The Return of Free Internet 260
valdean writes "Remember the days of ad-supported dial-up Internet access from the likes of Netzero and Altavista Free Access? Those days, and the business model that supplied them, are long gone... or perhaps not. A new effort is being explored by California-based FreeFi Networks. Last week, the company launched what will be a nationwide network of ad-supported wi-fi hotspots. Ads will appear in what FreeFi calls a "narrow, persistent band of content" across the bottom of the user's screen. To provide incentive to America's coffee shops, they'll share advertising revenues with the hosting venue. Has 'free Internet access' finally arrived?"
Misnomer (Score:3, Insightful)
You may not be paying for it with money, but you still end up 'paying' for it.
How? (Score:5, Insightful)
Ad-blocking technology may kill it (Score:5, Insightful)
Now we are in the age of pop-up blocking and adblock [mozdev.org], a few REGEXP filters and a bit of custom config will probably let a lot of users very easily remove the advertising content... unless, that is, they intend to use a dedicated client instead of open standards for their wifi hotspots, in which case mac and linux laptops probably won't work with it anyway.
Should it? (Score:4, Insightful)
We have had telephone network access for about a centutry now.
It has never been free.
Why should Internet access be?
Nothing is free (Score:3, Insightful)
Even "free"-to-air television is NOT free. All those products and services advertised. those products and services you buy, pay for that TV.
If it is government funded TV then it is your taxes that are paying for it.
There is no free lunch.
Here we go again... (Score:5, Insightful)
New Economy! (Score:5, Insightful)
Yes, it's the New Economy! It wasn't really gone - that downcycle was just part of it. Everything free (supported by ads for other free services, supported by ads for the first free service), buying up blog companies and other things that loads of people use for free, it's The Future! Once more!
The New Economy is really different from the Old Economy - for one thing, companies don't need to make any profits, earnings or even have a business plan, but we knew that already. The other thing is that it leads to a total stock market crash every eight years! It's The Future.
But doesn't that cost insane amounts of money, I hear you ask, investing billions in no-brains companies every few years, losing it all, starting all over "because the VCs must invest in something, or give the money back to investors!"
Yes, but (and you can sing along, as you do know the words) - we'll make it up in volume! Over and over and over again...
Re:Should it? (Score:1, Insightful)
It has never been free.
Why should Internet access be?
Why are you defending the shareholders? They'll stab you in the back if they see the opportunity.
The problem with ads (Score:4, Insightful)
Most people don't like adverts.
The companies that pay for the adverts are hoping to get extra custom want more ways to get to the client, and this will likely go forward because of the technology push - BUT the problem with a fixed bar of adverts is that after a few logons you ignore most of what happens in that part of the screen.
Yes, there are people who do find the ads interesting, and will click on them. I currently find TV ads more interesting than most TV, since the advertisers are stretching further and further to catch our attention in zany and wacky ways that make us impressed enough to even think about buying their product; but I don't think that's the norm. People with an agenda will miss the ads, for the greater part; the tie-in with cheaper broadband [slashdot.org] may be good enough timing that this will work - cost per profit - but I'll be surprised.
Not that I'd complain.
Re:Ad-blocking technology may kill it (Score:3, Insightful)
Better analogy (Score:5, Insightful)
Has 'free Internet access' finally arrived?
We have had telephone network access for about a centutry now.
It has never been free.
Why should Internet access be?
We have had television network access for half a century now.
It has always been free (well at least some of it).
Why shouldn't Internet access be?
Better than the current model (Score:4, Insightful)
On the other hand, many people leave their networks open either inadvertently or intentionally because if you're resolved to pay for the backend anyway, you might as well share.
So wireless internet access right now is either free or ludicrously expensive, with nothing inbetween. This seems like it could be a nice inbetween. No credit card changes hands, you're not committed to buying a day of time for 20 dollars, and you're not relying upon the kindness of strangers. You're paying for your internet access, and it's as always-on and always convienient as at home. If you want to just log on and check your mail quickly, you can do just that.
Hahahaha. (Score:4, Insightful)
Short answer, no.
Re:Ad-blocking technology may kill it (Score:3, Insightful)
I suspect the amount of problems facing IE/Windows users now is going to force a degree of evolution - yes, most users aren't capable of it, but those aren't the people who take their laptops to a free wifi hotspot. FreeFi are targeting their service at a section of the online community which has already moved far beyond newbie-status
Re:Not really free (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:Ad-blocking technology may kill it (Score:3, Insightful)
That and advertisers not interested in using these free-internet companies to advertise to the cheapskate demographic.
--
Simon
Re:Not really free (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:Will it be available for non-Windows users? (Score:2, Insightful)
Re:Return? Feh - it never left. (Score:3, Insightful)
Opera? (Score:3, Insightful)
Course it doesnt! Cos they're the plucky little software company taking on the big boys so they're the Good Guys.
So if we're all happy to have Operas banners when we use that browser, why the fuss about this outfit? You get to connect without paying cash, they get to show you adverts. Simple transaction.
Just want to say.... (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:Not really free (Score:2, Insightful)
People have been saying this for years.
That's true. It's a good thing that no website has ever gone out of business [disobey.com].
Re:Not really free (Score:4, Insightful)
I think you're missing something, when you say "take in no revenue", I assume you're talking about revenue from the wifi. There is such a thing as free wifi (and a free lunch), it's used to sell you something else.
I live in York, PA, one of the most untechnologically advanced areas in the country and I know of several places that offer "free" wifi just to get you in the door. "Sparky and Clark's", the local coffee shop has free wifi, all the time I see my few fellow geeks in there checking mail on a pda or surfing on a laptop while waiting for or enjoying their coffee. I don't know the specifics, but given the seating arrangement of the place, I have no doubt that a simple business DSL/cable line could serve everyone in the coffee shop, and I'm sure there's a decently configured router behind the scenes. But I can't imagine their monthly bill is more than $60-$80, and I can vouch for the fact that lines have gotten WAY longer and seating has become much more of a commodity since they installed the wifi. There are also several apartment buildings that are offering free wifi setups, I assume they get around some technicalities because they're giving it away. Don't forget hotels, last time I stayed in a Holiday Inn Express there was completely unsecured wifi. Oh and also, the indoor sports arena where I play Ultimate (and most people play soccer) also gives away wifi.
Can you offer free wifi as a service on its own and still turn a profit? No. But could an eatery, housing arrangement, hotel, entertainment arena, hell even a whole city? Sure, as long as it's providing some other benefit.
Having a bathroom costs money and requires maintenance, but how many businesses just deal with this as part of the cost of operation?
One catch (Score:3, Insightful)
The article says these guys run the hotspot at no charge to the location owner "except for the cost of a broadband connection". Does that mean the location owner pays for the link to the Internet? If so then I can see how they can offer this for free, there's no cost to FreeFi at all. And the first question I (and the manager of the coffee shop near me) would ask is, "If I'm paying for the expensive part, why do I need FreeFi at all?".