dslreports logo
site
 
    All Forums Hot Topics Gallery
spc

spacer




how-to block ads


Search Topic:
uniqs
9
share rss forum feed

howrman

join:2000-07-08
Philadelphia, PA
reply to wifi4milez

Re: 4 years late, and nothing to show for it!

said by wifi4milez:

For a network that was supposed to be up and running in 2004, this cant be a shock to anyone. What a joke this was, and what a waste of money.
Actually, there's a lot to show for it. The network is up and running and it's about 70% complete. Plus, it hasn't cost the City a penny. All in all, even if Earthlink bails, it was a very good deal.

ashworth7

join:2001-10-06
Pittsburgh, PA
Why not get an IT guy that knows what he's doing, then buy bandwidth from a Tier I provider, maybe a have a rudundant backup by another Tier I provider....then you've cut out the middleman(Earthlink)...then maybe you'll have a workable WiFi system on a municipal basis. As the previous post said "The network is up and running and it's about 70% complete". So why do you need Earthlink ??

Nightstick

join:2000-09-21
Philadelphia, PA

1 edit
reply to howrman
said by howrman:

said by wifi4milez:

Actually, there's a lot to show for it. The network is up and running and it's about 70% complete. Plus, it hasn't cost the City a penny. All in all, even if Earthlink bails, it was a very good deal.
That is complete fiction.

The network was slated to cover the entire city.

Right now it barely reaches out of Center City, if you can even find it working there.

Like most other technology projects that the city runs, Philadelphia Municipal Wifi is a complete disaster.

I saw this coming YEARS ago, as did anyone else who knows how Philadelphia's city government operates.

That said, I don't think ANYONE ANYWHERE has come up with a viable business model for municipal wifi. The fact that a city CAN do wifi, doesn't mean it SHOULD. While cities spin their wheels trying to work out kinks SLOWLY, like everything else in government, their private sector competition advances in leaps and bounds, giving few but the ultra-poor ANY reason to consider the second-rate service offered by municipalities.

If Philadelphia's city government REALLY wants to put more-affordable broadband into more of its citizen's hands, it should stop running interference for Comcast and allow Verizon FIOS within city limits.

But I won't be holding my breath waiting for this, anymore than I was holding my breath waiting for city wifi ANYWHERE NEAR my neighborhood in NE Philly.


patcat88

join:2002-04-05
Jamaica, NY
kudos:1
reply to ashworth7
Oversubscribtion cough cough. Tier 1 bandwidth is 20-60 a mbit per month. Wanna pay? Bandwidth is a rip off these days, Tier 1s charge as much as they can because they know they are valuable.

patcat88

join:2002-04-05
Jamaica, NY
kudos:1
reply to Nightstick
said by Nightstick:

The network was slated to cover the entire city.

Right now it barely reaches out of Center City, if you can even find it working there.
So this map is a complete lie? ahhahaah »www.wirelessphiladelphia.org/cov···area.cfm

Nightstick

join:2000-09-21
Philadelphia, PA
said by patcat88:

said by Nightstick:

The network was slated to cover the entire city.

Right now it barely reaches out of Center City, if you can even find it working there.
So this map is a complete lie? ahhahaah »www.wirelessphiladelphia.org/cov···area.cfm
Absolutely!

A WiFi router stapled to a telephone pole is not "coverage."

Sustainable connectivity=coverage. Good luck finding THAT anywhere outside the initial pilot areas.

patcat88

join:2002-04-05
Jamaica, NY
kudos:1
Are you expecting full building penetration or something? Using a directional antenna at a window and a inside dwelling repeater I would say should be standard procedure. Full building penetration would mean every lightpole or every other lightpole must have an AP. I am going to assume thats what your talking about. Or is there extreme wifi interference (# of APs) that makes its impossible to use even with LOS to the AP? If you can't get a connection with LOS to the AP on the pole, your story is too fishy.

IEEE needs to be put in the stocks for not having transmit power control in WiFi (using minimum amount of power needed to reach client), because they have polluted 2.4ghz so badly in urban/suburban areas.