----- Original Message ----- From: "Elliot Onn" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Tuesday, June 18, 2002 2:06 AM Subject: RE: [BAWUG] pubic hot spots - Boingo to add 1000 this year
> > Let me explain my viewpoint, if I may. You and many other individuals > and small businesses have Access Points that have connection to the > Internet. Because many (people) do not use bandwidth to its capacity, > default connections could be listed in an automated system where your > laptop would automatically switch from one WLAN to another seamlessly. > It might be feasible to have a massive wireless network where an AP from > one house bridges to an AP at another. This is certainly technically possible, but ultimately someone must still pay the piper for access. > > But that's just an example of what might happen within the next few > years. My stance is that if you NetStumble and can obtain Net access > whenever you desire, then why should you have to pay for the Internet > with services such as Boingo? After all, their LAN is limited to a > certain space. You can only achieve a strong signal inside of a > Starbucks. With Ricochet, or a streamlined WAN, you can go anywhere you > want, and you'll have a true Internet connection. I don't know about > you, but it would take a bit more equipment than I have to power a > wireless network that spans across Silicon Valley. Using your premise, one could logically conclude that stores should offer free products because shoplifters are able to steal merchadise anyway. > > Sure, true Internet access is not free. You pay taxes to fund your > libraries, schools, and government, which has to maintain the backbone > for our continent. The last time I checked, these were Internet access consumers, not providers. The Internet is a collection of COMMERCIAL backbone networks. > The Internet is not something you can put in your > pocket. It's like TV, yet in Times Square, there is a giant TV > televising NBC's programming. What, you say? For free? If Starbucks puts > in free Internet access, it will cost them all of $30 per store per > month (wholesale purchases). It attracts many customers. They want > customers sitting in their shops and sipping on lattes. Many locations > provide free 802.11b accessible Net access. Of the top of my head, Apple > retail stores encourage people on the street with laptops to browse the > web, courtesy of Red Delicious. $30/month is a long way from covering the cost of SDSL/Frame Relay/Frac T-1 high speed Internet access. Think more like 5X that figure or more for commercial access plus a couple thousand dollars per store in equipment. > > So why is Wayport and Boingo trying to make a killing making people pay > for something they should be getting for free? The Internet should not > be used as a direct product, but rather an incentive to using a service. > > So slice me and dice me, but that's my opinion. > > Elliot You asked for it. This idea of getting a free Internet lunch is flawed to the extent that people ARE in fact paying for these hotspot services, either directly in fees or indirectly in products they purchase while using the services. > > -----Original Message----- > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] On Behalf Of Franz Birkner > Sent: Monday, June 17, 2002 9:26 PM > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]; 'HMM Meganet' > Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Subject: RE: [BAWUG] pubic hot spots - Boingo to add 1000 this year > > Agree completely. We're trying to look forward. > > -----Original Message----- > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of Debi Jones > Sent: Monday, June 17, 2002 8:25 PM > To: HMM Meganet > Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Subject: Re: [BAWUG] pubic hot spots - Goingo to add 1000 this year > > > Personal attacks are bad form, dude. It's reasonable to disagree minus > the > name > calling. > > Here's an example. Your response is very emotionally, so it's clear you > have > strong feelings on this subject. I agree with Dan to the extend that > the > Internet economy would have been better served by being charged for the > connection and use of services, content or applications, rather than > "access" to > free content and services. This would have driven the necessity to > innovate > in > applications and services rather than control of access technologies. > One > of > the reasons the US hasn't evolved in advanced technologies like wireless > and > iTV > is that we have the strongest wireline infrastructure in the world and > flat > rate > access to the PSTN. There are other reasons clearly, but this is one. > > ...Debi > > HMM Meganet wrote: > > > Are you a communist or sick? Today people and companies work for > money. > > Before blowing out such a crap you should spend some money, if you > have, > and > > build a company and really do what you say here and then we see if you > still > > do it for free. When somebody offers something for free he has other > > interests but nothing so far is for free. > > > > > |Yessir, Boingo is a smart company. Make people pay for something > they > > > |can get for free: Internet access. In the coming years, Internet > access > > > |will become as free as water, and available at nearly the same > amount > of > > > |locations as water is. Okay, not quite. > > > > > > I wouldn't count on this. During the transition of the internet > from > > academic > > > and government/support use to public access the entities that were > to > > become > > > the wireline ISPs were quite inventive in finding ways to interpose > > themselves > > > (and their fees) between the net and the end user. Initially they > > leveraged > > > the old notion of authorized users to claim that you had no right to > > connect > > > to the new and improved internet unless you were their customer. > Then > > they > > > created routing cabals to insure that your routes would not be > carried > > unless > > > you were in the club. Much of this was done in the name of > technical > > necessity, > > > but the zeal with which they went after "indirect customers" (both > in > > contract > > > terms and in practice) suggests otherwise. At the time I (and I > assume > > many > > > others) had hoped that the internet would evolve in a more > mesh-connected > > > pattern with access being "free" in the sense that you would have to > pay > > only > > > for the wire to a friendly partner. But deviation from a strict > hierarchy > > > threatened ISP profits, and between contract terms and peering > agreements > > > they made it virtually impossible to "just connect": even if you > could > > find > > > someone who didn't mind risking their connection by violating their > > service > > > contract you couldn't route to your own addresses through them. > > > > > > Now with wireless the medium has changed but the politics haven't. > > (Granted > > > there has also been a technical paradigm shift in the sense that > nobody > > expects > > > to have and route their own address space, and this makes control of > > routes > > > less significant. But that's in the nature of a small silver lining > in > a > > bad > > > cloud of lost functionality.) In any case, just because the cost of > the > > > (virtual) wire may seem to have fallen to zero, don't assume the > ISPs > will > > > roll over. The cost of the wire was never the real obstacle. All > the > > same > > > arguments that were used the first time around are still available > plus > > there > > > are some new ones: the spectrum has to be managed by professionals > for > > the > > > good of everyone or chaos and interference will result, a > > randomly-connected > > > network allows bad guys to be too anonymous, think of the children, > etc. > > So > > > maybe Boingo is smart after all. Profit in the ISP business has > > historically > > > come from making people pay for something that would be mostly free > were > > it > > > not for the efforts of the companies making the profit... > > > > > > Dan Lanciani > > > ddl@danlan.*com > > > -- > > > general wireless list, a bawug thing <http://www.bawug.org/> > > > [un]subscribe: http://lists.bawug.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless > > > > -- > > general wireless list, a bawug thing <http://www.bawug.org/> > > [un]subscribe: http://lists.bawug.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless > > -- > general wireless list, a bawug thing <http://www.bawug.org/> > [un]subscribe: http://lists.bawug.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless > > -- > general wireless list, a bawug thing <http://www.bawug.org/> > [un]subscribe: http://lists.bawug.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless > > -- > general wireless list, a bawug thing <http://www.bawug.org/> > [un]subscribe: http://lists.bawug.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless -- general wireless list, a bawug thing <http://www.bawug.org/> [un]subscribe: http://lists.bawug.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless
