, keep it simple, and keep it elegant.

UPDATE: I made some small grammatical corrections throughout the article, and then decided to add one more paragraph towards the end, in this color. **Rock
Rock