Chicago Hopes to Make Their Broadband Suck Less Plans 1 Gbps Business Services, Free City Wi-Fi Chicago Mayor Rahm Emanuel has announced what the city is calling the "Chicago Broadband Challenge," which aims to shore up broadband shortcomings in the city while offering free Wi-Fi in parks and public areas. The city has issued an RFI seeking input from private companies, universities, and other organizations with three goals in mind: building world-class broadband infrastructure for the city; extending broadband service into underserved areas; and providing free Wi-Fi access in public spaces throughout Chicago. A new website launched by the city seeks public input on which areas are in the most drastic need of upgrades. The cornerstone of the effort will start by bringing "open, gigabit-speed networks" to "15 innovation zones in key commercial and industrial corridors." No financials have been discussed, and how "open" these networks will truly be will be interesting to watch given the lip service often paid to the concept. "Chicago will be one of the most connected cities in the world," said Mayor Emanuel in a prepared statement. "The establishment of a world-class broadband network in Chicago will create thousands of jobs and dramatically improve educational opportunities, economic development, health care services, and general quality of life throughout the city. We will rely on the ideas and efforts of Chicagoans to not only build this network, but make sure it is customized for our residents and our workforce." The effort appears to be similar to one being undertaken by New York mayor Michael Bloomberg, which also has focused on encouraging companies to speed up deployment of gigabit services for businesses while offering free Wi-Fi in NYC subways and parks. Both initiatives come after several years of criticism of the private sector in failing to deliver cutting-edge next-generation networks, especially for business customers as both cities try to challenge the west coast and lure more cutting-edge innovative tech industry. Google Fiber has also highlighted just how unhappy many cities are with current services. In both instances, New York and Chicago are belatedly realizing their broadband isn't top shelf, and are now asking everyone else (including those largely responsible for poor service) what they're supposed to do about it.
|
 | | Private At least they're not out spending money on bonds but hiring a private company to do this. But they should be charging for this service. Another way for this city to go further into debt- trying to be an ISP.
And as far as NYC- they used to have NYCWireless- a private 501c3 that offered free wifi until companies like VZ decided to launch their own hotspots only later to shut them down. | |
|  |  r81984Fair and BalancedPremium join:2001-11-14 Katy, TX Reviews:
·row44
·AT&T U-Verse
·AT&T DSL Service
| Re: Private said by hottboiinnc:At least they're not out spending money on bonds but hiring a private company to do this. But they should be charging for this service. Another way for this city to go further into debt- trying to be an ISP.
And as far as NYC- they used to have NYCWireless- a private 501c3 that offered free wifi until companies like VZ decided to launch their own hotspots only later to shut them down. Not true. Many cities across the country offer broadband, tv, and phone at a profit to the city because they built their own fiber network.
There is nothing wrong with cutting out the for profit middleman and having the tax payers own the ISP. If the city would go into debt being an ISP then no private company would even attempt to do it. -- ...brought to you by Carl's Jr. | |
|
 | | Not bad already Chicago already is one of the more connection cities. Most fiber that runs through the US stops in chicago, and they are also a peering point. A lot of businesses can already get 1gbps from multiple providers, obviously you are looking at a heafty price point though. | |
|  LinklistPremium join:2002-03-03 Longport, NJ kudos:5 | RFI very light on who pays and what it will cost
This city announcement is very light on who will pay for building a free WiFi system and who will pay for the gigabit infrastructure. But it hints at private companies will need to pay for most of the improvements. Not sure why this call to arms will get private companies volunteering to do this. -- »www.gop.com/2012-republican-platform_home/ »www.gop.com/2012-republican-plat···onalism/ | |
|  |  | | Re: RFI very light on who pays and what it will cost "who will pay for building a free WiFi system and who will pay for the gigabit infrastructure"
You really need to ask this question? -- I do not, have not, and will not work for AT&T/Comcast/Verizon/Charter or similar sized company. | |
|  |  |  ropeguruPremium join:2001-01-25 Mechanicsville, VA | Re: RFI very light on who pays and what it will cost said by battleop:"who will pay for building a free WiFi system and who will pay for the gigabit infrastructure"
You really need to ask this question? More redistribution... | |
|  |  |  |  | | Re: RFI very light on who pays and what it will cost Yep... | |
|  |  |  |  | | said by ropeguru:said by battleop:"who will pay for building a free WiFi system and who will pay for the gigabit infrastructure"
You really need to ask this question? More redistribution... Money for WiFi, no money for crime prevention. | |
|  |  |  |  |  jkj860The Final Frontier join:2002-01-10 Valparaiso, IN Reviews:
·Comcast Digital ..
·Comcast
| Re: RFI very light on who pays and what it will cost said by moonpuppy:said by ropeguru:said by battleop:"who will pay for building a free WiFi system and who will pay for the gigabit infrastructure"
You really need to ask this question? More redistribution... Money for WiFi, no money for crime prevention. The same people who will pay for the teachers pay increases due to the recent strike that are already making $70k/year and the same people that they are trying to add $5 to utility bills to pay for more cops on the street to control the daily shooting sprees that they had to cut due to budget constraints. Although the Mayor has already nixed the $5 cop fee. -- I know you think you understand what you thought I said, but I am not sure you realize what you heard is not what I meant. Nixon | |
|  |  |  |  |  | | "Money for WiFi, no money for crime prevention."
It's not like Chicago is the murder capital of the country. Oh wait, yeah, actually it is. | |
|
 |  |
 | | Field of dreams!
Build it and they will come! | |
|  | | Physically difficult/expensive to do? What is the situation in terms of how difficult/expensive it would be to do physically--tearing up streets, etc? | |
|  |  Reviews:
·Millenicom
·AT&T Southeast
·Verizon Wireless..
| Re: Physically difficult/expensive to do? I lived in Chicago from 1962 to 1986, so I may not have everything correct as to today's situation. Many residential and small business areas have electricity and telephone delivered from ally placed utility poles. These could be used for a fiber network. In the center city area there are a lot of underground utilities. Some run in quite open tunnels, other run in tiny conduit. As others have pointed out, there is quite a bit of fiber already in the central city and at some of the colleges in the city.
The Chicago Parks Department has gotten lots of comments about a lack of cellular service in the larger park areas and along the beachfront. The cellular companies have definitely made an effort in that area, but must negotiate with private building owners to get permission to place antennas. Some reach agreements and some do not. The city has thought that by creating a WiFi system overseen by the city, they can provide connectivity in the park system, without being seen as giving total control of the system to a private company whose goal is only short term profit. The city does not really want to get involved with accommodating cellular service by allowing cell sites in the parks, as they believe there is plenty of private property that can do that nearby. The building owners and the cellular companies just need to agree more and disagree less, so that those small cell sites can be constructed using existing buildings. With the newer smaller pico cell sites that are available, maybe more agreements can be reached. | |
|  |  |
 |  | | The chicago area has lot's of fiber by all the rail lines The chicago area has lot's of fiber by all the rail lines maybe they can use some of that. | |
|  jsinaikoPremium join:2001-04-25 Chicago, IL Reviews:
·AT&T U-Verse
| Lotta talk, no action Daley said the same thing - this yakkity-yak has been going on for ten years now. Without anything beyond the yakkity-yak happening. So we'll see. I'm not holding my breath.
And the previous poster is correct: lots of fiber running down the many railroad rights of way, but the issue has always been, and remains, the last mile. -- Illegitimati non carborundum
| |
|  |  Mele20Premium join:2001-06-05 Hilo, HI kudos:4 | Re: Lotta talk, no action said by jsinaiko:Daley said the same thing - this yakkity-yak has been going on for ten years now. Without anything beyond the yakkity-yak happening. So we'll see. I'm not holding my breath.
And the previous poster is correct: lots of fiber running down the many railroad rights of way, but the issue has always been, and remains, the last mile. Don't I recall a lot of cherry pickin' by TWC a few years ago in Chicago and a big front page thread here? How's the city going to stop that sort of thing? -- When governments fear people, there is liberty. When the people fear the government, there is tyranny. Thomas Jefferson | |
|  |  |  jsinaikoPremium join:2001-04-25 Chicago, IL Reviews:
·AT&T U-Verse
| Re: Lotta talk, no action It isn't gonna stop it, because this is just PR craparoo by Rahm. Thy have a web page up and an RFI. That's a huge investment - NOT.
They don't need an RFI; plans have existed for many years, collecting dust somewhere. What do they need to know now that they didn't in 2002 or 2003? What has changed? Not all that much. -- Illegitimati non carborundum
| |
|
 Reviews:
·Millenicom
·AT&T Southeast
·Verizon Wireless..
| Chicago Gigabit and WiFi. I think the mayor is going off in the wrong direction. Chicago has plenty of gigabit fiber access for big business. And establishing some dedicated tech corridors will get some investment of fiber in those areas. But one real genius idea of Google's Gigabit project in Kansas City is that it decided that each residence and small business should have the ability to utilize 1Gbps FTTP service. That way you facilitate the use of the network any business. From home based to medium sized companies. That gives you a larger base from which to get creative ideas related to broadband use.
I would like to point out that Chicago, with its mostly grid based street system and large above ground accessible utility infrastructure, still struggles to get great internet infrastructure. It still has much higher prices on a per megabit per second basis than some other major cities in the world. The population density and accessible utility arguments, that seek to explain poor internet service and pricing in the USA, do not seem to apply there. Chicago should have had symmetrical 100Mbps FTTP or FTTC for every building already, using that logic. | |
|  |  Reviews:
·Frontier Communi..
| Re: Chicago Gigabit and WiFi. Chicago has had AT&T as its ILEC for a long time! Remember Western Electric? They were based in the Chicago area, back in the early days of the telephone.
Former Chicago mayor Rich Daley's brother, Bill Daley, was Clinton's Secretary of Commerce. After that, Bill was a President of SBC (Southwestern Bell) Communications from 2001-2004. In 2005, SBC bought the old AT&T, and rebranded itself as AT&T.
So, the obvious question is.....How come Chicago didn't get better internet/WiFi years ago(with all that political clout)? | |
|  |  |  Reviews:
·Millenicom
·AT&T Southeast
·Verizon Wireless..
| Re: Chicago Gigabit and WiFi. Municipal WiFi plans have too often been dreamed up by coffee house WiFi enthusiasts who do not understand the radio frequency limitations of 802.11. Having only 3 real channels in the 2.4 GHz section helps make large scale deployment a difficult proposition. The number of APs needed per square mile was at least ten times what the coffee shop enthusiasts said it would be. Many cities WiFi projects ended when the capital costs got too large, so I put Chicago's previous WiFi messes in the same category as other municipal WiFi failures.
The lack of FTTP in Chicago is due, I think, to the fact that AT&T never had any real vision for what a very high speed internet deployment could become. Massive simultaneous multitasking using video conferencing, collaborative real time CAD design, financial analysis, and engineering analysis of projects was not something AT&T or its predecessors could imagine. The idea that many people scattered all over the Chicago metropolitan area could work on one project simultaneously in near real time was like telling the average person in 1775 about flying in the Concorde across the Atlantic Ocean. No one of importance at AT&T believed it would be possible, necessary, or profitable to entertain such concepts. The idea that large businesses, small businesses, potential customers at home, marketers, and others would have the ability to work together on a new product or service at the same time was as foreign and unthinkable to AT&T, as the Concorde would be to a person in 1775. AT&T never considered building a network anywhere to do those things. | |
|
 jl747 join:2005-03-24 Mount Prospect, IL | Free Right! A couple of options to pay for this.
They will just add a Fee (tax) to one of your bills.
They will get corporations to pay for by offering a tax rebate. Then they will ask the people to pay for the loss of revenue.
Nothing is free in Chicago. | |
|  |  | | Re: Free Right! aswell as new york. | |
|
 Reviews:
·ooma
·Optimum Online
·Verizon FiOS
| think small mayors.. mb and re are thinking small time legacy things they'll be remembered for.. meanwhile they can't afford other things like paying teachers a middle class salary
while business districts are racing to see who can put in 1 gigabit in a major city first... the residential customers and outlying suburbs don't even have 100/100 megbits symmetric for a fair price.. if cities want to start sucking less they might want to get the incumbent franchise companies to do better for their residential customers first. afterall, legacy will be judged by the weakest link the chain, not the strongest | |
|
 | |
|
|