Wi-Fi Spreading Fast But Lacks Profits

clapton_fan writes "The New York Times has a story that details the spread of wireless networks but says the concept has been short on profits thus far. Its growth is mainly attributable to homes and small businesses. Corporations are reluctant to embrace them because of security concerns. Meanwhile, Intel is planning to have every device that uses an Intel chip Wi-Fi enabled which will make it difficult for companies that sell Wi-Fi as an accessory to prosper."

Comments

Re:Well

[Apathy costs bills]

I don't think that the government has yet classified the use of 802.11 as terrorism, rather they have claimed that anyone running 802.11 without encryption or building devices capable of this are enabling terrorism. Which is in itself rather chilling and idiotic, but we should at least stick to being terrified of what the government is actually doing.

Who cares if it's profitable?

[gpinzone]

Why is everyone concerned about these companies being profitable? Let's get Wifi into as many hands as possible. The faster wireless networks can grow, the faster we can shit-can cable and phone companies and their arbitrary caps.

Wi-Fi as accessory?

[cornjchob]

So, let me get this straight: because Intel packs wi-fi onto each intel chip, wi-fi won't sell as an accessory? Ah, yes, I see...just like how motherboard venders include sound and video, and as such, the video card and sound card industries flail in lack of funds.

Oh wait, that's right...

The gain from a chip and antennae embedded on a chip isn't going to be that great. Intel's mainly doing it for internal purposes. If you want any sort of range, add-ons and accessories are the only way to go, and I foresee absolutely no change in that.

Re:Wi-Fi as accessory?

[stratjakt]

>> and as such, the video card and sound card industries flail in lack of funds.

You're being sarcastic, but they have suffered.

We're down to NVidia and ATI for video, Creative Labs and Santa Cruz for audio. And both are pretty much stuck to producing 'higher end' cards geared at gamers or audiophiles, respectively.

For the average office type desktop box, what's onboard is more than adequate. 6 channel AC97 and 64 megs shared-ram agp video is pretty hefty when you're just making up excel spreadsheets all day.

Remember the cirrus logic, trident, savage, et al 2 meg workstation cards? Fire up the original dos version of Doom and look at all the different sound cards you had to choose from. All gone, all obsolete.

Also, I don't think this is just internal usage. They're after integrated 802.11 just like one has integrated ethernet on the mobo. I envision a place to screw your antenna in on the rear IO panel.

Which I'm all for. PCI cards take up too much room. We need to pave the way for smaller form factors.

Reminds me

[XNormal]

The internet was also another technology that was spreading fast but failed to bring lots of profits. Most of the money moving around was investments, not actual revenue. There are no easy profits. There are always competitors, margins are razor-thin and even if you are doing well you need to watch your back for the one that will bring you down. In other words - business as usual.

That is, of course, unless you found some way to create a monopoly and maintain it. Monopolists are the only ones that get the goose that lays golden eggs. WiFi is not going to be that goose.

Re:Color me clueless, but...

[yack0]

> What is so hot about WiFi, anyway?

I can go home and open my laptop and be on the net.
I can come to the office, open my laptop and I'm on the net.
I can go to three of my friends houses with wifi, open my laptop and I'm on the net.
I don't need to run cable.
I dont need to worry about finding the hub.
I dont need to worry about reconfiguring anything.
It just plain works for me.

It's changed my work habits vastly. I don't sit at a linux X machine anymore, I just use my iBook and do things on the couch, the dining room table, the office, the bedroom, the toilet, even outside on the deck - I'm not tied into my desk with wires.

And on top of that, I can walk around any major city and get internet access from people who allow me to have free access (I ask for IP's and they implicitly allow me in by granting me an IP - this isn't flame bait - just how I see it). It's nice.

Wireless has changed the way I use computers. No longer am I tied to one place in my office or my home, I can work or play in comfort.

HTH

P2P WiFi does not require profit to grow.

[emptybody]

If all WiFi clients were also repeaters/bridges, the network would be supported and built by the users.

The wired internet was not a for profit system.
Why do people insist that WiFi must be for profit?

public open WPOPs should be all over the place. The more a pop is used, and the more pops/users there are, the more the infrastructure supporting it will grow.

By virtue of using the system you would add to it's range and capacity.

Just think if all cars had a WiFi repeater installed in them. the Highway becomes a true information highway. Packets jumping from car to car to get from anywhere to anywhere.

A previous slashdot article talked about doing this with Cell Phones. The logic is sound. There just has to be enough supporting users.