print      source      versions

tags: technology   wifi   

Related articles
Toledo Wi-Fi Debate - Aug 29, 2007

Comments ... #

ah...so maybe having information about the success/failure of other systems before jumping on the band wagon was a good idea after all ....

posted by MaggieThurber on Aug 15, 2007 at 03:37:03 pm     #

It seems to be the same thing as how slow broadband were to rollout. DSL companies were throttled because the phone companies didn't see much money to be made on something that would cannibalize existing services.

Even this article hints at how private industry is dragging its feet on this and that even in fledgeling wifi systems consumers enjoy broadband for 2/3 the cost (private)to 1/3 the cost (muni wifi) than their private only counterparts.

Right now you can probably do it on the cheap with cooperation from the technophile community on the cheap. Just run broadband to fire stations, libraries, and/or other muni buildingss spread throughout the city (this is exactly how DSL works but runs out of signal strength becuase they stick with antiquated technology) and do some hi wattage/gain wifi from there via Mimo, 802.11n, and perhaps 802.11y when that comes to fruition. Let people use it for free as long as they repeat/reroute the signal... The infrastructure is there, all you need is a few people with $70 or so to blow at a local computer store for the hardware and an electrical outlet.

Wouldn't be perfect or 100% reliable, but neither is cable, cell phone coverage, DSL, gubbermint, private welfare enterprise, etc.

posted by charlatan on Aug 15, 2007 at 06:04:57 pm     #

We shouldn't just jump into something because it's the thing to do.

I'm highly for WiFi because it helps the lower income get access and that has been proven to benefit society. However Toledo should hold out for a better deal.

I even suggested that the city contract with UT, which offers dial-up to it's students and faculty, a deal to boost their dial-up services which could then be offered to Toledo residents. It would accomplish the same goal, support a local institution, and take advantage of infrastructure that is already in place.

posted by MikeyA on Aug 15, 2007 at 09:24:13 pm     #

I have a question. Is the WiFi we have in town at present making money for the companies, or will they pull the plug? Will the Toledo Public Library continue to have wifi, or is it one of the first things to go if a new levy isn't passed? I saw the first person I ever saw use a laptop at the Heatherdowns Branch; it was a teenage boy (I imagine he had wifi).

Before that I've never seen anyone use a laptop in any of the branches (including the Main Branch). It was rather a pain in the butt since he didn't use his earphones, and I had to listen to his computer opening Windows (you know the music) several times. Is WiFi making money for anyone in Toledo, or will they be closing up shop as an idea that failed?

posted by oldsendbrdy on Aug 15, 2007 at 10:51:50 pm     #

OSEB - the current wi-fi in the library isn't dependent upon the city's planned 'wi-fi' service. The library has done this on their own. Now...I don't know if they've worked out an agreement with some company or not. But it's not that difficult to put wi-fi in a building...we have it in our house...

posted by MaggieThurber on Aug 16, 2007 at 08:35:43 am     #

Mikey, the lower income people have to rely on much older computing equipment for Internet access, and that means dialup, or at most piggybacking on the house broadband (which a lot of people prioritize, which seems foolish in light of the expense and the shorting of other things). Unless there are $5 wifi cards out there that are compatible with the Pentium II era that I haven't noticed, we're back to the trusty ol' 56K modem (like I'm using, since I can barely justify paying $10/mo).

People have mentioned laptops here several times. Those are even more expensive. The very few people I know who use them for wifi, use fairly expensive models, and I frankly don't have the $600 to blow on such a thing, and neither do most of the people I know.

Desktop-wise, I just upgraded in 2007 to a used Celeron- and XP-based machine for my surfing. I had been using a used Pentium I from 1995 to 2006, and a used Pentium II in 2006 (which died annoyingly fast, I might add).

I agree with the conclusions of the article. The signup rate for these wifi deployments is going to be feeble. No one should have expected anything over 10%. There is still a minority of wifi-capable hardware out there in PoorLand. Dialup is still king.

This wifi crap is getting out of hand. People are treating it like they treated the dotcoms and their stocks. It's not the answer to everything; it's just another tool, and it should start out organically. One thing which will help is that wifi networks should be treated as common carriers, so that those who open their wireless routers will not be penalized for the asshole who downloads kiddy porn on it. Several times, I've discussed this issue with folks, and although they like having access from other people's open routers, they don't dare open their own. This is a basic problem to what should be organic and social growth.

posted by GuestZero on Aug 16, 2007 at 11:41:23 am     #

"People have mentioned laptops here several times. Those are even more expensive."

Maybe some form of 'relief' is forthcoming for laptops. A July 2007 story :

A non-profit group that designs low-cost computers for poor children hopes to start selling multimedia laptops to consumers by Christmas, a foundation executive said on Monday. The One Laptop Per Child Foundation's rugged XO laptop could initially sell for just $350, or twice its production cost, although the group is also considering a $525 price tag.

Hopefully, the org chooses the $350 price tag. The laptop is Wi-Fi ready. It's meant to be an educational tool for children, but I guess adults could use it for the same purpose.

The laptop, however, is apparently a little slow. It might be better to wait until next year for an updated version. But for gadget freaks, it will be hard to wait if it's selling for $350 to $400 by the end of this year.

Here's an August 2007 video demo of the laptop:

Intel also makes a low-cost laptop for children in the developing world called Classmate PC.

posted by jr on Aug 16, 2007 at 12:22:11 pm     #

You can get used laptops for $50- $100 shipped on ebay and a wifi card for around $10. OR if you can find a leasing company/school or something liquidating their inventory, they might be much cheaper.

If you want to get rid of the bloat of some of the more popular operating systems, older laptops can run faster than new ones. Nlite works wonders.

posted by charlatan on Aug 16, 2007 at 01:45:13 pm     #

reconditioned/used laptops are also reasonable - at least compared to new, especially if you're using it for school work or surfing - and not for a business function...

posted by MaggieThurber on Aug 16, 2007 at 03:53:10 pm     #

I agree with GuestZero, I would gladly open up my router and let people use it for email/web surfing/ etc and share the bandwidth. I dont use it all anyway. Problem is, I don't want to have to deal with trouble if someone drives by my house with a laptop and decides to download illegal content.

There's also the security issue. If they can connect to an open AP, then they are free to portscan the network, packet sniff or whatever. Just to much of a headache. I seriously wonder how places like McDonalds , Burger King, the Library and Coffee shops deal with this kind of problem.

As I mentioned in a previous thread, the hardware and bandwidth are only part of the issue. There's more to the puzzle of offering free wifi.

posted by jshriver on Aug 18, 2007 at 11:14:02 pm     #

Aug 28, 2007 story titled Chicago scraps plans for Wi-Fi network :

An ambitious plan to blanket the city with wireless broadband Internet will be shelved because it is too costly and too few residents would use it, Chicago officials said Tuesday.

The plan to blanket Chicago's 228 square miles with wireless Internet access was announced early last year when Chicago leaders said they hoped to become one of the largest cities to offer all-over access to the Web.

Instead, the city said its negotiations with private-sector partners, including EarthLink Inc., have stalled because any citywide Wi-Fi would require massive public financing. The city had hoped to provide only infrastructure for the network.

Tuesday's announcement makes Chicago the latest in a string of municipalities to encounter troubles with their municipal broadband initiatives because of ballooning budgets and dwindling usage that's led to scant revenue generated by the projects.

Meanwhile, Chicago will be among the first three cities nationwide to have access to a new high-speed wireless network that's part of an emerging technology called WiMax. WiMax is derived from the same technology as Wi-Fi. Unlike Wi-Fi, which provides wireless Internet access over a several-hundred-foot range, a WiMax signal can blanket a much wider area.

Massive public financing? The only public support should be :

• an invitation for a network company to invest in the city
• permission for the network company to use the lampposts and building rooftops

Not sure about the current status of these 'old' Wi-Fi initiatives in other Ohio cities.

May 8, 2006 Toledo Talk posting titled Cincy riverfront goes wireless :

The Cincinnati, Covington and Newport riverfronts are now one big wireless hot spot. Time Warner partnered with the Lily Pad, a non-profit group seeking to increase the region’s technology assets. Lily Pad said it has launched 28 free hot spots in the region with as many as 50 more in the pipeline, all funded through sponsorships from area corporations and donors, it said.

Dayton's downtown Wi-Fi network from two or three years ago :

The move makes Dayton the first city in Ohio to initiate citywide, edge-to-edge WiFi coverage. Dayton also becomes the first city nationally to offer a public-private partnership WiFi model that is not funded by taxpayers and comes at no charge to the end user.

I wonder how a public-private partnership is not funded by the taxpayers? I think Toledo earlier this year claimed taxpayer dollars would not be used when in reality taxpayer money would be needed.

Rapidly changing wireless technology, problems with accessing the city-wide Wi-Fi networks from inside buildings and homes, and a lack of interest from the citizenry to subscribe to the networks could put a halt to near-future projects.

Seems like by now Buckeye Express would have implemented a city-wide Wi-Fi cloud in Toledo if they thought it was a profitable venture. Instead, Buckeye Express implements Wi-Fi hotspots.

posted by jr on Aug 29, 2007 at 10:08:42 am     #

Aug 29, 2007 story

AT&T has scuttled plans it had to deploy wireless Internet with some free access throughout Springfield [Illinois], according to Mayor Tim Davlin’s top aide. “They just made a business decision not to pursue these types of ventures,” executive assistant Jim Donelan said Tuesday.

Donelan said officials in Springfield have had similar concerns as those in Chicago that the technology is changing so fast that providing wireless Internet using Wi-Fi technology might not be wise.

Wi-Fi depends on pole-mounted nodes to transmit the access hundreds of feet away. But other technologies, such as Wi-Max, which uses radio spectrum to provide Internet access, are gaining in popularity.

Also, some similar projects in other cities have run into economic difficulties when too few residents signed up for the pay service. The Wi-Fi network to be established in Springfield was to come at virtually no cost to the city, with AT&T allowed to mount the necessary nodes on the city’s utility poles at no charge.

posted by jr on Aug 29, 2007 at 03:37:55 pm     #

Aug 30, 2007 San Francisco Chronicle story S.F. citywide Wi-Fi plan fizzles as provider backs off

Mayor Gavin Newsom's high-profile effort to blanket San Francisco with a free wireless Internet network died Wednesday when provider EarthLink backed out of a proposed contract with the city.

The contract, which was three years in the making, had run into snags with the Board of Supervisors, but ultimately it was undone when Atlanta-based EarthLink announced Tuesday that it no longer believed providing citywide Wi-Fi was economically viable for the company.

Newsom said he did not see any benefit in the deal collapsing even though EarthLink appears to be in financial straits and has an uncertain future. The company announced Tuesday that it will slash 900 jobs - about half its workforce - and close offices in San Francisco and several other cities as a result of stiff competition from other Internet service providers.

EarthLink spokesman Jerry Grasso said that EarthLink was willing to work with San Francisco but had decided that it "was not willing to work in the business model where EarthLink fronts all the money to build, own and operate the network."

Rolla Huff, who became the company's CEO in June, said in recent months that the company was re-evaluating its approach to providing Wi-Fi in cities because the practice was not providing an acceptable rate of return. EarthLink's nascent municipal wireless projects in Philadelphia and Anaheim so far have not produced expected profits.

posted by jr on Aug 30, 2007 at 03:57:10 pm     #

Another article on municipal wi-fi problems:

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20070831/ap_on_hi_te/wi_fi_setback

posted by MaggieThurber on Sep 01, 2007 at 10:06:39 am     #

Aug 30, 2007 Economist article American cities' plans for ubiquitous internet access are running into trouble :

[M]any municipal Wi-Fi projects have since been hit by mounting costs, poor coverage and weak demand. Most city governments did not want to build or run the Wi-Fi systems themselves, so they farmed the job out to specialist firms such as EarthLink and MetroFi. These companies initially agreed to bear all expenses, expecting to sign up 10-25% of each city's population for a fee-based wireless service. In some places this was to have been supplemented by a free service at lower speed, or supported by advertising. Some cities also planned to subsidise access for poor residents.

But municipal Wi-Fi schemes have been struggling to make ends meet. EarthLink, which runs networks in Philadelphia and New Orleans, recently admitted that “the Wi-Fi business as currently constituted will not provide an acceptable return.” This week the firm said it would lay off 900 workers, including the head of its municipal Wi-Fi division, the future of which is now in doubt.

The root of the problem is that city-wide Wi-Fi, which relies on outdoor radio transmitters, does not provide good access inside buildings, since it uses weak signals which do not always penetrate thick exterior walls. Proponents of the technology also underestimated the number of transmitters that would be needed to provide blanket coverage. Most networks deployed between 2004 and 2006 used between 20% and 100% more nodes than expected, which pushed up costs.

Worse, the networks that have been completed have attracted few users. Taipei's city-wide WiFly system, the largest such network in the world, was reckoned to need 250,000 regular subscribers by the end of 2006 in order to break even, but had attracted only 30,000 by April 2007. America's biggest network, around Tempe, Arizona, was aiming for 32,000 subscribers, but had only 600 in April 2006 and has not provided figures since.

EarthLink and MetroFi have responded by asking city governments to act as “anchor tenants” and agree to spend a guaranteed sum on the service. Minneapolis and Portland, Oregon, accepted such contracts from the beginning; their Wi-Fi schemes are proceeding relatively smoothly. But most cities have balked at the change. MetroFi has lost four contracts since April after asking municipalities to subscribe upfront.

One problem with the anchor-tenant approach is that few municipalities are in a position to do much with the networks. Despite vague talk about wireless parking meters and enabling building inspectors to submit reports using Wi-Fi hand-helds, most cities lack the back-office systems needed to do such things. “You're building them a better track,” says Craig Settles, a telecoms consultant, “but they don't even have running shoes yet.”

Sep 4, 2007 Wired story :

Esme Vos, an intellectual-property lawyer who tracks various national municipal projects on her site, MuniWireless, notes a pronounced downturn in muni Wi-Fi projects and attributes that trend to telecoms finally realizing they have no clear path toward profit with the agreements they currently have in place.

When companies like MetroFi and Earthlink started bidding for contracts in 2004, they often agreed to some spectacularly generous terms. For instance, many telecoms acquiesced to footing the entire bill for network build-out, maintenance and upgrades. They would also frequently agree to pay the cities to lease public property, such as light poles, which would hold Wi-Fi transmitters. Earthlink's canceled San Francisco contract contained many of these terms.

Lack of demand was the final nail in the coffin. Although cities and telecoms expected 10-25 percent of an area's population to sign up for muni Wi-Fi, what they got, in many cases, was closer to 1 or 2 percent, Fleishman says.

In fact, he suggests that Earthlink's recent press release indicates the company is abandoning the consumer Wi-Fi market for one very clear reason: "Consumers are a weak play for muni wireless -- they're expensive to get, and more expensive to keep."

"If Earthlink is serious about finding subscribers who are more likely to be 'lifers,' as (the) release states, then they should repackage their muni wireless offering for governments in a way that shows (them) the return on investment potential of anchor tenancy," Settles says.

In fact, Settles says all telecoms should focus more on developing an aggressive business-focused marketing campaign that "capitalizes on a continually growing interest among small- and medium-size businesses for mobile workforce applications."

posted by jr on Sep 06, 2007 at 07:59:21 am     #

another one bites the dust:

Citywide wireless Internet plan is put on hold by Cincinnati authorities

ASSOCIATED PRESS

CINCINNATI - Cincinnati isn't ready to become one big WiFi hotspot.

A plan for a citywide wireless Internet network has been shelved, because City Manager Milton Dohoney says the industry is going through a rocky period. For example, he says leading WiFi provider Earthlink has been cutting jobs and canceling projects in other places.

City spokeswoman Meg Olberding says Cincinnati probably would have to provide a lot of money up front in order to proceed with its wireless plan.

http://www.toledoblade.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20070913/NEWS24/70913016

posted by MaggieThurber on Sep 13, 2007 at 04:35:50 pm     #

home • about • help • contact

© 2003-2008 Toledo Talk

current date: 06-Oct-2008 2:31 P.M.

old version of Toledo Talk