Slashdot Mirror


Smalltime Wireless ISPs

Krimsen writes: "It's nice to see we still have some stories like we used to hear all the time in the mid-late 90's of the little guy beating the mega-corporations to the punch."

4 of 169 comments (clear)

  1. do the division by call+-151 · · Score: 4, Insightful
    From the article (speaking about Metricom):
    Its network cost $1 billion to build, but it had just 51,000 customers.
    That's almost $20k of capital investment per user- what a business plan that turned out to be! For that much per user, I could arrange a pretty impressive setup for the 10 apartments on my floor- $200k= $2000 in setup and 802.11b equipment plus many many months of T1 service to share...
    --
    It's psychosomatic. You need a lobotomy. I'll get a saw.
  2. Building infrastructure for AOL by el_doop · · Score: 4, Insightful

    the little guy beating the mega-corporations to the punch is really nothing more than the little guy building a customer base for AOL/Earthlink/MSN to buy out.

    It happened with dialup; I can't see how this will be any different. I'm getting flashbacks of my 2 mid/late 90s layoffs as a result of small ISPs "merging" with the mega-corporations.

  3. I don't think CNET get it... by rmckeethen · · Score: 5, Insightful

    It not really fair to compare wireless service from companies like Odessa Office Supply with Metricom's Ricochet. The two markets they serve are vastly different.

    Odessa, as I understand it, is mainly in the business of being a high-bandwidth ISP to their local customers, most of which are either too far out for DSL or cable modems or not in an area that is easily served by other types of carriers. As such, they do provide a pretty valuable service to the communities they serve, communities that would not have anything better then dial-up service otherwise. It's really pretty much intended to do only point-to-point service, they're not really intending that you will be running around the neighborhood with the equipment. They do support some mobile applications but nothing like what Ricochet did. From what I hear most of the wireless ISPs like Odessa use Breezecom equipment and 802.11 stuff for their networks, again a lot less expensive then the proprietary Ricochet stuff. And Odessa serves a rural market, not a metropolitan one.

    Metricom, on the other hand, was in the business of providing a true mobile wireless service within metropolitan areas. Unfortunately, this is a lot harder to do then point-to-point service. To ensure that everyone will have service wherever they happen to be within the area you have to build the network to provide service even to areas that may not have any customers in them. That means that a fair fraction of the network, at any given time, isn't generating any revenue at all, even though it's still got to be operational. Of course, until you have good coverage, customers aren't interested in paying for your service, so it's something of the old chicken or egg situation. No in-place network, no customers. But the costs to build that kind of network can be staggering. Is it really any wonder that Merticom failed?

    Looking at it this way, it's easy to see why companies like Odessa survive while Metricom went under. The markets are simply different and it's unfortunate that CNET appears to have missed this point. Oh well.

    If anyone is interested, you can find more information on Odessa at http://www.odessaoffice.com/wireless/

    Additionally, Marlon's a frequent contributor on the ISP wireless e-mail list. See http://isp-lists.isp-planet.com/subscribe/

  4. The little guy is only going to get bigger. by cosmosis · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Ok, I'm going to break from the pack and say that we have not seen the end of the little guy. And by little, I mean every one of us - you, me, your nextdoor neighbor. The dot-com failure wasn't becuase of the technology, it was stupidity plain and simple. Their really is a new economy and it is going to change everything, depsite EVERYTHING you keep hearing to the contrary after the dot-com crash. The only reasons it crashed in the first place, is becuase what has always been obvious to me since the beginning of all this (pre-1994) is that the internet revolution isn't about the big guys - that is the who fricking point! It is about the little guy.

    Think 802.11a, b, g, z? Everyone will have one on their house talking to everyone else on their houses. A wireless P2P 'gnutella', 'freenet' Neighboorhood LAN (NAN).

    While the rest of the idiots continue to get more depressed at the the rediculous dot-com crash, I'm celebrating the birth of individuality that is emerging quietly between the cracks. Ha ha ha ha haaa!