Comment on this article |
Email this Article
|
News :: Miscellaneous |
The Philadelphia Wi-Fi Project |
Current rating: 0 |
by nytimes via gehrig (No verified email address) |
28 Sep 2004
|
A New York Times story on a large civic sity-wide computing infrastructure project being sponsored by the city of Philadelphia. |
September 27, 2004
E-COMMERCE REPORT
Big Wi-Fi Project for Philadelphia
By BOB TEDESCHI
FORGET cheese steaks, cream cheese and brotherly love. Philadelphia wants to be known as the city of laptops.
The city recently announced a two-year effort to string a free wireless network across its 135 square miles, potentially giving Philadelphia an entirely new identity as the most wired - or unwired - municipality on the planet. But skeptics said this initiative, as well as similar efforts elsewhere across the United States, could also run aground on its own ambitions.
In a recent survey by Jupiter Communications, 8 percent of online consumers said they had tried accessing the Web through wireless connections. About half said they had no need or desire to do so. And because many of Philadelphia's households have no computer - let alone a computer with an Internet connection - the city's numbers would fall far below those figures.
"Consumer interest will grow, slowly, but right now, they don't have the equipment or desire for this," said Julie Ask, a wireless analyst with Jupiter.
For those considering municipal wireless projects, the big questions go beyond how quickly consumers will warm to the service. Cities and towns are also weighing whether the technology is as cheap and reliable as many perceive, and whether these projects will lure customers from local Internet providers, thereby undermining the economic benefits such initiatives are meant to provide.
Philadelphia is betting its technological reputation that these concerns will not derail its ambitious plan. According to Dianah Neff, the city's chief information officer, the plan is to offer free wireless access in public areas, using Wi-Fi, the wireless fidelity standard, but free or lower-cost connections could also extend to households or businesses that qualify for economic assistance. Ms. Neff said she believed the project could be started by next June and completed a year later at a cost of $10 million, which the city would raise privately.
"Obviously we won't tax people," she said. "But I've already had extreme interest from banking institutions interested in investing. It's a very do-able funding structure."
Building a 135-square-mile hot spot to serve 1.5 million people would not be too hard, Ms. Neff suggested. The city would probably mount wireless transmitters on light poles, which it owns, to send signals throughout the area. But, she said, Philadelphia would not become a municipal Internet company. "This won't be government-run," she said. Among other options, the city could pass the project to a management company, which would build and run the system in exchange for user fees. "We'll look at all the pros and cons for each possible model," she said.
The plan's proponents argue that wireless Internet access would benefit Philadelphia in many ways. First, Ms. Neff said, wireless connections would speed economic development in areas where businesses cannot afford to pay $800 to $1,500 monthly for high-speed T-1 lines. The wireless initiative would also improve education, Ms. Neff said, because children would have better access to information, and parents could communicate more effectively with teachers.
Because more than 70 percent of the city's students qualify for economic assistance, she said, few families currently can afford to do that.
"The reason we won't just let the market do this is that there are societal needs that aren't inherently part of the capitalist system. We need to be sure no communities in Philadelphia are excluded, whether there's an R.O.I. or not," Ms. Neff said, using the initials for return on investment.
As to whether enough Internet users are sufficiently enthusiastic about wireless technology to justify the investment, Ms. Neff pointed to a pilot test in the city's Love Park, in which 1,200 users logged on during a two-month stretch beginning in June. "It was a very, very positive response," she said.
Other city leaders are grappling with the question of whether to follow in Philadelphia's footsteps. "I can't say why we should be investing taxpayer dollars in this," said Bill Schrier, chief technology officer for Seattle. "There might be reasons. I just can't answer the question at the moment."
Mr. Schrier said the city recently asked a group of private citizens to help decide whether to build a wireless network, perhaps atop Seattle's light poles.
City government may be poorly suited to oversee such things as network security and customer service, he said. And with the advent of new wireless technologies like the Wi-Max standard, in which transmitters could send signals 30 miles instead of 300 feet, the city risks adopting a system destined for obsolescence.
Furthermore, Mr. Schrier said, a municipal Internet initiative could hurt city businesses that sell similar services.
Ms. Neff of Philadelphia said she met with executives of Comcast, which is based in the city, and found them "very interested in the contract on the management and support on this."
Asked for comment, however, Comcast gave a more tepid response. A statement from the company said, in part, "we are looking forward to assisting our hometown to make an informed decision."
Some cities have found success in working with commercial Internet providers. Hermosa Beach, Calif., for instance, last month introduced a system to provide free wireless access, primarily to businesses and residents in the downtown area. A local Internet company, LA Unplugged, bid to run the project, which is being financed by advertisements on log-in screens.
According to Michael Keegan, the Hermosa Beach city council member who led the project, the council will vote early next month on whether to extend the project to all 21,000 residents. If it does, he said, the city will have to find an additional $500 to $700 in monthly advertising revenues to maintain the system and raise an additional $65,000 to buy equipment. "Which will be no problem," Mr. Keegan said. "Even if we don't, this will cost taxpayers maybe 50 cents each. Maybe."
The average Internet user will have to spend between $75 and $150 to set up their homes to receive wireless signals, Mr. Keegan said. Wireless cards for notebook computer users cost about $40.
Mr. Keegan said he was not worried that the service might hurt existing Internet providers. "Should I care? I'm not a shareholder," he said. "I'm more concerned about residents, and they love it."
New York City has cast its lot with commercial Internet providers. It recently awarded contracts to six wireless contractors, who paid a total of $23 million for the right to use 3,000 city light poles as bases for cellular and, possibly, wireless Internet service for paying customers.
Citizens of Austin, Tex., are sidestepping any potential conflict between city government and Internet companies through the Austin Wireless City Project, a nonprofit organization. Richard MacKinnon, the project's president, said the organization's volunteers had set up 85 free Wi-Fi zones, or hot spots, to serve about 15,000 registered users.
Just as with the Hermosa Beach effort, Mr. MacKinnon said, the project finances each hot spot with advertising. If a local restaurant establishes a free wireless access point, for example, when users log in to the network, they see an advertisement for that restaurant's daily specials.
Even if local residents use that wireless signal as their home Internet connection, "it's really strong messaging for the neighbors of that restaurant," said Mr. MacKinnon. "It encourages them to come in."
© New York Times, 2004
@%< |
Copyright by the author. All rights reserved. |