Slashdot Mirror
A Discomforting Precedent For WiFi "Hot Spots"
rob.sharp writes: "The BBC have some history lessons for wireless networks ...", pointing to an article about a wireless phone service called Rabbit, which relied on access areas similar in concept to the WiFi "hot spots" ISPs and business are experimenting with around the globe right now. ("Subscribers to the service, backed by Hutchison Whampoa, could make mobile calls when they were within 100 metres of a Rabbit transmitter.") Rabbit didn't work out well, though, and the article questions whether 802.11 access providers can do any better.
300 million europeans?
Its no wonder that the Rabbit system failed. Requiring a mobile phone user to be within 100 meters of a station is extremely limiting. The idea of a mobile phone is that you can use it far from the receiving antenna. There are cordless phones on the market that have ranges of nearly 100 meters from their base station. The Rabbit idea sounds horrible.
To the wireless cable televeision transmitter called the rabbit?
Did anyone else notice that the hand drawn chalk logo spotting wifi access looks very similar to an ass?
There's no "I" in Linux.. err..
I recall there used to be a rabbit-like thing in The Netherlands a while back with hot spots near train stations, etc. It kind of died as gsm phones provide global coverage. I don't think any hotspot-based technology will really survive, unless it's significantly cheap.
see a Text Widget
I also think the article makes the wrong comparison. Considering the target audience arent wireless hotspots like the early mobile (car) phones? You know the ones like a brick that only worked in the large cities? They took of like the proverbial rccket. Wireless computing is aimed at the business men, kermit was aimed at the consumer.
MMO Quests are like orgasms:
You may solo them, I prefer them in a group.
What does this mean for warchalking? Hmm...
How to Download YouTube Videos
Read the article and you'll see that Rabbit failed because there was an always-on functional equivilent.
Can anybody please point to the always on alternative to WiFi networks?
Ok, now that you've mentioned G3, can you find it where I live? No. Ok, lets try again, oh CDCP? Sure, we have it, Lets see, its 19.2K (Higher with compression, WOW!).... WiFi is what? Up to 11Mbps?
The article might be right, but only if something with equivilent speed is more readily available... which it isn't, yet.
Tesla would roll over in his grave or might get out of it, if he knew how far behind we are with wireless.
That guy was wirelesss years ago!
The current Euro currency is supported by 306M people, which excluded the UK. So I guess if you include the UK and a few eastern european countries as well, you'd get well over 400 million. So there's plenty of people caring. Conversely, that's also plenty of people not caring about the original poster's comment :-)
see a Text Widget
It wasn't as bad as it sounds - if it weren't for mobile phones coming up fast at the time it could have been a great success.
If I remember correctly, you got what was essentially a cordless phone and base station - you piad wired rates when at home, and mobile rates when elsewhere.
The good was that anyone walking past your house could use your base station t omake 'elsewhere' calls (on thier bill, of course).
You presumably got a sign in the pack to stick in your window, because there are still some left around in random places. (one in a flat down the road from me).
Rabbit, et al, were implemented as CT2 technology at the end of the 1980s. Four operators were licensed to operate phonepoint (or equivalent) systems. When a user wanted to make a call from a mobile phone, they would lock onto the nearest low-power transmitter; with the aim to place transmitters would be in shops, tube stations, and so on and there would be few gaps in coverage in urban areas.
There was no mobility, as once a call had been set up through one base station it could not be transferred to another, also you could not take incoming calls (unless you were at home, where it worked like a cordless phone).
Rabbit failed because "proper" mobiles (albeit analogue) were taking off and moving from the brick car phone models, and they allowed incoming calls, and movement from cell to cell.
But look what happened to that. Maybe now the time is right (Wi-Fi cards are cheap now, etc).
Putting moderation advice in your
The one major drawback with the rabbit phones was that you could not receive incoming calls on them so making them basically useless(You do wonder who comes up with these ideas).
This is not a problem with WiFi because emails onlike phone calls do not need to be handled at once. Basically it will allow you to read the internet and catch up with emails when you get to the station or airport. I can see that being quite attractive.
Choose your allies carefully, it is highly unlikely you will be held accountable for the actions of your enemies
Wi-Fi cards have many uses BESIDE use at a hotspot. If Rabbit allowed someone to go from airport to airport, home, work, coffie shop, ... ( Highway ). Wi-Fi is supported by a raft of inexpensive interchangable devices that can be used with any interoperable equipment.
So if I already have a card and I wander into a hotspot I am much more likley to use it. This is much diffrent from purchacing equipment that MUST be used in specific locations.
So Wi-Fi hotspots are taking advantage of what people ALREADY OWN. I can't wander into a coffiee shop or an airport nowadays WITHOUT seeing a laptop out if not a dozen. Comparing this to rabbit would be like trying hotspots in the early 90's, nobody really had the equipment and it would be doomed to fail.
The chances of anyone making money out of the wireless hotspots could be dented by the fact that many community groups and well-intentioned individuals are setting up networks anyone can use for free.
This is how just about everything works on the internet, aside from most broadband connections. Regardless of what corporations are offering, someone else is offering it for free. The record industry wants to sell you CDs, but hundreds of people are willing to just send you a copy online. Subscription news sites, especially gaming ones like IGN and GameSpot, want to sell you their news and content, but Gameforms, The Magic Box, and GameFAQS are all giving the same stuff away for free. And now wireless internet companies are trying to sell you wireless internet access when the same people that are using P2P services are willing to just give internet access away for free.
There simply isn't any way to compete with people that are giving away the same product as your company for free, at least not for a small startup industry that doesn't have the financial and political clout to legislate against the people giving it away for free or strongarm the supply side of the market.
Yeah, I dimly remember those. Used to be a rabbit point in Jericho near where I live. (That would be the Jericho in Oxford).
At the time it seemed a little limiting to me, although I guess since you got a base station in your home, it was better than a regular cordless phone.
These days I'll probably throw my land lines away when I get broadband, mobiles are so cheap and ubiquitous. Times change. Every time I Watch Lethal Weapon, the only thing in it that dates it is a mobile phone the size of a car battery.
~~~~~ BigLig2? You mean there's another one of me?
My understanding was that rabbit was equivalent to the system that they use in Japan, but failed due to underfunding and low power... In fact the low power asepct shold have made it safer - less radiation - and resulted in smaller phones, as the power demands were less... Shame it failed really DK
We had something like that in the Netherlands as well (the phone thing, not WiFI hotspots)... I think it was called greenpoint or kermit or whatever... it was something greenish... Can't remember really.... And neither can anyone else... It failed horribly if I recall correctly.
Yea, 3-4x the distance is really a huge difference. 100 meters is crap, but 300 meters is doable.
In addition, if a wireless isp created a semi directional antenta (4 of them, each covering 90 degrees), and was able to boost the signal on each of them, the we would be able to get probably about 600 meters or better out of it.
Tibbon
tibbon.com
I mean, the first attempts werent so hot..what makes these new kids on the block think their idea is any different.
Only a madman would try something which others have tried and failed at!
It failed.
Mainly because its transmitters were often installed next to public phone booths (argh), and GSM turned out to have a much better coverage.
Nevertheless, I don't see what this has to do with WiFi failing or not.
-------
Warning: Slashdot may contain traces of nuts.
As long as the coverage of Wi-Fi is close enough to what we get with cellular it will be great. It doesn't even have to be that close, it just needs to be hotspotted in areas where people are prone to sit down with a laptop.
mbbac
I use my mobile phone while I'm mobile. I use my laptop while I'm sitting down (else it wouldn't be a laptop, now would it?)
It's always nice to recall where we've been, but comparing wifi hotspots to the Rabbit project is comparing apples to oranges.
(Apologies for the analogy-links, I couldn't resist)
The plans suck, if we were like Ireland and had pay as you go minutes, more people would have them. Being locked in to a plan is the worst way to market a phone, but it makes the companys the most profit.
Maybe a little off topic, but I think consumers would be a little more friendly towards cell service providers if the plans were better balanced.
any thoughts?
It's all good.
Ultimately, I think something like that would be ideal for wireless, but I see lots of technical issues on something like that, never mind the political issues of developing coverage.
Trying to do this while trying to maintian free access would be difficult.
"It is a greater offense to steal men's labor, than their clothes"
it's too slow and too insecure. what we really need is pervasive ethernet ports in public places.
The major ISP's in HK are now wiring up the popular locations like coffee shops, malls locations where people can sit down with their notebooks and surf the net or VPN back into work. The best wireless service is provided by Netvigator. I've yet to see anyone hooked into the net with a wireless connection in HK.
Anyways .. just a couple of pointers from Hong Kong for those who care. :)
I'm from the UK, and remember the Rabbit network quite well. Something that non-UK readers might not be aware of is the fact that you could use the Rabbit phone at home, as a cordless phone.
It was for outgoing calls ONLY except when you were at home, which is probably why it wasn't successful, not because of the limited places that you could use it. Infact, walking down the high street, you'd see loads of rabbit signs everywhere, it really wasn't as bad as all that.
I subscribed to Sirius a month ago. While driving around I think I'm actually finding locations of 802.11x networks, because my signal, normally strong, will just die regularly near some buildings. Maybe this is a way to find them, eh?
A feeling of having made the same mistake before: Deja Foobar
The thing with rabbit is that the inconvenience of having to use them in specific areas substantially outweighed the cost benefit of using them. With 802.11, hot spots would only be a questionable model if you could get comparable bandwidth through any other means.
Currently the best wireless services that offer long range coverage provide sporadic service and far lower bandwidth. 802.11 doesn't provide the wide coverage, but it at least gives substantial bandwidth at the shorter ranges. In the long run you can expect that the standard mechanism for doing wireless will be to roam from hot spot to hot spot, using 2.5G and 3G systems to provide some bandwidth when not near a hot sport. Even as 3G systems get built out, the bandwidth capabilities of hot spots will increase to continue to provide value enough to make it worthwhile to people.
This sig has been temporarily disconnected or is no longer in service
Not for me, I need national coverage, but it probably will appeal to people who rarely leave town.
Free Mac Mini Yeah, it's
... as if it was bleeding edge idea.
We got Bebop. A nice, cute little wireless phone that worked the very same way as Rabbit: spot a relay, get close enough, and you could make a call. Let me just say it was completely wiped out of the paysage by cellular phones.
Now, could someone tell me how many time it gonna take for business to understand that if a product had no market because of technological deficiency ten years ago, it is not going to be more successful today?
Same goes with Wap: the problem was not the speed, but the size of the device. 3 years later, they come back with even smaller devices... and GPRS. Duh!
--
Arkan
Study compares apples and oranges. Discovers oranges make bad pies. Finding none to encouraging for apple enthusiasts.
I lived in the UK too when Rabbit (and the other 3 licensees) were around. And as previously mentioned, it was an outbound call service only. In now way similar in any form to a cellular service -- more like a private payphone service.
;-)
Now, WiFi access points might well take off. There's many times I'm at a restaurant or a cafe or an office building when I'd like to be able to get decent Internet access. I carry around an Apple TiBook -- so I've got built-in WiFi already.
The usage profile of this sort of technology is very different from phone service. You want to reachable when you have a cellphone (predominantly), and you want to be able to *reach out* with WiFi -- to check email, send email, grab a copy of that report you forgot at the office, read Slashdot at the airport terminal etc.
Funnily enough, I've noticed Spotnik have put in a WiFi access node in one of my favourite restaurants here in Toronto (SpaHa). Despite being quite a trendy restaurant, it's actually located on the University of Toronto campus -- probably a pefect place to attract both geeks and rich students with their iBooks who want to drink latte while surfing and pretending to write their papers
-psyco
When you want to make a phone call, you want to make the phone call 'now', right? But if you want to check your email, the delay inherent in needing to pass through a hot spot to download your latest messages may not be a problem. Also how often are people walking down the street using a laptop? Stationary hot spots go well with the current practice of parking your butt somewhere for a while to do work.
Of course if you want to be searching google all the time, anywhere, at the slightest provocation, you're out of luck...
BT is reportedly considering prices of up to £85 per month...
The chances of anyone making money out of the wireless hotspots could be dented by the fact that many community groups and well-intentioned individuals are setting up networks anyone can use for free.
£85 per month seems high, but I suppose broad band isn't near as cheap "accross the pond" as it is here. However, free is a lot cheaper, and I'm hoping that there are some "well-intentioned individuals" that can help make that happen.
It would be great to see a web site for freloaders dedicated to WIFI spots where you could enter your zipcode and then find out what is near you to get on, and what you must do in order to get on (hardware, settings, etc.). Anyone know of such a thing?
I tend to move around when using my phone, but most people using PDAs and lap tops are quite content to be in one place, and I think that hurt Rabbit.
I do agree that the charging issue might make commercial WiFi fairly rare, but if prices keep falling I see a fairly large enthusiast group that will have free WiFi in a lot of urban areas, and I think that places like Hotels, Clubs with either admission/membership fees, Airports, and perhaps more exclusive coffee shops will be willing to spring for it as a way to attract/keep customers
I agree with some of the other posts that WiFi will survive as long as there is no affordable, always on equivalent covering wide areas.(And for the forseeable future in America at least, there won't be....)
We had a similar system too Rabbit, called Kermit (and yes, the phones were greenish). It only worked around hotspots, which were located at trainstations, big busstations and large plaza's. Ofcourse it failed because coverage was limited. But it also, or even more failed because at the same time nationwide coverage by the then proprietary ATF-networks became cheaper. Not long after that the first GSM networks were deployed, making cheap wireless nation-wide covered calling available. So, if you ask me it's not only the limited coverage that counts...
Rabbit didn't fail because cellular/mobile phones overtook it. It failed because it offered no compelling advantage over a conventional payphone.
Rabbit phones didn't take incoming calls, and were only usable close to a "hotspot" where payphones were plentiful. Call charges were similar, and payphone users didn't need to buy equipment.
Payphones killed Rabbit, and now cellular/mobile is killing payphones. Two separate battles, 10 years apart.
(One marginal benefit of Rabbit was the ability to use the same phone at home with your own personal base station connected to your POTS line, like a conventional cordless phone. This wasn't enough to sell the service though. After the service collapsed, Rabbit phones and home base stations were sold off dirt cheap as digital cordless phones, and very good they were too.)
http://www.inforeading.com/archive/text_files/ham_ radio/rabbit.txt
I'm sorry, but there are exactly 400 million people who don't care about your comment or your definition of clue.
At the time of the Rabbit phone, mobile phones were firstly a great luxury, and secondly not commonplace. Now, however, laptop computers and PDAs are widespread. The opportunity to have a high-speed internet connection available at various access points (railway stations, cafes, etc) seems a good idea.
The thing that will differentiate the amount of success that such access points have is the fact that there is a captive market. Because mobile phones were not thought necessary back in the 80s, the Rabbit phone was not a success. Whereas, with 802.11, you have a large group of people who feel lost without their internet connection.
All it comes down to is the convenience with which one can use the WiFi networks.
Like car accidents, most hardware problems are due to driver error.
It was not intended to be used as a mobile phone, rather it was a work around to the restrictions that prevented pay phones being installed in many locations, and the fact that most pay phones were vandalised constantly.
Unfortunately, shortly after Rabbit was launched, the laws were changed to allow more pay phones to be installed (by companies other than BT), so it kind of under cut Rabbit.
This combined with the fact that mobile phones became portable (as opposed to tethered to a car battery) meant the Rabbit didn't really stand a chance. Rabbit was really a case of too little too late.
One point about Rabbit was that you got a base station to use in your home. This base station could also be used by other Rabbit users to make calls if they were in range. This meant that the Rabbit network got larger as more people became customers, just like current community WiFi initiatives such as Consume et al.
www.vurt.co.uk
The London Underground had antenna on every station.
This made Rabbit the only network that could make calls while on the tube.
Rabbit had excellent reception in areas where physical topography blocked normal transmitters - too many tall buildings blocking the signal for example.
It has become appallingly obvious that our technology has exceeded our humanity. --Albert Einstein
my dad got ahold of a couple of these phones cheap, we did have a "base station" in the shops nearby (further than 100m though) so we never actually used the phones as mobile phones. they made for good cordless phones in the house though. compact.
I actually live in New Barnet (the part of London mentioned in the article), I use that train station and I've seen those signs and occassionnaly wondered what they were for (I never rembered the Rabit phone system). Now I know.
I never expected slashdot would point me to some obscure bit of local trivia. Weird.
If I'm not mistaken, GPRS uses ganged-together GSM bands. That implies that there's a fundamental limit to how inexpensive it can be, at least until someone comes up with a whole lot more spectrum, or starts building thousands and thousands of GSM microcells (very expensive).
The advantage of 802.11 is that the base-station technology is cheap (given that it's roughly the same as the client technology), and that it's designed to operate over a fairly short range. This means it's not going to be the preferred solution for rural or even (possibly) suburban areas, but it'll be a much better investment than things like GPRS in high-density areas.
I don't imagine that the final solution will actually be 802.11, but I think the Telecom companies will eventually adopt something that's more closely related to 802.11 than to traditional mobile systems, at least in the cities. Your phone (or PDA or computer, whatever) will be flexible enough to switch to a much slower, more traditional cellular network only when you're out of range.
1) UMTS cells are generally much larger than WiFi hotspots, meaning that the bandwidth may be shared between a larger number of people. Microcells are generally far less cost-effective than 802.11.
2) UMTS is a much more expensive technology in general. The rollout costs are mindboggling, and they're going to be paid off by service fees. High adoption would mean better rates, but also more competition for the bandwidth.
3) Where do I need coverage? If there are fast, inexpensive WiFi hotspots in a lot of the places I need to go, it might be not be worth the extra dough to get coverage in every nook and cranny.
Rabbit can't be compared to Wi-Fi in very many ways at all, if any.
Rabbit had to compete on the high end with cellular phones, giving seamles coverage over large areas.
And it had to compete on the low end with pay phones - A MUCH cheaper alternative that it had few advantages over.
What competes with Wi-Fi? There's no mobile equivalent, while 3G may be "fast", Wi-Fi is 10-100 times faster.
Rabbit used a proprietary phone that became a paperweight if service died - Such unease makes customers hesistant. Wi-Fi uses standard hardware that you can use without any service, in your own home.
The problem wISPs will have is "the network" - Coverage is what makes people switch cellular providers, coverage is what will make people switch/sign up for WiFi providers. The founder of Earthlink has found what I consider a pretty good solution to the problem of building a network - It's the exact same technique he used to build Earthlink into a nationwide dialup ISP - Don't build the network yourself, partner with a multitude of ISPs for maximum coverage, eventually buying them if it makes sense to do so.
There's only one comparison to be made here - Just as Rabbit was a souped-up cordless pay phone, Wi-Fi is a souped-up cordless RJ-45 jack. The only decent competition I can see for Wi-Fi is a provider that puts Ethernet hubs in hot-spots to compete - An easy threat for a wISP to avoid - Simply be the one providing and charging for the Ethernet ports too. Once you've got an AP with a connection to the outside network (the hard/expensive part), adding wired Ethernet drops is easy.
retrorocket.o not found, launch anyway?
While there are definitely some similarities between Rabbit and Wi-Fi, there are also some important differences.
First, the model that I expect to be successful is non-commercial Wi-Fi networks. In some cases, Wi-Fi networks will be offered as a loss leader; to get people into a coffee shop, for instance. In other cases, universities will setup campus wide networks for students, which will probably be freely available to anyone on the campus. Also, some residences will allow people to piggy-back on their broadband connections. In each of these cases, the costs to the Wi-Fi provider are small, although there is the potential for abuse.
Another reason the comparison between failed mobile phone networks in England and Wi-Fi may be irrelevent is the way in which these services are used. Mobile phone users are on the go. They are either walking or driving, but in most cases they don't want to be tied down to a 100 meter radius. On the other hand, the current generation of wireless users are primarily using laptop computers. Laptop users will generally prefer to park themselves at a table or bench. Of course, as PDA's and other devices start to become equiped with Wi-Fi capability, this behavior my change. But, before that really gains steam, I expect a lot of other changes to be under way as well.
The main point is that Wi-Fi is not going to be driven by large corporations the way that mobile phones have been. Wi-Fi is more likely to be a grassroots movement because the price is right. On the other hand, grassroots Wi-Fi networks is not a one-size-fits-all solution and there will definitely be opportunities for the telcos to get their grubby paws in the game as well.
Would that work? Build some "special phone hardware" that can use current 802.11 hotspots to connect to the internet. This would be a nice incentive for people to put up more hotspots, and it would also mean free calls.
We should probably use some free, existing voice-over-IP net so people could still call with their computers and stuff like that.
My experiences with this came from numerous angry europeans (from Germany in this case) who were enraged when I said that having a pre-determined number of minutes to use your mobile phone per month was not the same as a plan with no 'gotchas' and they told be about paying one price to use it as much as they want (for local calls) ... just like land lines in the USA and Canada.
Also someone else mentioned http://www.boomerangwireless.com/.
Oh, come on. That's nothing at all like what's available in Europe. Boomerang is only in a handful of cities, limits you to one kind of phone ( and you can't use your existing phone) and has only very basic features.
Here's what I get from E-Plus in Germany:
There just isn't any comparison. Yes, Boomerang has a flat monthly rate -- but then they suck in just about everything else.
And I have no "gotchas" with my phone...so, sad to say, American cellphones really do suck. I shudder when I visit my family in the States and see what stuff they are using.
Then I salivate over their cable modem...ah well, you can't have it all. ;-)
Cheers,
Ethelred
Everyone wants to be Ethelred. Even I want to be Ethelred.
As a tech lover from the UK I remember the Rabbit network, and it's no wonder it failed. The idea of taking what was effectively a cordless phone and having to be within 100 metres of rare and pretty badly signposted Rabbit points to use it was clearly insane. To anyone!! So okay, you say, perhaps it might be useful to let people phone friends delayed at railway stations or airports. They're likely to be near a Rabbit point at the time. Great idea ... except the Rabbit system didn't allow people to receive incoming calls.
... !!
So lets check this off. Having to be close to a particular stop to make outgoing only phone calls. Wait a minute, what about if instead of Rabbit we made little kiosks and put phones in them that anyone with coins could use!! Nah, now that really would be bonkers
I can't believe something this dumb ever got funding. Sheesh!!
PS Don't even get me started on DCC (Philip's digital tape cassettes that died a death against MiniDisc's.)
1.Rabbits are "lagomorphs" (not rodents) and they are related to hares and pikas.
2.A house rabbit pet can live up to 10 to 12 years and is a long-term commitment.
3.There are over 45 recognized breeds in the United States and all domesticated rabbit breeds are descendants of European rabbits.
4.Rabbits can be litter box trained and it is much easier to train them after they have been neutered or spayed.
5.A rabbit's digestive system is similar to a horse and they require daily hay to prevent digestive problems. Rabbits cannot vomit and hairballs can be fatal.
6.Rabbit teeth grow constantly and bunnies will naturally gnaw wires, furniture legs, etc. so rooms in a house must be bunny-proofed where they are allowed to run.
7.Rabbits can mate as early as 3 months of age and gestation is 31 days with a litter size of 4 to 12 kits.
8.When bunnies become adult rabbits they can exhibit aggressive and territorial behavior. They will spray urine, mark territory with their feces, bite and grunt.
9.Young bunnies should not be separated from their mother until they are 8 weeks old.
10.Domesticated rabbits are very social and do best as when adopted in pairs. They can also bond with cats, dogs and guinea pigs with proper supervision and patience.
11.Spaying and neutering prevents health problems for rabbits. Females are prone to uterine cancer after 5 years of age if they are not altered. Altering makes rabbits less aggressive and prevents overpopulation.
12.Rabbits can become very affectionate pets that can enjoy cuddling, being petted and quiet interaction with humans especially after altering. They can learn their names and simple words such as "No."
13.Most rabbits do not enjoy being picked up since they are ground dwellers by nature. Many will scratch and kick violently to avoid being picked up.
14.The skeleton of a rabbit and especially the backbone is very fragile and it can break easily when the rabbit is handled improperly or dropped. Legs can break, too, if contact is made with a hard surface when a rabbit is struggling violently.
15.Rabbits require a solid floor in their cage instead of a wire grate since their feet are not padded like a dog or cat.
16.Domesticated rabbits need exercise to stay healthy and time outside a cage to run.
17.Rabbits have their own version of a purr. They will grind their teeth softly when petted. Rabbits also communicate through a variety of ways such as stomping a hind leg, grunting, honking/oinking softly, grooming each other, etc.
18.Rabbits are nearsighted and have a blind spot right in front of them.
19.Domesticated rabbits do not survive in the "wild" if they are abandoned.
20.Rabbits are most active in the early morning and in the late evening.
21.Rabbits are not Hares, but they are closely related. Hares have fur when they are born and their eyes are open.
SCO (noun.)- A Slimy Corporate Ogre. Often seeks free money.
I met one of the people rolling out the Toshiba Hot Spot product. Very impressive business concept. It redefines the previous wireless economic models (Ricochet, et al).
http://www.eweek.com/article2/0,3959,180,00.asp
I still occasionally see the signs around. There was one at a train station. Think it might be City Thameslink but I could be wrong.
Powered by onion juice.