Nation's WISPs Trying To Map Coverage > The map is missleading

The map is missleading

It is a bit strange, it shows a massive coverage area in the upstate NY region of largely rural communities around Binghamton that I'm fairly sure does not exist. I'm going to try and get a hold of Webster to talk about it...

I've updated the story above with a more detailed description of how data was collected from both WISPs and the map creator.

It looks to me that they are using the same method that the FCC uses. If one address in a zip code has wireless then they all do.

Chattanooga has 3 ISPs that also have wireless networks. I am rather familiar with the coverage of all 3 networks and I know that there are areas that are not served that the maps shows as served.

It might not be accurate or perfect....but at least it is SOMETHING! At least now there's something to build on.

The problem is that it appears that it's not ever remotely accurate. I think it does more damage than good. It's helping out the large Cable and Telcos by giving them a chance to tell the FCC "See I told you we have competition from other providers."

reply to battleop
This map is missing large areas of central WA which have wireless. One rural county is almost entirely blanketed with wireless but it's not shown on the map.

»www.dccn.net/MapsAndAvailability···aps.aspx

Also, some guy down the street just ordered WildBlue satellite when there is already wireless available and the fiber network which is under construction is set to go live by next month.

reply to T1 Rocky
Given the choice between "nothing" and a big steaming pile of bull shit, I'll take the nothing thanks.

Fudging numbers even a little bit puts the entire project in a dubious light, and makes it easier to dismiss the entire thing.