 RayW
Premium
join:2001-09-01
Layton, UT
clubs: | I agree Now we wait and see if it is a waste. | |
|  | 
calvoiper
join:2003-03-31
Belvedere Tiburon, CA
 ·Comcast Formerly ..
| Re: I agree A mix of questions presented here:
1. Will Wi-Fi survive? (IMHO, yes.)
2. Will Bluetooth "beat" Wi-Fi? (IMHO, no.)
3. Will commercial Wi-Fi pay off for its investors? (Who knows?)
The last is the hardest. Putting aside Forresters' preference for Bluetooth for the moment, Wi-Fi stands to become the ultimate commodity--every Tom, Dick, & Harry can put up a hot-spot, so consumer prices for access at any given point are likely to crash.
What survives in a commodity environment? Branding--if your brand is easy to use, easy to bill, widely available, represents reasonable quality, and IS FIRST IN THE MARKET, then your brand may well survive. But you will find your brand attacked niche by niche. If you price high enough to support nationwide roaming (Starbucks), you'll be undercut by the local coffee shop catering to locals who don't travel much. If you support the bandwidth for active gaming, you'll be undercut by the guy who only supports enough bandwidth to use e-mail and spout on DSLR. If you support paper billing, you'll be undercut by the gal who only supports on-line billing and credit-card payment.
I think the "pay-to-play" Wi-Fi folks will have a hard time sooner or later, but most new industries do go through periods of consolidation.
Then again, libraries used to be "paid membership" institutions -- until this Carnegie fellow got the idea that they should be free. Maybe Wi-Fi is destined to become a community service supported by government?
Calvoiper
--
VoIP--the death knell of remaining voice monopolies! | |
| | | 
dvd536
as Mr. Pink as they come
Premium
join:2001-04-27
Phoenix, AZ
| Re: I agree said by calvoiper  :
2. Will Bluetooth "beat" Wi-Fi? (IMHO, no.)
LOL. bluetooth was dead years ago while everyone involved with it was squabbling over standards, wifi came in and owned them.
--
You can never be too rich, too thin or have too much Bandwidth | |
| | | | Jon_Hanson
Mountain Dew Rules
Premium
join:2001-07-09
Gilbert, AZ
| Bluetooth and WiFi do not compete with each other! Bluetooth and WiFi are not competing technologies. Bluetooth is meant to get rid of the tangle of wires needed for PC peripherials (cell phones, PDAs, etc.). It has a range of about 30 feet. WiFi has a range of up to 1,000 feet and is meant for network access. How can you compare the two? | |
| | ashworth
join:2001-10-06
Pittsburgh, PA
| There will be a wireless solution....right now it is 801.11b(I think)...I believe, as a community, we need to do this (hot spots) because we will be left behind if we don't. Just because we have good technology and is not feasible at this time doesn't mean we should give up on it...Maybe universities and municipalities would fund "hot spots" in the future....we can only hope....pray !!!! | |
| | | RayW
Premium
join:2001-09-01
Layton, UT
clubs:
 ·XMission
| Re: I agree said by ashworth :
...Maybe universities and municipalities would fund "hot spots" in the future....we can only hope....pray !!!!
How much in taxes are you willing to pay for this? Should that be a property tax, a sales tax, a special computer tax (like the Brits have on TVs), a communications tax, maybe a gas tax? | |
| wkendrvr
join:2001-07-09
Greensboro, NC
| huh? Hello? We are talking apples and oranges again. Bluetooth is not the same type of protocol as 802.11 (think irDA).
They were NEVER intended to compete with each other, if anything, barring interference problems, they can enhance each other... | |
| | aarong3
join:2002-08-01
Los Angeles, CA | Re: huh? nobody seems to be addressing this, and that worries me.
get your tech straight before you start mouthing off, people. | |
| 
tomkb
Premium
join:2000-11-15
Avon, OH
clubs: | Well It's a waste as a commercial venture, as it increases in popularity, the airwaves are bombarded with noise and this is an unregulated band. | |
| | 
Eat Me
join:2002-09-25
Sussex, NJ
clubs:
·ProLog
| Re: Well It's not an unregulated band. There are actually other legit users of the band around. 802.11 falls under FCC Part 15 rules, which means that all users are allowed only limited power, and can use the band on a secondary basis.
Now, if the FCC would grant licenses and regulate 802.11 properly, maybe it could be better. The way I would like to see it is that the channels that are outside of the ham radio 2.4GHz band can be for commercial use, and those that are in the ham radio band can be for regular non-commercial ham radio use, under part 97. The FCC should also do away with the requirement to have all data sent over ham radio 802.11 sent in cleartext (unencyrpted). These rules would apply for higher powered transmitters (more than 1 watt) and high gain antennas.
This way, anyone wanting to do 802.11 as a hobby would have to get a very easy to obtain and free ham radio license. And it would mean that any corporation wanting to do 802.11 would stay out of the noncommercial ham radio band. | |
| | |
calvoiper
join:2003-03-31
Belvedere Tiburon, CA
·Comcast Formerly ..
| Re: Well said by Eat Me :
Now, if the FCC would grant licenses and regulate 802.11 properly, maybe it could be better. The way I would like to see it is that ....
Yeah, like they way they granted licenses for PCS? First, they split the spectrum in completely nonsensical ways. Second, they prohibited initial "nationwide" license acquisition, guaranteeing service fragmentation. Third, they experimented with new "auction" schemes willy-nilly. Fourth, they managed to sell licenses to financially incapable entities which tied up the frequencies for years in litigation. Finally, they admitted to creating a sinkhole in the US Treasury and looked for a bailout--in which the benefit to the consumer was the last consideration. And who benefitted from this? Only the incumbent cellular duopolies, who saw meaningful competition delayed by years. The whole thing was run like a bad psychology experiment for a high-school science fair.
That could be done. (Of course, it would be predated by 1.5 years of arguing over whether the way you "would like to see it happen" is better than the way, say, Verizon "would like to see it happen....")
No, thank you. I'll take the "Wild West" of the present Wi-Fi approach instead, and keep those meddlesome bureaucrats out of the pipeline.
Calvoiper
--
VoIP--the death knell of remaining voice monopolies! | |
| 
Yowzaaah
Ours Go To Eleven
join:2000-12-14
DamnFlat, OH
clubs:
| I love hotspots Everytime I'm in Chicago or NY I leach bandwidth from my hotel room. It's great all I need is my WiFi card and Net Stumbler and I'm set. No more $2.00 dialup access fees from the Hyatt or the Westin.
--
Don't suspect your friends...Report Them. Brazil (if you haven't seen it, you should) | |
| jcondon
join:2000-05-27
Thornwood, NY
| UK numbers The article mentions UK numbers.
I would imagine more then 50% of the readers of this website are probably in the USA and maybe Canada.
Seems like a more interesting story would have US numbers.
Then they throw in BlueTooth into the article. Perhaps they mean for cellphones that have Internet and BlueTooth?
Coupled with a BlueTooth enabled Laptop and it gets a bit more interesting.
That might offer some serious competition to WiFI. But, 3G phones and slower have not been impressive in their speed and reliability (at least not the ones I have used).
I have never used a 4G phone. | |
| | |
calvoiper
join:2003-03-31
Belvedere Tiburon, CA | Re: Wireless? Yea Right! And my Great-Grandad said the same thing about that annoying machine Mr. Ford was selling....
Calvoiper
--
VoIP--the death knell of remaining voice monopolies! | |
| | | 
pnh102
Reptiles Are Cuddly And Pretty
Premium
join:2002-05-02
Mount Airy, MD
·Comcast
| Re: Wireless? Yea Right! said by calvoiper :
that annoying machine Mr. Ford was selling....
Go buy a horse!
--
Jewel got Britney-fied! There is hope for the world yet! | |
| 
DrTCP
Yours truly
Premium,ExMod 1999-04
join:1999-11-09
Round Rock, TX | Forrester is wrong! They are pumping bluetooth for the last 3 years. Still no significant acceptance. Compare that with Wi-Fi (802.11b) and in 3 years there is a huge gap.
Now, there may be consolidation among service providers but Wi-fi will survive. | |
| vic102482
Premium
join:2002-04-30
Upper Marlboro, MD
 ·Verizon FIOS
| Wifi is shipping with just about every new laptop On top of that manufacturers are looking about integrating it into mobos. As conumers move to replacement desktops (big arse laptops) its pretty obvious that they would want mobility. If my laptop can do everything my desktop can, why wouldnt I want wifi.
Again we have certain "specialists" trying to drop the bomb, all they are going to do is scare people away.
We should just let commercial WIFI evolve as it is doing now and see what happens. (and pray the FCC doesnt screw it up)
--
I tie a rope around my penis and jump from a tree, don't you wanna grow up to be just like me!!!! | |
| 
Orwell 1984
@rr.com
| The Future? I recently went wireless on my laptop at home. It is O.K. My job requires some travel. There is a chain of truckstops that has 802.11b from the parking lot at really good prices ($90/yr,$2/hr)It works well.There will probably be dismal failures as in the dot com bust. Dot coms are still here, the railroads are still here, and WIFI is likely here to stay. | |
| 
bhhurd
Premium
join:2003-02-13
Korea | Too few WiFi hotspots WiFi works, when you can find it. Unfortunately, I have been many places in the last few months that have no hotspots.
On the other hand, I can connect via my cell phone and at least check email from almost anywhere. | |
| |
Orwell 1984
@rr.com
| Re: Too few WiFi hotspots I have been trying to convince my employer that the $50/mo cell phone internet would cost is worthwhile. For now I am still on my own. Even 14.4k would be better than nothing. 256k in my work van at a truckstop is still better.(By the way $50 for the month is only 20 mins of my labor) Damn it is hard to get the accountant to spend a buck. | |
| WolfJaguar
join:2003-03-20
Portland, OR
| Catchy Title Well there are plenty of hotspots in my city, in fact, here in Portland, the council is trying to decide if creating a city-wide hotspot with adhoc wireless relays on every block would be feasible.
That would be interesting, yes?
BTW, I know some of my terminology is incorrect, but it's 4am and I need to get to work. *sigh*  | |
| ricep5
Premium
join:2000-08-07
Jacksonville, FL
·Comcast Formerly ..
 ·AT&T CallVantage
·AT&T Southeast
| Who will pay? Who wants to pay?
I go to Borders to check out their "hot spot" from TMobile. Too expensive! Why pay for broadband at home and then pay for hot spot access at Borders?
Now if Borders (or others) were offering some kind of a frequent flyer club for book buyers that would "give" hot spot access away, well, perhaps it could be usable.
To be honest I can't understand why retailers would want people "hanging around" surfing, when they should be there to shop.
I went to Starbucks and there was no where to sit because college students were hanging around surfing on their laptops, coffee well completed. | |
| nx23
Premium
join:2003-05-30
Seaside, OR
| tough call I think Its going to be a tough call. All of you have brought good points on the subject. The one I find most interesting is about the ham operators. I'm doing a wi-fi (wisp) service over two towns +. I helped some ham people link up to my wireless at a convention, and next thing ya know, they have there on little channel I set aside for them. There doing some repeaters a.k.a voip through my system. Are company has great ideas along these lines, so perhaps we'll survive, perhaps we won't
Cheers,
Nx23 | |
| 
DSLTech
join:2000-12-30
San Jose, CA
| Everyone wants to predict.. These morons are just trying to predict bubbles whenever possible, so they can be the ones to say "I told you so."
Ridiculous.
From what I can tell, the future will indeed hold both free and pay wifi situations. Companies will either charge for wifi services or use it as a selling point to attract customers.
Imagine a club/restaurant that has wifi. As you come near it, your PDA/Phone/whatever scans and automatically picks up the signal and links up. YOu're on the patio and decide to make a VoIP call with your IPAQ 3955, using X-lite CE or some other Roger Wilco-type communications software. There IS some slight delay but as VoIP gains priority placement (QoS), delays should be cut to a minimum.
It is possible that quality and speed wont catch today's mobile services, but its hard to not imagine the possibilities of using one's PDA/laptop as a walkie-talkie (can you say nextel?) type communications device. | |
|
Goatie
@co.uk | heh I can see things like what happened in Minority report happening. With that dude who had the auto-updating newspaper..using WiFi..why not? | |
| | | |
|
|
A Wireless Waste
