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?"
Not really free (Score:4, Interesting)
Re:Not really free (Score:5, Interesting)
Don't confuse who gets what. The phone company makes money to route your call to your ISP. Your ISP makes money routing your computer to the internet. Somehow, the websites you surf, including this one, need to get some financial recompense or they're going to fall under the cost of bandwidth and hosting. Of all of the people on the food chain, they're probably the most deserving.
You may be paying your phone company and ISP, but you're not paying via your phone company and ISP... It's not going to anyone but them.
Re:Not really free (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:Not really free (Score:3, Interesting)
I tend to notice that sort of thing too. I watched Panic Room recently, and was struck by the prominent placing of Sony, Nokia and Evian.
Of course, the worst I've ever seen is Inspector Gadget, with the huge Yahoo! billboard, complete with "Yahoooooo!" voice effect...
Re:Not really free (Score:2)
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:3, Insightful)
Re:Not really free (Score:2)
Google seems to managed without pop-ups or pop-unders, and without animated ads. I never block static images or text-only ads. I always block popup and pop under (without noticing). Animated falls in between: I avoid sites with (too many of) those.
Re:Not really free (Score:4, Informative)
Google is, in essence*, in the business of
a) Content Provision
b) Advertising
to run an ISP for free is a fairly difficult proposition. I have friends in the business and they provide "free" internet, but in the end someone has to pay up - in the case of pubnet [pubnet.com.au], the pubs pay, and the punters surf for free. What I'm saying is the money has to come from somewhere.
* simplifying
Re:Not really free (Score:2)
He did? Then I misunderstood him. I thought he was talking about ad-blocking in general.
Otherwise I agree. It is different because serving web pages is so darn cheap, while wires and routers are not.
Re:Not really free (Score:4, Informative)
That really depends on how popular the site is, of course. A heavily hit site like microsoft.com or google is going to have to invest a fair amount in hardware, network infrastructure, etc, in addition to any bandwidth charges they incur. I wouldn't be too quick to write off the potential cost of serving web pages (although admittedly, in the case of MS especially a fair chunk of their bandwidth bill is going to be due to file downloads rather than just straight serving of pages...)
Re:Not really free (Score:3, Funny)
Tell that to the next poor sap who gets Slashdotted when he posts a story featuring his personal webpage...
Grab.
Re:Not really free (Score:2, Informative)
There were two major Telcos in NZ, Telecom NZ, which is the monopoly provider of residential phone lines to the majority of the population, and Clear (now Telstraclear), which provided a few business lines and toll services. Telecom basically forced Clear to sign an interconnect agreement whereby the two companies would charge each other 2c per minute for calls terminating on the other network. Sin
Re:Not really free (Score:2, Informative)
http://www.cooltechzone.com/special_images/adim
http://pagead2.googlesyndication.com/pagead/ad
in your AdBlock list. Much better...
Re:Not really free (Score:4, Informative)
Re:Not really free (Score:2)
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?
Re:Not really free (Score:5, Informative)
Really are the ads on Slashdot so bad. When I read Circut Cellar or CycleWorld I actually value the ads. Never know when I will see a good deal on a new Helmet or development system. I have even gotten some good out of the ads on slashdot.
Misnomer (Score:3, Insightful)
You may not be paying for it with money, but you still end up 'paying' for it.
*free* as in *beer* (Score:2)
/insert cliche here
cross-subsidised indirectly paid-for beer (Score:5, Interesting)
The cost of the bandwidth and overheads and so on will be subsidized by advertising costs. These costs are in turn paid for by the customers of the advertisers (*) (meaning the advertisers must charge more for their products than they would otherwise have been able to). This means the customers of the advertisers' products are paying for it, rather directly in fact (although that may seem too abstract for some people to connect the two .. but a percentage of the cost of any product you buy is used to advertise that very product to you .. you are in a sense "buying" the advertising too). There is also going to be some overlap between the two sets of users (advertisers' customers vs 'bandwidth users'), so some will pay for the BW even more directly. But while on an individual level it may be possible to just sit and use the bandwidth 'for free', taken on the average the users are still paying for it. And it doesn't sound like a terribly efficient bandwidth payment model to me - paying an ISP directly is probably more economically efficient for providing the same service, which may make this "devolution" in a sense, or perhaps just "divergence" as there is now a choice between models to the consumer.
And although you may think that you're purely snarfing free bandwidth and that the ads have no effect on you, unless you physically block the ads or take note of the places advertised and deliberately avoid them, those ads are absorbed by your brain in one way or another, and will increase brand recognition and brand identity no matter what you do, making you statistically more likely to buy those products. An interesting question is whether or not this is a more effective (and thus economically efficient) advertising medium than other advertising media. If it turns out to be less effecient, it means the advertisers have to pay more to get the same return, which is perhaps a step backwards.
My own theory is that ultimately we never get anything for free because over the course of your life it all averages out: Some level of cross-subsidisation is everywhere (e.g. IE isn't "free" because those who buy Windows pay for it; "free pizza delivery" is effectively subsidised by walk-in customers in the form of slightly higher prices to cover the delivery costs, etc.) For every product you get for "free", on average there is another occasion where you end up subsidising someone else's "free" product (usually without even knowing), so it all cancels out in the end.
(*) Just to pre-empt anyone counter-arguing that investor funding may be used: True, but investors still expect returns, and investor returns generally come from customers or more investments.
Return? Feh - it never left. (Score:5, Interesting)
In the past year, when on the road, It's never taken more than a few minutes of walking / wardriving through a strip mall or retail street to get a connection.
While this service certainly has some value to me as a last resort, I wonder how many non
Re:Return? Feh - it never left. (Score:3, Interesting)
It's all free and very well maintained.
Re:Return? Feh - it never left. (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:Return? Feh - it never left. (Score:2)
Outside the range of my own WLAN I'd seriously consider ad-sponsored free WiFi service...
Re:Return? Feh - it never left. (Score:5, Informative)
Prior to this the way to make money was to have a prequisite on these "free of charge" services - you had to sign up on their international and long distance calls services.
In Sweden a governmental organisation called Post- och Telegrafistyrelsen, PTS regulates how much teh different networks and telcos can charge for their calls and call transfers, and telcos' business schemes adapt to these rates, but in short the general idea is to distribute the end user's money to the companies offering different parts of the phone/computer -> destination services.
That way you would use Telia's phone lines to connect to the ISP/phone operator's lines that would in their turn do the final long distance or international call.
Internet access has always been cheap in Sweden even in the dial-up times. I currently pay about 300kr (40$) a month for a 10Mbit/s Ethenet connection, the house is connected to a X GBit/s city network, with an option for 100Mbit/s for around 10$ more a month, but with a cap at 800GB transferred a month at that rate, after which it falls back to a slower speed.
insulating tape (Score:5, Funny)
' narrow, persistent band of content" across the bottom of'
my screen
Re:insulating tape (Score:2)
hotspots? (Score:5, Funny)
Note: All hotspots will occur exclusively at starbucks coffee shops. Considerations are underway to expand to McDonalds and Walmarts near you!
How? (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:well lookie who's high and mighty (Score:2)
Depends on where you live (Score:5, Informative)
Here where I live (EU, Czech Republic), we have had companies offering free access to internet for free for many many years. So your question should be rephrased to "Has 'free Internet access' finally arrived in the US?"
Do you not pay for the phone calls? (Score:5, Informative)
Re:Do you not pay for the phone calls? (Score:2)
Exactly, European local calls not free like the US (Score:2)
The key thing here is that around the time the internet was taking off, local phone calls in Europe were not generally free, unlike the US.
Interestingly in Ireland in the 80s, local phone calls were however flat rate, ~10p for as long as you wanted. I was using a C64 service
Idem -- Brasil (Score:2)
Re:Do you not pay for the phone calls? (Score:2)
Worked out to be about £20/month and 5p/minute off peak, 10p on peak.
The model is different (Score:3, Informative)
In Egypt, the internet is free for everyone who has a phone line. No ISP fees, no subscription (and no POP mail either, everyone uses Hotmail).
The trick is revenue sharing between the ISP and the telecom provider (either a government run monopoly or a private state-sanctioned monopoly). The per minute charge comes on the phone bill, and the fees are split by the ISP and telecom.
In the USA and Canada this
!Free (Score:4, Interesting)
I am somehow anxious to see that one has to pay the big bucks to avoid an over-commercial situation.
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.
Re:Ad-blocking technology may kill it (Score:3, Insightful)
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 hotspo
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
Will it be available for non-Windows users? (Score:5, Interesting)
Re:Will it be available for non-Windows users? (Score:2, Insightful)
Ha ha ha ha... (Score:2)
Slim and none.
Great idea, but will it make the bucks? (Score:3, Interesting)
Whap happens when... (Score:5, Informative)
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?
Re:Should it? (Score:2, Informative)
Re:Should it? (Score:2)
What's to stop a phone service from offering lowercost lines by forcing you to listen to a short ad before completing your call ?
It would be trivial to skip the add on emergency calls like 911, or local PD, but to force the ad before connecting the call.
Plus, you're already exposed to ads on the phone. Ever waited on hold at any decent sized company ? T
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?
Re:Better analogy (Score:2, Interesting)
Television isn't a communication network. Someone broatcasts to you whatever you desire. You can't broadcast back. You don't determine which information you get. You can't even choose not to receive the commercials. You can't be a server yourself, share your files, or setup your own broadcast on the television "network".
Telephone network access is a much better analogy for Internet access than television. Furthermore, television has never really been a network in the computer sense. And in the cases when i
Re:Better analogy (Score:2)
Communication doesn't have to be two way to be effective.
Re:Better analogy (Score:2, Informative)
We have had television network access for half a century now.
It has always been free (well at least some of it)
Come to the UK - we have a mandatory TV license which is non-free.
Buy a TV in the UK and you will have to give a name and address so that they can insure you pay it.
Even if you never use the Television set for anything more than watching your own DVDs you will have to pay the annual TV-license fee of just over 100 pounds.
(The money goes to the BBC who use it to fund their programming - in add
Re:Better analogy (Score:2)
In reality, you have a better choice with a licence fee because if you choose to stop watching TV then you can get rid/store your TV and not pay for the licence, but you'll still be hit with a charge for adv
Products advertised on TV are NOT 'taxed'!! (Score:2)
That's right; if you're determined to buy MCDONALD'S hamburgers, ARIEL washing powder and SHELL fuel, then you're "p
Re:Should it? (Score:2, Interesting)
Enter a coffee shop and ask (politely) for a glass of water or to use the bathroom, or to sit for an hour while you're waiting for someone: no one will charge you, as the cost for providing this service is absorbed in the fixed costs of the store.
Side note: I don't think the television metaphor is a good one: you have to keep producing TV programs to entertain TV viewers, hence TV broadcast can't be free, unless it's crap meant to zombie you
Re:Should it? (Score:2)
FM Television is free.
It really depends on whether the business model is supportable with advertising. And then again, its about being open to change. The web and email is free because the pioneers thought of a radically new way to make money out of it. And then it became the rule.
It did not happen with telephone. People were narrow minded then.
And finally, you said telephony is not free. But then if the net becomes free, VoIP enables free telephony. It also enables free web-casts, an
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.
Re:Nothing is free (Score:2)
Here we go again... (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:Here we go again... (Score:2)
I don't think this is the future. But what is? (Score:2, Interesting)
But I think an ad-based system for basic access is j
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...
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.
So what happens when... (Score:2)
maybe off-topic (Score:3, Informative)
Hell, there are several places where you go to a webpage, click a button and boom they provide you with a username, password and phone# to call. All without having to provide a single shred of personal information.
Re:maybe off-topic (Score:2)
Of course you have to pay per minute (0.01/0.028 euro) for using the phone connection. It's actually more expensive than a cheap 20 euro a month ADSL subscription if you use Internet regularly.
Free WiFi is really free. There are lots of free WiFi access points here (with the university spread all over own), but no provider with a free national network. It is an interesting con
Displays ads? (Score:5, Funny)
I'd like to hear their definition of adware.
Nice (Score:4, Interesting)
Free wifi internet, free packets? (Score:3, Informative)
With public access wifi, capturing the airbourne packets is probably gonna be very easy. And no-one notices you, because your notebook will simply function as a 'radio'...
Ofcourse, using tunnels (w/IPSec) and TLS will provide the neccesary encryption, but unless you always 'phone home' and use your home intenet connection, privacy will be an issue.
And ofcourse, there's the banners. The only thing that I can think of that will work is some mangling proxy that adds a frame on each and every page. And even that is very simple to bypass. But it _does_ mean a direct internet connection is not allowed, because most services are not meant to have banners injected to them, or even incapable of transferring them.
Thus, when they indeed only use a web proxy, I cannot classify as 'free internet', because the web isn't the Internet.
I'd just sit back and wait til it comes, then take a look at it again. It may not be as bad as described above, but it still could ofcourse.
Please submit an article when it is actually _working_.
Re:Free wifi internet, free packets? (Score:3, Informative)
With public access wifi, capturing the airbourne packets is probably gonna be very easy. And no-one notices you, because your notebook will simply function as a 'radio'...
At public access points I always use a Proxy Server, and I always use one at work also - added bonus - I can look at any pages I'd like to and not worry about hitting something NSFW.
A
Re:Free wifi internet, free packets? (Score:2)
You access this web page, and from there access other web pages.
As far as they know, you're accessing a web page. They don't know that this web page displays other web pages.
I admit the banners would still be present, but I only put forth a solution to the snoooping problem, not the annoying banner ads.
Re: (Score:2)
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.
Shrinking market? (Score:4, Interesting)
UK dialup (Score:4, Informative)
There are no additional fees from the ISP and most give you POP3 email, a couple of email aliases and sometimes a small amount of web space.
Not totally free, but pretty close to it (and no adverts either).
WiFi hotspots and payment (Score:3, Interesting)
The trouble with the pay for access WiFi hotspots (at least here) are most of them are extortionate. The minimum charge at, say, Gatwick Airport is GBP/5. You can't buy less than a one hour block. Those 'payphone style' Internet kiosks are cheaper, and you can buy just 15 minutes worth which is enough to check email (and you don't have to use up your laptop's battery).
If I ran a cafe, I'd allow free wifi with a purchase. It'd be something extra to differentiate my shop from the competition.
Re:WiFi hotspots and payment (Score:2)
The joke is that WiFi connections are so expensive that 3G is actually cheaper in most circumstances.
Heh... (Score:5, Informative)
Netzero and Juno free access aren't "long gone" (Score:3, Informative)
Timothy is often reposts previously posted news because he doesn't look first. In this case, he should have looked up netzero [netzero.net] and juno [juno.com], which are still around, still offering free ad-supported dialup access. They actually merged into one company, United Online, [unitedonline.net] in 2001.
The business model is to give away ad-cluttered free access -- which is limited to something like 10 hours per month -- and try to upsell you to their $9.95 and $14.95 premium plans, which do not install an ad panel.
Uk already has them (Score:3, Interesting)
I'd not seen this elsewhere, but it got me thinking, considering the price of a basic dsl connection (about £20) and wifi access point (also about £20-30) for the extra revenue it'll generate it's surely a good loss leader to bring in customers and keep them a little longer. On the way back from brighton I stopped at a Motorway service station and picked up a leaflet for BT openzone (£6 per hour) hardly a great incentive!
How? (Score:2, Interesting)
Re:How? (Score:2, Informative)
They have a transparent proxy on port 80 which initially intercepts any web page access and pushes you to an AUP page which you have to click 'yes' on. Until you do this your IP is blocked outbound, afterwards everything works fine (esp ssh which I use heavily). Every now and then (5-10 mins) the transparent proxy responds to a random http get with a page of ads instead of whatever you asked for.
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.
As Long As... (Score:3, Interesting)
Just want to say.... (Score:3, Insightful)
Two words. (Score:3, Informative)
Of course, if that blocks the ads, and the ads are on the same server that their connections are routed through, you're kinda boned.
So what about those of us already providing (Score:3, Interesting)
Free WiFi (Score:3, Interesting)
I use Google and Gmail all the time right now and the ads they place on each page loaded don't bother me at all.
The problem with services such as NetZero (which I had for over a year) was that at dialup speeds the ads hogged enough of the bandwidth that eventually I got sick of it and quit.
Also, in terms of TV/radio I don't think ads are necessarily bad. If the ad creators did a better job of producing their ads then folks wouldn't necessarily skip them. I know a lot of you don't skip the beer commercials during sports programming because you want to see those hot chicks.
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?".
Re:One catch (Score:2)
And I forgot a second catch: at the coffee shop near me, at least half of the users are non-Windows users. Most of the other half use Powerbooks or iBooks and there's a sprinkling of Linux laptops. How does FreeFi deal with non-Windows systems?
Easy Solution (Score:2)
Put a narrow duct tape across bottom of the user's screen. Much less annoying than narrow, persistant band of content.
Free WiFi has been here for a long time... (Score:4, Informative)
Re:Seems reasonable (Score:2)
For example, I'm reading stories on the
I can't search for the ad, only hit reload and hope that the ad reappears, kinda like roulette. So, the ad systems tha
Re: (Score:2)
Re:Ubiquitous Wireless? (Score:2)
Yeah, that's a big risk like being near secondhand smoke or drinking tap water. Also you shouldn't stand too close the mircowave.
Don't be too worried. A tinfoil hat will surely block this radiation.
Re:Juno (Score:2)