On Mon, 24 Apr 2006, Rob Kelley wrote:
> I can't tell how much of this is FUD (Fear Uncertainty and Doubt) > reporting, but it's on AP and ABCNews... Hrm, typical journalism > Does anyone else know what's really going on with the St. Cloud > deployment? IMO, it looks like a problem with user education. I would agree. Specifically, it is a failure of 'expectation management'. What I am trying to do here in Cambridge is to not promise the world, but instead say "there will be free wireless Internet across the city", and not throughout the city. It's impossible to cover every household and every square foot of the city. What I am trying to build is a network that will grow as funding and interest grow. I would like to see 50% coverage by the end of the summer, 85-90% within a year. The next 9% will take longer, and take more money. The last 1% of the people are unlucky, and may have to use their laptop away from home. > Well, to respond to the writer, I see one lesson learned: as the > stakes increase, free-to-the-public wi-fi networks should expect to be > put under more of a microscope (especially by naysayers). Maybe SLAs >are >in order. How about no SLAs? Why make more work for the lawyers? It's a best-effort service. People need to learn that. Damn, I need to finish writing my book on muni wifi ;) and expound upon this. -- NYCwireless - http://www.nycwireless.net/ Un/Subscribe: http://lists.nycwireless.net/mailman/listinfo/nycwireless/ Archives: http://lists.nycwireless.net/pipermail/nycwireless/
