Les Jones

MetroFi Looking for Buyer, May Wash Hands of 9 Cities

Sunday, May 18th, 2008 | Municipal Wi-Fi | Permalink | No Comments |

Wall Street Journal - MetroFi Will Consider Sale, Quit City Wireless Networks:

In a further sign of the hurdles faced by municipal wireless Internet services, MetroFi Inc. said it is exploring a sale and pulling out of the nine cities in which it operates wireless networks. MetroFi’s exit makes it the second major Wi-Fi provider to drop citywide projects this past week.

EarthLink Walking Away from Philadelphia Wi-Fi

Wednesday, May 14th, 2008 | Municipal Wi-Fi | Permalink | No Comments |

Atlanta Business Chronicle - EarthLink ending its wireless Internet service in Philadelphia:

EarthLink Inc. said Tuesday it is pulling the plug on its Wi-Fi network in Philadelphia.

The Atlanta company said it has notified network customers that it will help them find other Internet service providers before terminating their service June 12.

EarthLink (NASDAQ:ELNK) also said it has filed a petition in federal court asking for permission to remove its equipment from Philadelphia street lights and seeking a declaration that its total potential liability is no greater than $1 million.

EarthLink said it had offered to transfer ownership of the entire network to either the city of Philadelphia or Wireless Philadelphia, as well as give them cash and new equipment, but couldn’t work out a deal with them after months of negotiations.

Slate Article on Municipal Wi-Fi Failures

Monday, October 1st, 2007 | Municipal Wi-Fi | Permalink | 2 Comments |

Slate - Why municipal wireless networks have been such a flop

Setting up a large wireless network isn’t as expensive as installing wires into people’s homes, but it still costs a lot of money. Not billions, but still millions. To recover costs, the private “partner” has to charge for service. But if the customer already has a cable or telephone connection to his home, why switch to wireless unless it is dramatically cheaper or better? In typical configurations, municipal wireless connections are slower, not dramatically cheaper, and by their nature less reliable than existing Internet services. Those facts have put muni Wi-Fi in the same deathtrap that drowned every other company that peddled a new Net access scheme.

Today, the limited success stories come from towns that have actually treated Wi-Fi as a public calling. St. Cloud, Fla., a town of 28,000, has an entirely free wireless network. The network has its problems, such as dead spots, but also claims a 77 percent use rate among its citizens. Cities like St. Cloud understand the concept of a public service: something that’s free, or near-free, like the local swimming pool. Most cities have been too busy dreaming of free pipes to notice that their approach is hopelessly flawed.

The lesson here is an old one about the function of government. When it comes to communications, the United States relies on a privateer system: We depend on private companies to perform public callings. That works up to a point, but private industry will build only so much. Real public infrastructure costs real public money. We already know that, in the real world, if you’re not willing to invest in infrastructure, you get what we have: crumbling airports, collapsing bridges, and broken levees. Why did we think that the wireless Internet would be any different?

Earthlink Backs Out of San Fran Wi-Fi Deal

Friday, August 31st, 2007 | Municipal Wi-Fi | Permalink | No Comments |

“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.

Hat tip to Instapundit.

Chicago Scuttles Muni WiFi Plans

Thursday, August 30th, 2007 | Municipal Wi-Fi | Permalink | No Comments |

Chicago Tribune:

A few years ago when San Francisco, Philadelphia, Houston and other cities jumped into Wi-Fi, officials thought paying less than $20 a month to get a high-speed Internet connection anywhere in the city would find a lot of takers. They also thought advertising could support citywide free connections.

Results on both scores have been generally disappointing. In Lompoc, Calif., which activated its $2 million Wi-Fi network almost a year ago, the city signed up fewer than 500 users out of a population of more than 40,000.

“There’s a serious dose of reality, much needed, that has come into play after all the hype last year about free, ad-driven Wi-Fi,” said Craig Settles, a wireless business strategist and consultant based in Oakland.

The most successful municipal Wi-Fi networks are those devoted to improving public safety and other city services, Settles said. Helping less-affluent residents get fast Internet access also can be a goal, he said, but it requires much more than just firing up a wireless network. Getting computers and training for the poor is a greater challenge, he said.

Hat tip to Slashdot.

Disappointment with Municipal Wi-fi

Wednesday, May 23rd, 2007 | Municipal Wi-Fi | Permalink | 2 Comments |

From the AP via Slashdot:

More than $230 million was spent in the United States last year, and the industry Web site MuniWireless projects $460 million will be spent in 2007.

Without revenues they had counted on to offset that spending, elected officials might have to break promises or find money in already-tight budgets to subsidize the systems for the low-income families and city workers who depend on the access. Cities might end up running the systems if companies abandon networks they had built.

And this is interesting:

In Lompoc’s case, officials say construction was delayed about a year once they realized wireless antennas had to be packed more closely together.

Then the city learned that its stucco homes have a wire mesh that blocks signals, making Internet service poor or nonexistent indoors without extra equipment.

Yeah, Faraday cages are a hassle that way.

And via the AP story I discovered MuniWireless.com, which is a very pro-muniwifi site. They have a response to the AP story, though I don’t find it very reassuring.

My opinion is that muni-wifi will make sense for a few cities or a few places within some cities. But - based on my experience working for an ISP and covering the industry for my old site, 56K.COM - most cities will soon find themselves with obsolete technology and/or business models. There will be winners and losers, successes and failures, but I expect it to be more of the latter in both cases. I also have some reservations about city governments appointing monopolies and/or competing with free market ISPs. There’s lots of room for backdoor shenanigans and mis-spending of taxpayer money.

Municipal Wi-Fi Censorship

Saturday, April 21st, 2007 | Municipal Wi-Fi | Permalink | 14 Comments |

From Instapundit:

BOINGBOING BANNED IN BOSTON: This is the best argument against municipal wi-fi systems — they’re sure to be run by idiots who can’t resist meddling and censoring.

I agree. That is a tremendously compelling argument against municipal wi-fi.

If the government provides Internet service there will be enormous political pressure to filter the content. First it will be smut, as defined by the voting block screaming the loudest. Then you’ll see pressure to ban “hate” sites, abortion information, drug information, and anything to do with weapons.

Some commercial Web filters already categorize my blog under the “weapons” category because of the information I post about guns. If the organizations using those filters decide to block weapons sites, my site will be blocked. In the wake of something like last week’s VA Tech shooting imagine the political pressure a city government would be under to censor Web sites that have to do with weapons.

If you don’t want the government deciding what you can and can’t see on the Internet, don’t depend on the government to provide your Internet access.

Portland Chooses MetroFi

Tuesday, April 18th, 2006 | Municipal Wi-Fi | Permalink | No Comments |

City chooses MetroFi for wireless Internet:

After months of deliberation, Portland’s city government has chosen MetroFi Inc., of Mountain View, Calif., as the company to create wireless Internet access across Portland.

Startup MetroFi beat out EarthLink Inc., a publicly traded, $1.3 billion Internet service provider based in Atlanta, and VeriLan Inc., a downtown Portland startup that operates a small wireless Internet network in Portland.

San Fran Picks Google, EarthLink for Wi-Fi Project

Friday, April 7th, 2006 | Municipal Wi-Fi | Permalink | No Comments |

Via Reuters. “San Francisco city commission has selected a joint bid by Web search leader Google Inc. and Internet service provider EarthLink Inc. to provide free wireless access throughout the city.”

Disclaimer: I own stock in EarthLink from a previous job. To be honest, I wound up seeing a lot of this municipal wi-fi stuff by checking EarthLink’s stock. I’m hoping that Google winds up having a good relationship with EarthLink and buying them. That might finally bring their stock above water.

Don’t do drugs, kids, and don’t work for ISPs. One reason I’m skeptical of cities getting into the wi-fi biz is that I’ve seen just how cutthroat and just how rapidly-evolving the ISP scene is.

Ernie the Attorney on New Orleans Wi-Fi

Tuesday, December 20th, 2005 | Municipal Wi-Fi | Permalink | No Comments |

Ernie the Attorney (who’s lucky his parents didn’t name him Brocktologist or else he could have had a very different career) looks at the Louisiana law that prohibits municipalities from providing Internet access faster than 144 Kilobytes/second. New Orleans is avoiding the limitation now because they’re in a state of emergency. The city plans on eventually turning over operation of their wireless network to a private company. Via Philip Greenspun.

Update on the New Orleans Wi-Fi Network

Friday, December 16th, 2005 | Municipal Wi-Fi | Permalink | No Comments |

New Orleans is going to turn over operation of their wi-fi network to a private company after all. Washington Post:

The wireless network covers the central business district and the French Quarter, and the city plans to expand it as the people return.

The network also is used by law enforcement and other city agencies to help speed recovery. Eventually, the city intends to outsource operation of the network’s business and consumer services to a private firm, officials said.

Tempe Plans Universal Wi-Fi

Tuesday, December 13th, 2005 | Municipal Wi-Fi | Permalink | No Comments |

Tempe, AZ wil offer Wi-Fi across its entire 40 square mile area in conjunction with NeoReach. The system will be available for free to city offices and vehicles, and for two hours per day in the vicinity of Arizona State University and the Mill Avenue retail district.

NeoReach will directly sell service to outdoor users for $3.95 per hour or $29.95 per month. The resellers of NeoReach access have not yet announced pricing, but Rockwell said it will be cheaper than DSL or cable Internet access. Cable operator Cox Communications Inc. charges $49.95 per month for customers who don’t get Cox phone or TV service. Qwest Communications International Inc. charges $44.99 and $54.99 per month, depending on the speed.

Tempe signed a contract with NeoReach after asking for bids — which prevented it from having to start its own utility and probably quelled potential objections to the city’s involvement in a Wi-Fi network.

Elsewhere in the nation, cities have run into heavy resistance from telecom companies, which argue that the free market should dictate the cost and availability of service.

At least 14 states have passed laws limiting municipal Internet service, and other states are expected to consider similar limits, Leanza said. Arizona does not have such a law.

Didn’t know that. The interesting angle here is the free Internet access for municipal vehicles. Knoxville has hotspots for police officers. In an increasingly connected age, the need for city workers to have Internet access everywhere their jobs take them could be a big factor pushing municipal wi-fi.

New New Orleans to have Free Wi-Fi

Wednesday, November 30th, 2005 | Municipal Wi-Fi | Permalink | 5 Comments |

Big Easy Launches Free Wireless System:

n an attempt to boost its stalled economy, the hurricane-ravaged city of New Orleans is starting the nation’s first free wireless Internet network owned and run by a major city.

Mayor Ray Nagin made the announcement at a late morning news conference.

Similar projects elsewhere have been stalled by stiff opposition from telephone and cable television companies aimed at discouraging competition from public agencies.

Nagin said the system started operation Tuesday in the central Business District and the French Quarter. It is to be available throughout the city in about a year.

I’m equivocal on municipal wi-fi. Depending on how it’s done, it might be the next advance in civilization, or it might be a pork barrel cockup like the Seattle monorail. But free wi-fi from the nation’s most corrupt and incompetent city government? Sounds like a bad idea to me.

LATER: Here’s some fresh equivocation! During the rebuilding phase, this is probably a good idea. It will take a long time to get hard-wired Internet access up. Many third-world countries are skipping landlines and going with wireless phones because the wireless infrastructure is cheaper and quicker to build. Likewise, if you’re looking for a way to build an Internet infrastructure from scratch wi-fi is your buddy.

Downsides? Sure. If the city is rebuilt with free govt. cheese Internet, there’s not much incentive for private companies to offer ISP services in New Orleans. So in the next hurricane, everyone will be dependent on the city’s Internet services.

Wireless in Asheville, and Talk of Same for Downtown Knoxville

Friday, November 18th, 2005 | Municipal Wi-Fi | Permalink | No Comments |

Metro Pulse’s Leslie Wylie looks at talk of wireless Internet for downtown Knoxville (scroll down to reach the story). I didn’t realize downtown Asheville had free wi-fi.

To date, Knoxville’s taken few steps toward acquiring its own wireless cloud, although city planners are conscious of the option. Upgrading downtown Knoxville to a wireless district would require the installation of antennas, radio devices that each emit a 200-foot radius of wireless signals, throughout the area. Knoxville’s IT director Janet Wright explains, “We love wireless, and I’ve been looking at what other cities are doing, but we’re more difficult because of location and topography.”

Currently, the city has only one public hotspot, or unmarked point of public Internet access: the City County Building. In addition, 30 non-public hotspots are located throughout downtown for the Police Department’s use. “Our policemen just pull into one of these hotspots, and they can pull up incident reports, check their email…. It’s great technology,” Wright says.

Portland Takes Bids on Wi-Fi

Thursday, November 10th, 2005 | Municipal Wi-Fi | Permalink | 1 Comment |

Another city is going wireless. They’re taking bids now and expect to select a winning bid in January of 2006.

Anaheim to Have California’s Largest Wi-Fi Network

Wednesday, November 9th, 2005 | Municipal Wi-Fi | Permalink | No Comments |

Anaheim will roll out a 50 square mile Wi-Fi network in conjunction with EarthLink. (Disclaimer - I own EarthLink stock.) The project is scheduled to be finished at the end of 2006.

Nashville Broadband Proposal

Monday, October 31st, 2005 | Municipal Wi-Fi | Permalink | 3 Comments |

The Tennesseean has a pro wi-fi editorial:

Nashville has everything to gain and nothing to lose by studying what Metro might reap from providing broadband access countywide.

The estimated $300 million cost of the service shouldn’t deter the task force which will look at how a system might connect the most disadvantaged child to the Internet or better serve public safety, public works and education needs. The world of the Internet, broadband, digital, Wi-Fi and beyond encourages people to think creatively and to think big. So why not Nashville?

To which Bob Krumm responds:

Ummm. . . has anybody stopped to do the math on this proposal? With a 300 million dollar pricetag–a cost well over a thousand dollars a household–wouldn’t it make more sense for the city to just pay our Comcast bills?

Philadelphia’s Citywide Wi-Fi Plan

Saturday, October 22nd, 2005 | Municipal Wi-Fi | Permalink | No Comments |

Fortune looks at the phenomenon of cities offering wireless Internet. There’s a twist to Philadelphia’s plan that I didn’t realize. Access will be free in places like public parks, but residential access will cost $10-20 per month, not free as in San Francisco.

Internet providers who serve the city are predictably not thrilled with the city’s plan to use taxpayer dollars to compete with private companies. I can’t blame them. Why is Philadelphia entering the residential Internet access market? Philadelphia has some of the worst public schools in the country. Why is the local government worrying about wi-fi when they have problems in their schools. And why should anyone trust them to run an Internet service any better than they ran their schools.

Disclaimer and reverse disclaimer: Philadelphia is partnering with EarthLink, a company in which I own stock. Even if this is good for EarthLink, I’m not sure if it’s good for Philadelphia or the ISP industry.

Free Municipal Wifi in San Francisco

Wednesday, October 5th, 2005 | Municipal Wi-Fi | Permalink | No Comments |

S.F. Mayor Sees Wireless Service as Basic Right

“This is inevitable — Wi-Fi. It is long overdue,” [San Francsico Mayor Ganiv] Newsom told a news conference at San Francisco’s City Hall. “It is to me a fundamental right to have access universally to information,” he said.

The city was going to provide the service for free anyway, but Google came in with the low bid of zero.

There was a mania a decade ago for free Internet access, with lots of high-minded arguments made to support the idea. It made no sense to me even then during dot-com fever. Telephone service is clearly more fundamental than Internet service, and no one was claiming telephone service should be free. And if free access to information is a basic human right, what about access to free water and sewer service? Today most of those community freenets are either defunct or effectively defunct because broadband Internet made them obsolete.

Slightly different arguments can be made for free municipal wireless. Essentially, there’s no way to bill for it, so it has to be provided by the city if universal coverage is the goal. When the cost is spread across all taxpayers, the cost may be relatively small, and in dense urban areas it may work well. The argument then becomes whether universal urban coverage is a worthwhile goal that taxpayers are willing to pay for.

It’s possible that the case can be made for municipal wifi as a city service. For instance, one could argue that it’s not a utility, but rather a distributed benefit, like street lights or landscaping. In San Francisco, Google is footing the bill for now, but time will tell if municipal wifi fares any better than freenets.

UPDATE: Nashville is considering municipal wifi.