Want to read Slashdot from your mobile device? Point it at m.slashdot.org and keep reading!

 


Forgot your password?
Close
typodupeerror
×
Wireless Networking Hardware Technology

Orlando Cancels Free WiFi Project 285

Posted by samzenpus from the no-internet-for-you dept.
EvilStein writes "According to local news, the City of Orlando has cancelled the city WiFi project. The 6 month pilot program ran for 17 months instead of the planned 6, but in the end, it was costing the city too much money and very few people were using the service. Might other municipal WiFi projects go the same way?"
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Orlando Cancels Free WiFi Project More

Orlando Cancels Free WiFi Project

Comments Filter:

  • Noooooooo they can't (Score:5, Funny)

    by LiquidCoooled ( 634315 ) on Wednesday June 22, 2005 @09:38PM (#12886351) Homepage Journal
    Someone tell them to stop, I'm in the middle of dow$£$"%[NO-CARRIER]

  • not economically feasible not a surprise (Score:5, Insightful)

    by yagu ( 721525 ) <yayagu@[ ]il.com ['gma' in gap]> on Wednesday June 22, 2005 @09:38PM (#12886356) Journal

    From the article: But city officials said that only about 27 people a day took advantage of the program -- not enough to justify the $1,800 the city paid every month for the service.

    Maybe naively I've been waiting for the propogation of wireless to be everywhere and always available and if not free, at least very inexpensive, and ubiquitous. The quote above snapped me back to reality. Sure wireless everywhere is the buzz these days, but how many people really need, or want it? I would venture even in the techno-elite slashdot crowd many wait for wireless everywhere but only a relatively modest subset of those would actually use it, and of all who use it, it would not likely be at great volumes everywhere (as in, that's kind of what it needs to be to sustain and maintain the infrastructure).

    Wireless internet isn't the same as cell phones in the sense that wireless access to the internet is nice, but doesn't drive communications as does telephony. Wireless internet access is a nicety but until wireless folds neatly into existing or expanding other necessary infrastructure (e.g., cell phone) I wouldn't be surprised to see other experimental free wireless internet sites suffer the same fate (really the question asked by the article).

    If a city as large as Orlando didn't sustain the experiment there are many other cities that would point to that as justification for not even bothering trying, at least not in the near future.

    (Doesn't mean I don't want it, just means it's too niche-y a market right now.)

    • Re:not economically feasible not a surprise (Score:5, Interesting)

      by LWATCDR ( 28044 ) on Wednesday June 22, 2005 @09:52PM (#12886418) Homepage Journal
      I work at a software company as a developer. I have an Atlanta Bread right next to my office that has free wifi... I have never used it. Why? When I go to lunch I go to eat, talk with my wife, and just mellow out. Why would I want to surf the net at lunch?
      Why would I want to surf the net at a park?
      I used to think of all the cool things you could do with wifi everywhere but in reality I do not see all that much use for it.
      • I often find myself at Panera bread after work if I have an activity shortly afterwards, because I have time to kill, but not enough to drive home and then back across STL for my cooking class, dinner date, or whatever.

      • Re:not economically feasible not a surprise (Score:5, Insightful)

        by deep44 ( 891922 ) on Wednesday June 22, 2005 @10:35PM (#12886590)
        When I go to lunch I go to eat, talk with my wife, and just mellow out. Why would I want to surf the net at lunch? Why would I want to surf the net at a park?
        Most people wouldn't. The point is, why work from the office when you can work from the park? ..or a coffee shop? ..or _anywhere_ in the city of Orlando?

        When I was a kid, my parents bought their first cordless phone, replacing an old rotary phone in our living room. My Mom would always sit right next to the cordless basestation when she used it- not because she doubted the technology; it was just what she was accustomed to doing.

        I think you see my point. Orlando was just a little ahead of the curve on this one..

        • Re:not economically feasible not a surprise (Score:5, Informative)

          by Squareball ( 523165 ) on Wednesday June 22, 2005 @10:53PM (#12886680)
          Actually I lived in Orlando for 15 years and I had no idea this even existed until reading about it on Slashdot... I'm not sure if that says more about the marketing of the service or about me as a person ;)

          Seriously, I asked a number of people I know in Orlando if they knew this was even there and they have all said no.
          • I grew up in O-Town and still have a lot of family there. I don't think Orlando would have been a good candidate for free wireless for the following reasons:
            • Relatively few people actually live in the City of Orlando. Most actually reside in the Orange and Seminole County suburbs far from downtown.
            • Likewise, relatively few people visit downtown. Other than some offices and local government, downtown Orlando has been in a death spiral for at least a decade. The vast majority of economic, social, and cult
        • "Most people wouldn't. The point is, why work from the office when you can work from the park? ..or a coffee shop? ..or _anywhere_ in the city of Orlando?"
          Because I have AC in my office. All my books and references. Several test machines. And several other people I can work with face to face. Plus I am there to help the support staff if needed.

          If there is no value being in my office I could just work from home and use my WAP to work in my garden.
          It would also save on gas, travel time, wear on my car, and g
      • You're thinking about it backwards. The point isn't to get people who are there for lunch to use the wireless, it's to get people who go there to use the wireless to buy sandwiches and coffee.

        Some people who can't get/afford broadband go there to do their work. You probably have it at work and/or home.
        • Who needs broadband for work doesn't have it?
          Yes I have it at work and at home.
          To be honest I have never seen more than one person using it when I am have been there.
          Where I would like to see it is at more truck stops and restaurants near the Interstate.
          My wife and I drive from Florida to teas at least once a year.
          It would be great to stop and grab the latest weather radar, send an email or two, and check the traffic ahead.
          We went for one the hurricanes when we evacuated.
          Spent the week visiting family but o
      • Currently I think Wifi is lacking some killer apps, once they start appearing we will have a lot more use for it. However at the moment the main benefit of Wifi is the fact that it is there if you need it, and really if you need some net access urgently, or just to look up what the capital of Slovakia is (Bratislava for those of you who don't know) to settle a bet having some Wifi access is a godsend.
      • I work at a software company as a developer. I have an Atlanta Bread right next to my office that has free wifi... I have never used it. Why?

        Because it's unencrypted, like the one near me?

        rj

      • In my case, I like to work in the park. It gets me out of the house for a while and then I'll take a break and go wander around for a while. Frightningly enough, I tend to prefer doing my initial UI design outside.

        I don't currently have an office, however, as I am doing contract work while looking for something more permanant.
    • Excellent comments. However, it is very much a catch-22. I, for one, don't really have any wireless devices or plans to buy any soon. However, if wireless were available throughout my city, then this would change my decisions considerably. Suddenly, a wireless device is worth the money. I would probably buy a laptop and use wireless constantly (whereas for now I'm content using landline internet at various places).

      My point is that, unfortunately, this is one of those things that requires time for people to

    • Re:not economically feasible not a surprise (Score:5, Insightful)

      by samtihen ( 798412 ) * on Wednesday June 22, 2005 @10:01PM (#12886459) Homepage
      Personally, I think the real problem is the availability of service in conjunction with the cost, rather than people's desire for it.

      At this point in time, small wireless network hotspots are not all that useful except in certain situations, such as your home, your office, or a type of business such as a fast food joint.

      WiMax (or an equivalent solution) is, of course, the only way that something like this will become effective. If user realizes that wireless access will be available ANYWHERE, not just some half block area, then more than 27 users will take advantage. Plus, when this happens, it will pave the way for VOIP services for mobile phones.

      I have yet to make up my mind if this is a service that should even be provided by the government. It may be better left to private organizations to ensure that the government does not restrict or monitor information across the network.

      • Re:not economically feasible not a surprise (Score:4, Insightful)

        by Daniel Dvorkin ( 106857 ) * on Wednesday June 22, 2005 @10:37PM (#12886595) Homepage Journal
        Bingo -- it's a matter of network effects. Hotspots are useful only for a small number of people who are willing and able to go to those hotspots to get their work done. Always-on, available-everywhere wifi (used in the generic sense, not meaning any specific flavor of 802.11) is useful to ... well ... everybody, because it encourages the adoption of the technology that makes it useful.

        Cell phones only became a universally accepted technology once coverage was good enough that you could be assured of getting a signal in just about any urban or suburban area, and most rural ones as well. Going a bit farther back, I believe the same is true of TV, and before that, radio. It would be absurd to look at a small-scale experiment like this and conclude "municipal wifi doesn't work."

    • Re:not economically feasible not a surprise (Score:4, Informative)

      by maggotty ( 206064 ) on Wednesday June 22, 2005 @10:05PM (#12886472)
      Having personally experienced the wonderment of Orlando's failed municipal WIFI, I can personally say that it will not be missed. Connections were sub-2400-baud-modem speed if you could connect at all. If Orlando's experiment was the standard of municipal WIFI, it won't surprise me if all such experiments fail for general lack of interest.

      I hope this doesn't disuade other cities from trying public WIFI. It would be a shame if Orlando's poor implementation of a good idea might doomed municipal WIFI.

      On the other hand, perhaps Orlando is a bellweather of sorts. Municipal WIFI might fail for incompetence. On the other hand, without a municipality cluttering up the spectrum, interested residents of downtown Orlando might have the incentive to set up a cooperative ad hoc network. Er...right.
    • The quote above snapped me back to reality. Sure wireless everywhere is the buzz these days, but how many people really need, or want it?

      I think this kind of thing is an enabling technology. What I mean by that is that you don't need it, until it is available, and then you can do various things so much better than you could before, that your life changes so that you then do need that technology. (By need I mean that things would be not nearly as good without it)

      An example of this kind of technology i

    • Well, as I could definitely have taken advantage of that, as could more than the 27 people per day they quoted that I know and influence, I would say that the issue is they failed to promote it. I live in Orlando, watch the local news etc., and knew almost nothing about it.

    • The cover article on the newest Linux Journal talks about the municipal network that has been developed in Wellington, New Zealand, and how it's set up, how it has developed, etc.

      It's not that the Internet is free (you still have to set up and pay for an ISP account in order to get DNS to the rest of the world. Oh, yeah, this MAN is ISP-agnostic...), but if you're just doing stuff on their network, it's peer-hosted, fast, and probably good enough for most people, really. Probably what cable modems should h
    • I dunno, I think the ubiquity is exactly what it needs to succeed... as long as it's only in some places it's going to suffer the fate mentioned in TFA.

      I mean, think of all the blackberries and treo's on the road today, I know I, and I'm assuming alot of others, would gladly buy a significantly cheaper and/or more functional PDA, scratch the monthly data charges, and use WIFI for the email services, heck if it were good enough use Skype for the voice (but regardless, even just the email would be awesome)

      H
    • That's 810 connections per month, or two bucks each.

      Assume for the moment that these were city employees. That's NOTHING.

      I used to live in Long Beach, CA. They started a WiFi project and, like Orlando, it is a city that lives on convention income. As a benefit to conventioneers, this type of expense barely registers on the accounting books, yet it is GREAT PR.

      Abandoning this sort of thing is just penny wise and pound foolish. It's a loss-leader. Get with the program.
    • Actually, my question is: Why does it cost $1,800.00 per month?

      Whatever happened to tapping into the already existing T1 line the city uses, connect it to a router (ie: 1 TCP/IP address), and then just setting up a bunch of sub-routers with the 192.168.2.XXX ids? At today's prices it should only cost about $100.00 max per wireless unit. These are set up a block apart (so say a 10 block area which means 10 routers or a one time fee of $1,000.00).

      Once set up it can't cost them $1,800.00 a month to run the

  • This is why (Score:3, Insightful)

    by thelizman ( 304517 ) <hammerattack@yah ... com minus distro> on Wednesday June 22, 2005 @09:39PM (#12886362) Homepage
    ...you let the free market handle these situations. A bunch of Government Beauracrats spent oodles of taxpayer dollars, and ran the project almost three times as long as promised, and the taxpayers basically got bupkis. Private industry knew better than to waste money there. OTOH, if I'm within spitting distance of Schlotskies in this town, I get free high-speed wifi.

    • Re:This is why (Score:2, Insightful)

      by LiquidCoooled ( 634315 )
      Private industry LOVED the operation.
      Or did you think the government obtained the hardware and internet connections out of thin air?
    • And i agree 100000% lets not ingore the fact, once the government lays the lines, they own them, muhc as they own the broadcast spectrums. as much as /. hates regulation, why would we want a body that CAN regulate laying the lines which they can control, it makes no sense. the last thing i want is the FCC cropping up in the internets, the FEC is already trying to reach their greasy palms on it, lets keep them at bay as long as we can. the gov't made the biggest mistake of release the interent because the
      • so we let private companies with limited legal accountability and no moral/fairness accountability beyond their shareholders own the lines? wake up, people, we're fucked either way, at least with government owned wifi/etc our tax dollars do something useful that we can actually USE and have some form of representation in the decision process. People vote only on abortion, why not throw the 'wifi vote' in as well.
        • The free market is self cleansing, it always will be. I would rather trust the free economy to remove bad institutions than a MONOPOLY government whcih continues to make bad ones.

          we can't get rid of the government, we should do our best to ensure they have the least power as possible

          the biggest friend of big business is big government. everyone on this site that hates big biz should be fearful of big gov't. big gov't sells its favors to big biz, if you fear one, you should fear both
          • The free market is self cleansing, it always will be.

            What's the weather like on your planet?

            • The free market is self cleansing, it always will be.

              What's the weather like on your planet?

              Free markets are self cleaning, however we don't have a free market. What we have today is a corporate aristocracy.

              Falcon
              • Free markets are self cleaning, however we don't have a free market.

                Never have, never will. Pure capitalism is just as impossible as pure communism.

          • the biggest friend of big business is big government. everyone on this site that hates big biz should be fearful of big gov't. big gov't sells its favors to big biz, if you fear one, you should fear both

            While I have some concerns about big business I am afraid of big government, as you say, all too often government is the hand maiden of business.

            Falcon

    • A bunch of Government Beauracrats spent oodles of taxpayer dollars, and ran the project almost three times as long as promised, and the taxpayers basically got bupkis

      They spent a mere $1,800 a month. This is a negligable expense for the city of Orlando amounting to one penny per metro area citizen per year, not "oodles of taxpayer dollars" and certainly a reasonable expense for an experimental project.

      What happens when you let the "free market handle these situations"? Why don't you visit Sea-Tac

      • Oh, that $31,000 is taxpayer dollars that only benefitted a few hundred people only cost the taxpayers each a penny, so that makes it okay? And what about all the other useless programs that benefit few or none that only cost a penny? Seems to me it ends up being between seven and twelve percent of everyones income, which is to say millions. Look at your cities budget sometime.

        And while you're on it, there is a huge difference between Seatacs 'free as in choice' and Orlando's 'free as in someone else pays
    • Why did you capitalize "government beauracrats[sic]"?
    • Private enterprise never misunderestimates the demand for a product?

  • Free WiFi? (Score:4, Funny)

    by kc32 ( 879357 ) on Wednesday June 22, 2005 @09:45PM (#12886385)
    Screw WiFi, I want free fiber connections.

  • Vague Article (Score:4, Interesting)

    by wbren ( 682133 ) on Wednesday June 22, 2005 @09:47PM (#12886395) Homepage
    The article left me with a few questions, since I'm not an Orlando resident. Unfortunately I don't get "Local 6 News" up here in Massachusetts :-)
    • How much was the service advertised? I mean, besides the orange signs, did they make an effort to inform local businesses' employees of the free WiFi access? How about local shops, cafes, restaurants, etc.?
    • What made up the $1,800/month price tag? Was all of that put towards a dedicated line? Maybe they should have scaled down the bandwidth (and the price), increasing it as needed.
    • Why did the pilot program get extended in the first place? Did they simply hope more people would use it as time went on?
      • What made up the $1,800/month price tag? Was all of that put towards a dedicated line? Maybe they should have scaled down the bandwidth (and the price), increasing it as needed.

      That's what I was wondering too. I would guess either a dedicated line, or seperate connections to each AP. Either way, not a good way to do things. What they should be doing is using a shared DSL/cable 3 or 4mbit account. Throw up a linux box as a firewall (and to monitor bandwidth), and it's easy to scale up and load balance co

      • Re:Vague Article (Score:2, Insightful)

        by wbren ( 682133 )

        What they should be doing is using a shared DSL/cable 3 or 4mbit account. Throw up a linux box as a firewall (and to monitor bandwidth), and it's easy to scale up and load balance connections as required.

        That's exactly what I was thinking. With Comcast and other providers offering residential downstreams of 4Mbps at $40-$50/month, it seems natural to go that route. But remember, we may not have all the facts. For example, the city might be bound by a contract with the local Telco, who insisted they leas

  • Why does government need to do this? (Score:5, Funny)

    by toupsie ( 88295 ) on Wednesday June 22, 2005 @09:47PM (#12886397) Homepage
    Why do taxpayers need to fund free WiFi when you can just get it from your neighbor's right out of the box, default install Linksys/Netgear/Airport router?

  • Understand (Score:5, Insightful)

    by robpoe ( 578975 ) on Wednesday June 22, 2005 @09:48PM (#12886404)
    I live in Kansas City. If the city put in free wireless in our downtown - nobody would use it. There's nothing in our down town to do .. after 5:00PM (except buy drugs, hookers, or be on a cleaning crew).

    A city running something like that would give me the willies anyway. Who's to say they wouldn't be monitoring every piece of information - and/or someone sitting there with AirSnort doing the same..

    • Re:Understand (Score:3, Insightful)

      by Daniel Dvorkin ( 106857 ) *
      A city running something like that would give me the willies anyway. Who's to say they wouldn't be monitoring every piece of information

      Who's to say your ISP isn't monitoring every packet you send and receive right now?

    • I live in Kansas City. If the city put in free wireless in our downtown - nobody would use it. There's nothing in our down town to do .. after 5:00PM (except buy drugs, hookers, or be on a cleaning crew).

      Downtown Orlando isn't Kansas City if KC is like that. There's a happening nightlife in Orlando, at least there was when I grew up there. Church Street Station was a busy place, I don't know if they still do it but a show used to be recorded at the Cheyenne Saloon for the Country Music Channel, and yo

    • Hell, a ton of public places offer wifi for free already in KC. Most every library, coffeeshops and university offers it. Crown Center, Union Station, Hell, I think a couple of bars have public access for some reason; perhaps a public service as an apology for the shitty clientele. Not to mention that KC has some of the worst sprawl I've seen, and plenty of buildings and hills to interfere with line of sight.

      But you've struck up a pretty good point. A lot of businesses won't or can't adopt wifi because it

  • I live in Orlando... (Score:5, Interesting)

    by xENoLocO ( 773565 ) on Wednesday June 22, 2005 @09:52PM (#12886419) Homepage
    ... and I've never heard of this.

    Why not? I'm a technically inclined 20 something who would have used this, had I known about it.

    I think that is the real problem here. Their target demographic didnt even know about it!
    • I live there too...25yrs old, Comp Engineering graduate, and never heard of this either.

      There was absolutely no advertisement of it. I went downtown alot, and saw 1 sign in the last 6 months that said something about wireless, with no explanation what it was, or what the fee/cost was.

      It seemed like it was someone's pet project, and no one ever advertised it to the masses. If someone here advertised it on TV or Radio, it would have been huge I imagine. Theres a number of cool eateries downtown that have ou
    • Just want to add another voice - regular computer geek guy in Orlando who listens to local AM and FM but never heard of this.
      Saw the headline and thought WTF. Maybe I should look into this "Local 6" thing...

      Hell, Lake Eola is a great place downtown - I would have have enjoyed this...
      • I watch Local 6 and barely heard of this. I think that is a good illustration of their overall plan, which was well though out.

        1) Put up WiFi
        2) Fail to market it
        3) Say it costs bundles
        4) ???
        5) Pocket the profit

        Of course, with a Mayor who is being indited for fraud, not surprising.
    • I think that is the real problem here. Their target demographic didnt even know about it!

      That's probably just one part of a larger issue. If they had no idea how to advertise the product, it's likely they had no idea how to market it, and it's likely it was just a hair brained idea, not thought out and poorly implemented. My city can't even clean the streets 3 times a year without costing my block $500-1000 per visit in addition to taxes. There's no way in hell I'd trust them running an ISP efficient
    • Why not? I'm a technically inclined 20 something who would have used this, had I known about it.

      Why would the Government need to advertise this if you are so technically inclined? Sounds like to me you would just open your notebook and see an AP that you were able to connect. Didn't you notice it pop up in yellow or red in Kismet [kismetwireless.net]? Come on! You're a technically inclined 20 something! You don't need the man to tell you about a free Wifi AP!

      • I've been a web developer and designer for 12 years. I currently work at Disney Internet Group.

        We operate Disney.com, DisneyWorld.com, ESPN.com, Movies.com, Go.com, ABCNews.com, MLB.com, NFL.com, NBA.com, NASCAR.com, and *many* others.

        Any other questions? Or would you like to continue mocking my technical ability?
    • I've never heard of this

      What? I visted Orlando in March and they had signs up all over downtown and the Lake Eola area that said free Wifi. If I could find out about it in the 2 days I was there, surely you should have been able to notice the same.

  • "Free" and "Cost Too Much" ah, the irony (Score:4, Interesting)

    by ScentCone ( 795499 ) on Wednesday June 22, 2005 @09:54PM (#12886428)
    I'm always a little amazed that people will use the word "free" when they mean "taxpayer subsidized."
    • That's right up there with the "free value added bonus" crap that companies try to pawn on people...

      Though in this case, it costs X dollars to have a Y bits/sec network running.

      You could have I subscribers pay X/I dollars to have it run and not likely use Y/I bits/sec each

      OR....

      You could have J taxpayers pay X/J dollars to have it run and likely hit the Y/J bits/sec average. The trick here is J is probably much larger than I.

      Obviously I think as a community some control should be put on it. I'd say i

  • It's Great In Theory, but... (Score:5, Interesting)

    by chia_monkey ( 593501 ) on Wednesday June 22, 2005 @09:59PM (#12886447) Journal
    Sounds great, doesn't it? Free WiFi for the entire city. No need to search for hotspots. No need to pay to surf while you're sipping your Starbucks coffee. But...realistically, who's going to use it? I'm a WiFi junkie and I keep forgetting about all these free WiFi initiatives. Also, we need to keep into consideration that first wee need a very mobile client base, people lugging around their laptops and then using them somewhere. When they do pull out their computers to work, it's usually at a hotel (which generally provides WiFi now) or at work (provided network) or at home (probably networked). I doubt anyone is going to cancel their Internet service at home simply because the city provides free WiFi. I'd much rather blame Comcast for a downed network than rely on the city. Like I said...it sounds great, but the logistics and cost of it all far outweigh the reality of the situation.

  • That's because... (Score:5, Informative)

    by __aaitqo8496 ( 231556 ) on Wednesday June 22, 2005 @10:02PM (#12886463) Journal
    ...I live in Orlando and I had no idea the pilot program was going on. You'd think they'd advertise it somewhere - maybe even at the local university [ucf.edu]. In fact, I don't know anyone that knew such a project was in place.
  • Please just give me money, you can have your government-subsidized WIFI.

    We have this crap in my town (one of the first in the country). Word is, it totally sucks.

    The company that provides the equipment is local; looks like a typical corrupt local govt. deal.

    SF, on the other hand, was WIFI all over the place, due to people just having open APs.
    • Please just give me money, you can have your government-subsidized WIFI

      You mean, give you back your money (um, if you pay taxes). Otherwise, you mean, give you my money. There is no "government" money. Honestly, where do these memes come from?

      The company that provides the equipment is local; looks like a typical corrupt local govt. deal

      That's hardly an indication of corruption - more like giving a local vendor the business so that the increase in their local economic activity pumps a piece of that
      • "That's hardly an indication of corruption - more like giving a local vendor the business so that the increase in their local economic activity pumps a piece of that company's revenue right back into the local tax base. That's more like recycling than corruption.

        It really looks like they are propping up a corpse of a local company. Robbing Peter to pay Paul.

        It looks like it was sweetheart deal (local politics here is totally corrupt), and the technology is a failure.

        More freedom (e.g. take less taxe

  • Seems to follow the no-progress trend. (Score:3, Interesting)

    by RyanFenton ( 230700 ) on Wednesday June 22, 2005 @10:10PM (#12886498)
    The internet is a great tool - a channel for almost unlimited forms of information. It's potential hasn't even begun to be tapped, despite the wonders we've already seen. But to see more potential, we need a lot more than just access - we need people with the time, interest and freedom to explore that potential.

    We don't see much of that anymore here in America. Few people have the time or interest to go beyond the mundane around them. The concept of progress has become the idea of people selling things to people, with little else involved. Science and education just aren't that important anymore, except for expanding markets.

    Am I surprised this experiment failed? No - who is going to have the time to use even free bandwidth to try something new? Not many people anymore. We're just not interested.

    That's not to say that it's a truly bleak picture - but we as a population do seem to be stuck waiting for progress to come to us, rather than going out and making the progress ourselves. We need science, social thought, meaningful public education, healthy debate and journalism, and a much greater interest in human progress.

    It's not about liberalism versus convervatism - it's about humanity doing something to make the world better, so it's not such a horrible place. It's about doing something to outpace the destruction we're causing, at least on some level. It's about seeing beyond dollars, and using our vast resources towards creating a future where we all know more, not just avoiding the terrors that will never stop coming in new forms.

    It's not experiments like these failing that we should be depressed about - it's that we have so very few experiments like them at all anymore (relative to population increase over time).

    Ryan Fenton

  • Biggest Problem.... (Score:3, Informative)

    by rogabean ( 741411 ) on Wednesday June 22, 2005 @10:21PM (#12886538)
    was that they didn't really tell anyone either. I live in Orlando and I wasn't aware of this test project running... First I've ever heard of it was today... too late now I suppose..

    figures.

  • blah (Score:5, Interesting)

    by Momoru ( 837801 ) on Wednesday June 22, 2005 @10:21PM (#12886540) Homepage Journal
    I like how Government programs get cancelled due to initial lack of use....cancel the wifi, cancel the bus routes only a few people use....the government isn't a corporation, its there to help the people, not turn a profit. If only a few people were using a park would they pave it? If only a few people used the courts would they close them? Some things are just a public service, and WiFi is the public service of the 21st century.

    • Re:blah (Score:4, Interesting)

      by Have Blue ( 616 ) on Wednesday June 22, 2005 @10:46PM (#12886640) Homepage
      Those government programs get cancelled because they are tremendously egregious wastes of money. Even governments can't subsidize forever; the bar is lower than it is for a for-profit business but even cities can go bankrupt if they run at a deficit for long enough.

      Face it, free wireless is neither a high priority nor a fundamental necessity of life to the vast majority of people, and that will be true for the foreseeable future. If it's really that important to you, you can get it from a commercial provider (at a cost, but hey, it's really that important, right?).
    • its there to help the people, not turn a profit

      Right. Sometimes the government can help people the most by cancelling unpopular bus routes and not trying to be an ISP.

      At my old university (Ohio State), through a contract with the city, every student was required to pay a mandatory $9 per quarter bus fee. In my time at OSU, I paid around $150 for a bus service I only used once. Most everyone I know was exactly like me. According to a recent article in a local newspaper, the city of Columbus has one

  • Scope (Score:5, Interesting)

    by sigma ( 53086 ) on Wednesday June 22, 2005 @10:30PM (#12886571)
    Please don't get the impression that this was a city-wide project. In reality, the signal was only available over a few city blocks and one park in downtown Orlando.

    This failure is clearly because of a poor location choice. The main branch of the Orange County library is only a block away from Lake Eola park where this project was centered, but no signal was available in the library when I was there earlier this year.
  • The real problem with this is how cities in the US are laid out. Cities in the northeast may have a lot of residents per square mile, but almost every where else, cities are very spread out. Maybe I'm only speaking for Miami here, but if you put WiFi in downtown no one would use it because nobody lives there. What is the city of Miami only has a population of 400,000. It's Miami-Dade County, where everyone inside considers themselves to live in Miami, which has the large population (2.3 million). Anyway, f
  • I don't understand why a city would offer this, why don't they also offer free telephone service and newspapers, its just as crazy a concept. I can understand why you would do it at attractions for example Baltimores Inner Harbor area. It makes no sense at all and is a waste of money.
    • I doubt it's a problem in Orlando, but in some small towns in Colorado, you are not permitted to have any wideband access. Qwest owns the rights to run DSL, and they will run it when they get damn good and ready, which is not going to be any time soon since they haven't finished wiring Denver yet. Meanwhile, they're spending plenty to prevent those towns from installing their own WiFi so the Qwest monopoly will be waiting for them when they want to exercise it.

      rj

  • In related news... (Score:3, Interesting)

    by TeknoHog ( 164938 ) on Wednesday June 22, 2005 @10:46PM (#12886644) Homepage Journal
    A country-wide wireless network is being built in Finland. It will use Flash-OFDM [flarion.com] technology at frequencies around 450 MHz. Here's the story in Finnish [mintc.fi].

  • bad area, poor service (Score:5, Interesting)

    by vsync64 ( 155958 ) <vsync@quadium.net> on Wednesday June 22, 2005 @11:02PM (#12886719) Homepage
    I live in Orlando and on several occasions I tried to use the wireless service outside. I was unable to get a DHCP lease or even a very strong signal (this was right next to the sign proudly advertising the wireless). Then there are the homeless people that congregate in these parks. Finally the humidity is very bad. It wasn't even summer yet, but I was concerned that long term use might short out parts of my laptop. Plus it's not pleasant to sit outside and be hot and sweaty.

    I hope they didn't kill the wireless in the library downtown though; that works quite nicely and is a great benefit when visiting for relaxation or research.

  • Civic issues (Score:2, Insightful)

    by GregBryant ( 868930 )

    Although subsidized-WiFi isn't as important as subsidized health, housing, education, etc... at least it's a public service subsidy. Most government subsidies just go to a few corporate stockholders.

    If you're going to push something like this in the civic sector, you need to push the non-laptop uses ... kiosks, for example. At malls we're starting to see health & human service kiosks provided by non-profits & public agencies. This would be a lot cheaper to do if WiFi was pervasive.

  • 16 months? Jesus, I was in Orlando for a tech trade show for two weeks last November, and I didn't have a clue that there was open access wifi anywhere but at the bistro in the Millenium Mall. On top of that, there are virtually zip public internet access sites listed in the Yellow Pages, other than the downtown city library.

    It was only into my second week that I realized the wall jack in my hotel room provided internet access at no additional cost [sheepish grin].

  • Let the government do it. The bigger the governed body, the "better" your chances.

  • Mickey Mouse Project (Score:5, Interesting)

    by Doc Ruby ( 173196 ) on Wednesday June 22, 2005 @11:43PM (#12886875) Homepage Journal
    $1800:mo for 6 months pilot, extended to 17 months, means they planned to spend $10K, but spent $30K instead. For a system to support "up to 200 people at once" - which would have been $9:mo, just in costs, for a hotspot. That's not "municipal WiFi", that's a token gesture, doomed to fail.

    How much could they have spent getting people to know about the service, known to everyone in business as "marketing"? And with that kind of tiny coverage, what possibility could it have had to be meaningful as "citywide"? None at all. Philadelphia's project will cost over $10M, complete coverage for 1.5M people. And it will not just be some "hotspot startup", it will be a complete coverage, so people can forget about the network, and just get access to Internet content, services and people. That has a good chance of success.
  • It's Orlando, after all. They must have been wishing they were Manhattan.
  • Free wifi huh?

    it was costing the city too much money

    Replace "city" with "unwilling taxpayers who were robbed at gunpoint by a few lobbyist nerds..." and you're right on.

    Nothing's free, someone pays for it. Start a business, offer a service, do it that way.

    Yeah, I want "free" wifi too. But I'm not going to use the Government to rob people in order to pay for my "free" wifi...

    Lower price, better service, no Government monopoly... why is everyone clamoring for the Government to start running an ISP?

  • I'm from Orlando... here's the scoop (Score:3, Informative)

    by paulrpayne ( 719508 ) on Thursday June 23, 2005 @03:21AM (#12887461) Homepage
    Lake Eola is a 9 square block area. It is a single path surrounding a large lake. There are a few benches along the path, a small deck with 4 or five rocking chairs, and an outdoor stage with rows of metal-wire seats (100-200) where homeless people can usually be found sleeping and congregating. There are a few grassy areas, a kids playground and a few sculptures dotting the landscape. With that in mind, would you rather go to this park and either sit on a wire-seat with homeless people or on one of these benches with joggers and people feeding the pigeons and ducks in 90 degree(F) Orlando humidity without a power outlet or a table, or would you rather go to Stardust Video, a 5 min. drive from there, where they have a full espresso bar, a broad selection of beers, comfortable seating, your selection of popular and underground videos, occasional live music, and most importantly AIR CONDITIONING along with their free wifi?? I always went to Stardust.
  • I'm a programmer. I'm frequently on the road. There have been plenty of times where an emergency happened, and I needed to get on right now!!!!

    Towards this end, I wrote a stupid-simple script for my Fedora Core Laptop that essentially is a "war driving" script. Basically, it runs 'iwlist scan' every 5 seconds, and does a pattern match to find unencrypted networks.

    Typicaly scenario: I'm in my car, in some god-forsaken town, and I get a call on the cell phone. So, I cruise around the town, paying particul

Slashdot Top Deals

Get hold of portable property. -- Charles Dickens, "Great Expectations"

Close