The muni wifi deals are the ones operating under the belief of: "build it and they will come" As a wisp who has slowly, but consistently built out my network, thats a bad theory. We build it where there is demand.
George Brian Webster wrote: > No big surprise here. The problem with the municipal networks that I saw > was the cities that thought they were going to get all this infrastructure > for free. I'm sorry but I don't think you can get enough ad revenue from any > of these networks to support the real cost of building a system properly. In > reality all of these cities should have learned from Verizon and their wi-fi > deployment in New York City. Verizon was never able to build on every phone > booth because they didn't all have power at them. They discovered after > building what they could, that usage patterns emerged. People were only apt > to use the hotspots in locations where they could conveniently fire up their > computers. Municipal mesh networks should do the same. Deploy what I call > "Hot Pods" only in areas that make sense. Residential neighborhoods make no > sense in my opinion. There are many other options for broadband in those > neighborhoods and with the trees typically in those areas, your node density > per user ratio stinks (and your customer per node ratio does as well). That > is what drives up the cost of building these networks. > If a municipality wants ubiquitous coverage all over a city for their > employees to use, then they should be paying a large portion of the cost of > that network. You can't expect someone else to pay for it for you. Wireless > is great but to compete in residential areas over a mesh on 802.11b/g is not > a good business model. With things like FIOS and cable being able to deliver > 3 to 10 times the bandwidth to a customer, mesh does not make sense and the > consumer knows this. Wireless is good for mobility but most users do not > need it everywhere all the time. > No let me really climb up on my soapbox..... As far as free internet > service for citizens, that makes about as much sense as free telephone, > electricity and gas!!!! If they worry about their underprivileged > neighborhoods not have equal opportunity access to the internet, have them > stand around their local library where they already offer this. Unless there > are lines a mile long at the computers, I doubt there is that much of a pent > up need. These same people can somehow find a way to pay $5 a pack for > cigarettes, I don't think $35 a month or less for broadband service that > they can then use to reduce other cost like phone bills will make a > difference. Broadband internet is an essential infrastructure for a > community. That is true. Providing it for free can not be done unless the > municipality is going to foot the bill. All WISP's know it takes money to > deliver bandwidth. Many of these mesh projects were led down the Primrose > path by their internal IT geeks who thought a muni mesh network was as > simple as throwing up a bunch of meraki nodes or flashing some linksys > routers with open source tools. Those Utopian idealists forget to think > about who then bears the cost of delivering the rest of the commercial > internet to their love and hug fest........ <off soap box....lol> > Don't get me wrong, I was the Chief Engineer for EarthLink on the Philly > project. I like the idea of municipal mesh and I know they can work. I just > think many municipalities and some commercial companies needs a reality > check on what it takes in cost to build one. Then they need to examine what > it takes to make a profitable business model from one. Eventually these > networks will be working well and with devices like the IPhone, cellular > carriers will welcome them to offload some of their traffic (roaming > revenue?). Their networks certainly won't be able to shoulder the bandwidth > demand of all the kids watching TV on their phones. Muni mesh networks will > be able to absorb a lot of that demand. It's just time the politicians > realized it costs some long term money to develop this....... I could go on > for hours but I'm know I'm just preaching to the choir on this topic. It's > Monday, guess I needed to vent... :-) > > > > Thank You, > Brian Webster > > -----Original Message----- > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Behalf Of Jack Unger > Sent: Sunday, February 03, 2008 8:45 PM > To: WISPA General List > Subject: [WISPA] MetroFi - Portland - Uh oh > > > > http://wifinetnews.com/archives/008158.html > > > -- > Jack Unger - President, Ask-Wi.Com, Inc. > Serving the Broadband Wireless Industry Since 1993 > FCC License # PG-12-25133 > Author of the Cisco Press Book - "Deploying License-Free Wireless WANs" > Vendor-Neutral Wireless Training-Troubleshooting-Consulting > Phone 818-227-4220 Email <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > > > > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- > ---- > WISPA Wants You! Join today! > http://signup.wispa.org/ > ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- > ---- > > WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org > > Subscribe/Unsubscribe: > http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless > > Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/ > > > > -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- > WISPA Wants You! Join today! > http://signup.wispa.org/ > -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- > > WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org > > Subscribe/Unsubscribe: > http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless > > Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/ -- George Rogato Welcome to WISPA www.wispa.org http://signup.wispa.org/ -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- WISPA Wants You! Join today! http://signup.wispa.org/ -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
