Chicago Cancels Municipal Wi-Fi Plan

thatshortkid writes "The Chicago Tribune is reporting that a proposed plan for municipal wi-fi in Chicago has fallen apart. The story cites contract disputes and the falling price of residential broadband as reasons for the talks collapsing. 'Chicago officials had intended that the city would offer infrastructure, but no cash, to a carrier that would use its own funds to build the network here. EarthLink and AT&T Inc. submitted proposals to the city, but after months of negotiations the parties were unable to reach agreement. The companies sought a commitment from Chicago to be an "anchor tenant," agreeing to pay to use the Wi-Fi network to support city services, but the city declined ... Even if Chicago declines to back a municipal wireless network, city residents soon will gain more Internet connection options. Sprint Nextel Corp. is building a wireless WiMax network here that is due to offer service next spring.'"

Falling Prices?

[dsginter]

Comcast hasn't dropped my broadband price a single time (they have raised it, however). That said, has anyone actually figured out exactly *how* to get the $10 DSL that was the FCC requirement of the BellSouth Merger [techdirt.com]?

With every day, I become more disgusted with the corporate greed stranglehold. Even more so, I amazed that consumers largely don't care.

Public Works

[packetmon]

I can't see how a public works effort such as this would work because I'm looking at it from the admin/engineer side of things. So here we have Chicago creating a network that will be funded how. Firstly officials there wanted freebies, they didn't even offer a bone. So having worked at a provider, I can say the provider's first mode of thinking was "Why should I". Think about it, the city charging $20 the provider gets what? Why would the provider dish out all that cash when all it takes is a cluster of people to open WAP's all over the place to let their neighbors surf for free. Sure people do it now, but there is no city official dipping into a providers pockets right now.

Provider --> resells to City @ say 10.00 per person/etc (who cares) City --> sells to citizens @ say 20.00

City now also has to hire network engineers, admins, tech support etc. Higher taxes.

Provider --> resells to City @ say 10.00 per person/etc (who cares) City --> sells to citizens @ say 20.00 Citizens --> Opens WAP's citywide leading city to lose revenue

This is GREAT news

[joshv]

If this had gone forward we would have spent something like $100 million, the work going in no-bid contract to Friends Of Daley, and ended up with a few "hot zones" in inconvenient parts of the city, with coverage conspicuously absent from any area covered by a commercial provider.

Re:It's Like Water

[LWATCDR]

No it isn't
I just don't see the need for WiFi EVERYWHERE. If you want to compare it to water then fine. Are there public water fountains on every block? No. Is there a public water fountain even at every park? Probably not. Why have a city wide WiFi system? Hot Spots will get you 99% of the benefit for 1% of the cost. There was a Network admin for a college here on slashdot talking about this. His school was demanding that the entire campus have WiFi coverage. For the life of him he couldn't figure out why WiFi coverage out by the trash dumpsters was important. Why not just have it in the class rooms, Dorms, Student Unions, Library, and the Quad?
Add in Sprint bringing WiMax and yea it just doesn't seem like a good idea.

I could see WiFi and WiFi Mesh networks as a great solution in rural areas of the Midwest. Lots of silos and grain elevators and very few hills. But City Wide WiFi nteworks? Why?

Re:Falling Prices?

[DogDude]

Even more so, I amazed that consumers largely don't care.

Well, you are saying that your prices have not dropped, yet you still use it. Congratulations on being one of those consumers who while maybe care, still continue to pay for a service you're not happy with. That's the way to stick it to the "greedy corporations!". Keep paying them for a service you're not happy with. I'm sure that they take extra time to read your angry letters to them... right after they get finished cashing your check every month.

Sooo...

[It doesn't come easy]

[...]and the falling price of residential broadband as reasons for the talks collapsing.

Would like to see where prices go over the next couple of years now that a competitor has been eliminated...

Comment removed

[account_deleted]

Comment removed based on user account deletion

You are probably the wrong audience

[ishmalius]

Just the fact that you are chatting happily on Slashdot indicates that you have Internet access, and you will likely not be a customer of any government-subsidized WiFi. The people who are NOT speaking here are the potential beneficiaries. Think more altruistically. Just because YOU don't need it, doesn't mean that other people don't.

That is like saying, "Why donate food and clothing to the homeless? I have all I need."

WiMAX - Way to go, WiFi go away!

[maxrate]

WiMAX is the way to go. WiFi isn't truley designed for long-range mobile access. Yes, I have seen plenty of WiFi mobile solutions, but in reality they just aren't reliable. WiMAX mini-PCI cards in notebooks is definately where we'll be at in a couple of years. Metropolitan area broadband deployment over WiFi is simply not the best solution, and is backwards thinking in my opinion. WiFi should stay at home and the work place for private networks and small hotspots. There is no reason why license free WiMAX can't be implemented. A licensed approach (although it involves the -evil- telco's typically) would be of higher quality of service (presumably) - but the cost of broadband is really not very high if it is implemented by responsible companies that haven't gone too greedy.

Re:Falling Prices?

[Pilferer]

..still continue to pay for a service you're not happy with.

You make it sound like we've got options! Where I live in Chicago, I can go with Comcast for $65/month (after taxes), or get slightly-better-than-ISDN speeds with AT&T, for $40-something. If I want high-speed internet, I'm stuck with Comcast! You can't "vote with your dollar" when one company has a monopoly!

Support is a killer

[ACMENEWSLLC]

We're trying to offer WIFI at two motels, a campus, and a 3 mile run to a farm using wireless bridging on non 802 technology.

My god, support's a pain. Wifi router drops. Some moron opens up bit torrent and kills the pipe. Some idiot decides to run his own Wireless bridge and run on the same channels we use, but he's packet capturing the data.

The utilities decide to unplug our fiber. The AP quits handing out DHCP. The ISP goes down. Why can't I get Wifi in this one room? The news crew bounces microwave into our wifi bringing it down. The WIFI gets hit by lightening. The UPS battery needs replaced. The WIFI gets hit by construction workers, causing the directional Yagi to be aimed just wrong enough.

I can't imagine trying to support the entire Chicago area with Wifi.

Re:It's Like Water

[LWATCDR]

"So sensors in the dumpster can notify the Garbage Collection that it's full and let them optimize their routes to save gas, time and money.

The point is if you build the infrastructure people will find ways to use it. "

So you will have to spent the money and energy to build and run those sensor. I have a better idea. Just use a big dumpster and pick it up once a week as part of a route so that you don't waste fuel making a special trip!
Simple is better.