I live in the center of Piedmont and don’t even have access to AT&T DSL, let alone Uverse. Instead my only option is Comcast internet for $63/mth which is a total rip-off. So, do not assume that Uverse is throughout Piedmont. Since, as you note, Piedmont is surrounded by Oakland, I would bet that more Oakland residents have access to Uverse than Piedmont residents.

If you’d be kind enough to look up 3 random addresses per zip code on Trulia.com, verify whether or not Uverse gives them access and then input the results by Zip Code into a spreadsheet, I’ll be happy to add your neighborhood to my survey. It is my belief that if we look at enough data, it will show a pattern.

2. I’m pissed that AT&T has used the cable pricing model once high speed capability is in. They choke down the service and sell it in a good, better, best, elite, model.

3. This is discrimination at the individual ‘pipe’ outlet and should be banned as it is not neutral at all but discriminates by pocket book. If the water department utility had a similar structure and ability, poor people would only have three or four pounds pressure in their lines and water would come in at a trickle whereas the wealthy would have 60 pounds of pressure for showers, etc. The real discrimination comes in in when suppliers of content will be able to make specific content available only to ‘elite service’ customers.
It gives AT&T the ability to ‘red line’ individuals by income, and is an extension of zip code red lining by banks for lending.

4. I would like to know if anyone else is concerned here and if anyone is working to prevent this?

I’ve been attempting to get ANY answer as to when I will get uverse and I too am getting the “we can’t tell you or else the cable company will use it as an advantage against us” response. That doesn’t hold water. What I see in 94086 is a bunch of uverse hardware rusting and unused and still no terminals in 95050 / 95051 Santa Clara.

What is worse is at&t claimed uverse was a stopgap between dsl and their next fiber plan for 2010-2011 start date back in 2006 when they announced it in Texas somewhere. Well that’s nice but it’s now 2009 and it’s not in the heart of silicon valley. Are they giving up?

I’m also in the process of mapping out available areas by typing in individual addresses. Where it is available, in some areas, they are average 30-40% penetration. Our local cable provider, Time Warner Cable, has to be “shaking in their boots.”

What I’ve noticed, so far, is AT&T seems to be going after the “low hanging fruit” as they have installed their nodes (VRADs) close to where their existing switching infrastructure is located. I’m located approximtely 4,800 ft. from the my CO which is fine for my DSL connection but approx. 1,800 ft. too far for their U-Verse service.

AT&T does not seem to “finish off” implementation of U-Verse in their existing communities rather they would prefer to expand into areas where its convenient for them.

Residents a couple of blocks from me have had service for well over a year whereas AT&T has been unresponsive as to when they will install more nodes closer to me and others.

Also, in our area, I’m finding that there does seem to be some correlation as to poorer areas not having access to U-Verse.