Muni Wi-Fi Problems Aren't Just For Big Cities > unsuccessful in large cities

unsuccessful in large cities

Not sure where you're getting those numbers. In Tempe it was something like $20 a month for 1meg down, $30 for 2meg. (Edit: And no contract.).

It was competitive. DSL ($25 for the landline, $39 for Earthlink, and I only get 300k down). Or, Cox Cable at about $30 for 1.5meg.

I think the problem is that Wireless G isn't suited for this kind of long-distance (100 yards) wireless (in windy conditions, rain, disrupting reflections). I read that N is supposed to take advantage of reflections (thus the multiple antennas). Maybe when it's ubiquitous it would be feasible.

Mark

AV radio net is the local Wifi i am talking about

reply to Anonymous_
It's unsuccessful in in large cities due to the business model that's being proposed by the companies bidding to run the network. The cities all want completely free access to any type of wireless network put into place, and the companies want the city to pay them for upkeep, maintenance, and access to the network.

The trouble here is that these cities want something for free and believe that the citizens are a commodity which they can offer up to the wireless networking companies. The reality is that the larger municipalities are still the home of what's referred to as the "Digital Divide", meaning that there are people out there that don't own a computer so essentially there's no customer base. No company is going to invest themselves into a market that doesn't have customers.

If these cities were smart, they'd start offering public internet access at all of the recreation centers, libraries, and publicly held properties. This would be a first step in bridging the divide and would ultimately be viewed as a progressive step forward in the direction of modernization of any city.