Minneapolis To Go Wireless 212
an_mo writes " According to a Minneapolis Star Tribune article, Wednesday will see the announcement of a request for bids on a citywide wireless access service The city will unveil a request for a proposal for a privately owned, $15 million to $20 million citywide wireless and fiber-optic network to improve government communications by linking every city building, police car and housing inspector. The network would also would be available to every individual in the city for $18 to $24 a month."
Re:Pros and Cons of Municipal Broadband... (Score:1, Informative)
Tithe actually means 1/10th (tenth) So if $45 is 1/10th your monthly income, I sincerely urge you to re-examine your priorities. However, if this was just a mixup and you used the wrong word, save tithe for things that really are 1/10th
Re:Shouldn't be all that expensive... (Score:4, Informative)
All antenna gain comes from restricting the pattern. In your typical high gain directional antenna you have a conical pattern of anywhere from 3-45 degrees. There are 18dbi gain omni antennas, typically co-linear arrays. They will have a very flat pattern (typically 3 degrees vertically), but cover 360 degrees horizontally. The problem is that if it is on top of a flag pole you won't have any coverage below it, but that could be solved by using a standard antenna on a different channel closer to ground level.
Re:Shouldn't be all that expensive... (Score:3, Informative)
Anyone Wardriving this area? (Score:3, Informative)
Re:Every cop car? (Score:5, Informative)
Re:Pros and Cons of Municipal Broadband... (Score:4, Informative)
The proposed RFP will be for "shared governance" where the city will have a say in how the network is run, but the service provider (qwest/comcast/timewarner _could_ in theory bid for this) will do all the build out.
They will also provide city backed loans to help with the finantial burden. basicaly better financing terms, because the city is behind them.
The city will pay a certin ammount to have priority access to the network for use with police/fire/municipal departments.
It's a well thought out system, but is potentialy handing another monopoly over a big company. It is un-certin how badly they will step on local hotspots, educational institution wireless, and projects like the Twin Cities Wireless User Group.
(we have a hotspot network covering a large park near downtown)
Re:Shouldn't be all that expensive... (Score:2, Informative)
I've done long range wireless links in Minneapolis and St. Paul for years and I know personally it's just not that easy, I also know some of the wireless guys who worked for MCI when they had (maybe still have) antennas on top of the IDS tower -(Minneapolis's arguably tallest building next to Wells Fargo Tower (the mast on IDS makes it taller))- they had a LOT of problems with signal degredation, dropouts and packet loss not to mention just plain dead spots.
Most if not all of downtown, and it's surroundings are surrounded by trees and a lot of times the homes and buildings they surround are limited by city codes as to how tall a mast or tower they could legally build limiting the penetration of wifi to the taller objects in a given region.
Although it's not difficult to find a good spot and a clear line of sight, there will be some obstacles - just tossing a big antenna on the nearest tall building will only get you so far.
You need massive penetration.
Water towers, freeway light poles, and the rooftops of high-rise apartment buildings will all be required POPs and give the best lines of site while providing the necessary hookups and accessibility an infrastructure like this would require.
Re:I live in Mpls - they will screw it up! (Score:4, Informative)
This isn't municipal broadband either, it's commercial wireless, but the city wants "shared governance" to keep the wireless company in check, and so they have a say in the coverage (to prevent the problems you talk about) Basicaly they are trying to avoid another ricochet, network hardware all over town rusting because they went under.
I live in Saint Paul, and we're trying to do something similar, although we're about 6 months behind minneapolis.
For those of you too lazy... (Score:4, Informative)
* The citywide wireless network is necessary to improve government communications by linking every city building, police car and housing inspector to the city's databases, city officials say.
* No tax money would be used for the Minneapolis wireless network, which would be paid for, built, owned and operated by the winning bidder on the city's proposal.
* Minneapolis officials decided not to build their own wireless network because of high construction and administrative costs, Beck said. In addition, city officials were concerned that cities offering high-speed Internet service have been accused by large telephone companies of competing with the private sector, he said.
* the city also needed an improved network that could speed up data traffic in its 47 main buildings and extend high-speed access to 300 other buildings
* The city also wanted to replace expensive cellular radio communications used by police cars with a cheaper and faster wireless data network. There also was a desire to provide broadband to an estimated 10 to 15 percent of the city's population that either isn't served by high-speed Internet access or can't afford it.
So, there's a little bit more going on here than the city slapping an antenna on top of the IDS tower and charging people for internet access, which a lot of these posts seem to think is what is happening.