Slashdot Mirror


BusinessWeek on Wi-Fi

ydeepakjois writes "BusinessWeek is running a series of articles on the potential of wireless high-speed access, the Wi-Fi industry and the challenges faced by it. There is also an interesting bit about a business model for wireless carriers."

110 comments

  1. This is going to be a joyous thing by thedbp · · Score: 5, Interesting

    When Centrinos are commonplace and WiFi hotspots are provided and subsidized by Intel and the like around the country, those lucky bastards who bought iBooks and PowerBooks w/ AirPort YEARS ago will have a nice little windfall of free bandwidth as they roam around the landscape.

    Being ahead of the curve has always been good for Apple users - sometimes you find that the industry sort of settles around what you've been doing/using for years ... for instance, Macs have had built-in ethernet since 1991, and the first true a/v models that features composite and s-video input and output w/a second DSP chip specifically for the heavy a/v lifting, debuted in 1993.

    I feel like a Boy Scout w/ my Mac - always prepared. And not in the hot entree type of prepared - I mean the "ready for anything" type of prepared.

    1. Re:This is going to be a joyous thing by benjiboo · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Battery life on laptops needs to improve before wireless access is truly a useful thing. You couldn't anticipate being able to pick up a mail or video conference with such a big possibiliy of running out of juice. This is especially important as it's mainly useful to business users - even the most hardcore geek can do without the web for a few hours whilst traveliing etc.

      --
      Vacancy for signature. Apply within.
    2. Re:This is going to be a joyous thing by krray · · Score: 1

      Off topic, but you are correct. Never really liking Windows I've been the one playing with/using Linux, BSD, BeOS in the basement at home... :)

      With OS X the move the Mac's has been painless. The family loves theirs and those at work are always ready too.

      I've never had the need, want or desire to play with PPPoE until a recent broadband install forced me to. The router they supplied required Windows to setup/install which VirtualPC took care of -- and showed me I didn't want their router after all.

      I have gotten Linux to do the job nicely, but only after some tweaking, playing, and configuration changes. Initially to confirm the connection was good and working plugging it into the PowerBook just worked with no added software, drivers, etc. The somewhat non-techie installation guy who _only_ barely understood Windows was amazed at the ease.

    3. Re:This is going to be a joyous thing by krray · · Score: 1

      On topic, and I hate replying to my own posts (how rude!). The broadband install _was_ a wireless 5Ghz connection which is easily giving me 4Mbs (http://www.dls.net/).

      Cable in this area (heavily populated now) is not available.

      I had DSL with Ameritech, er SBC, um, SBC/Yahoo! which was originally 768K. Either it was down, had poor latency, or would just drop 80% of the packets on a WEEKLY basis and last for hours to days on end. I put up with this for YEARS now and finally cut them ... after they cut my connection to 384K _and_ raised the bill by $5. Their answer as to why was to ask me if anybody else in the neighborhood got DSL. Do I look like the phone company?
      And WHAT does that have to do with my connection back to the switch? NOTHING.

      Thankfully I do have ISDN (Internet backup/voice usage) as well -- which causes problems with SBC and trying to get DLS with ANYBODY. I have no POTS line, don't want one, and wouldn't use it -- but I can NOT get a unbundled DSL circuit anymore (my original one WAS).

      Of course I went wireless ... and frankly it SMOKES the T1 at the office...

    4. Re:This is going to be a joyous thing by Toasty16 · · Score: 1
      Well, good for Mac users, but the barrier to entry for Wi-Fi is so low that anyone (not virtually anyone, but anyone) with a PC or laptop can benefit. Wi-Fi compatible wireless access cards can be found for as little as $30, possibly less with rebates.

      And as for Apple being ahead of the curve, the problem with that is that if they shipped wireless products before mid-1999, those products might not be compatible with existing networks. This is because 802.11b was ratified by the IEEE in mid 1999, and Wi-Fi is actually a superset of the 802.11b standards. So when companies jumped the gun and made products based on the draft form of the 802.11b standard, they basically made a proprietary technology with no guarantees that it can communicate with the eventual ratified standard.

      The same thing is happening with 802.11g today, as that standard will be ratified in July of this year. 802.11g products being rushed to market now have no guarantees of compatibility with the future standard. Personally, I would delay 802.11g purchases until at least July for fear of buying an incompatible technology, but YMMV.

    5. Re:This is going to be a joyous thing by timeOday · · Score: 2, Informative
      What is this, an ad for Centrino?

      Anyways for what it's worth, a LOT of conferences nowadays set up wireless access and it is very popular. Just walk around at lunchtime and you'll see many people checking email (or just surfing the web or whatever). As for videoconferencing, that's not even popular over wired connections.

    6. Re:This is going to be a joyous thing by Surak · · Score: 4, Insightful

      At the risk of sounding somewhat like the Mac fanboy the parent poster is (as I am not a Mac fanboy myself), I'll point out that iBooks are supposed to get something like 5 hours of battery life in real-life use. Centrinos are supposed to get 5-7, I'm guessing 4-5 in real-life use. Personally I'd like to see notebooks that can do 8-10 hours -- IOW, a full day's work.

      I personally don't see anyway for battery life to improve unless people are willing to compromise on performance and whizbang features. Battery capacity itself is as perfected as it's going to get...the key is to cut down consumption. But everytime someone figures out how to cut consumption on one component, the laptop mfrs stuff more features in rather than focusing on a laptop that has the longest possible battery life.

      Unfortunately, too many people will buy laptop "X" with 17" display, DVD+R+RW/CD/R/RW combo superdrive, ultrawhizzy 300 GB hard drive, with the latest and greatest ultrawhizzy superfast processor and 1.5 hours of battery life rather than laptop "Y" which only has a 13.1" or 14" display, a relatively slow-clocked processor, with a somewhat slow, but powersaving hard drive, no removable storage and 7 hours of battery life.

      That's because they've bought into the marketing hype and have forgotten that the number 1 advantage of a laptop is to be able to work anywhere, anytime. Laptops don't NEED to be desktop replacements, they should be thought of as desktop complements, rather than replacements.

    7. Re:This is going to be a joyous thing by ePhil_One · · Score: 2, Insightful
      That's because they've bought into the marketing hype and have forgotten that the number 1 advantage of a laptop is to be able to work anywhere, anytime. Laptops don't NEED to be desktop replacements, they should be thought of as desktop complements, rather than replacements.

      Nonsense. While a laptop doesn't NEED to be a desktop replacement, if its a "desktop companion" it radically changes the function. If I chose a desktop companion laptop, it would be and "ultraportable", the biggest I'd consider would be the new 12" powerbook. I could carry it into wiring closets to attach to network equipment, keep documentaion handy, check website, and test network functionality.

      But I couldn't pop it open an work on spreadsheets and the like, update my resume, etc., even though technically its capable?

      Why?

      Version control. A while ago, I juggled three computers, home computer, work computer, and a laptop. Could never tell where the latest document was, and would often fork my own documents constantly, or not have the info I thought I had because it had been done on one of the other systems. Which one? Who knows.

      With a "desktop replacement", I use the same computer everywhere. Sure, maybe the battery only lasts two hours (I've never seen a laptop go much further than this except when brand new), but how often am I that far away from a power outlet?

      Actually, My palm does a really good job at being a desktop companion. Keeps my contacts, schedule, etc., stays in sync with my desktop (even key spreadsheets and documentation with its 256MB SD card) and has some handy games for keeping me entertained. Now only if it had a serial port for managing the network equipment...

      --
      You are in a maze of twisted little posts, all alike.
    8. Re:This is going to be a joyous thing by Gonarat · · Score: 1

      That's where fuel cells will come into play. A fuel cell will give your laptop enough power to run all of the wizbang stuff that many people want, as long as they want.


      Wireless will be essential in the future for any laptop. With wireless, one will be able to go online and check e-mail, surf, etc. almost anywhere. Security will get better with new 802.11 standards -- default 802.11b is very poor, even with 128 bit WEP. There are more wireless hubs out there every month -- my Orinoco card and net stumbler keep finding new ones in my area all the time, and that is just 802.11b.


      --
      Beware of Sleestak
    9. Re:This is going to be a joyous thing by indiigo · · Score: 1

      Buy more batteries. Sure it's costlier, heavier, sure it's space-eating. But you get your 8+ hours easily, at only a fraction of the cost of tomorrow's "tech".

      Invest in very small (3 pound) laptops, that get 5 hours per battery, and a few hotspares(less than a pound each), and you are good for a day, easy.

      --
      fslg503-985-8686503-985-8686503-985-8686503-985-86 8650 3-985-fdsg8686503-985-8686503-985-8686503-9
    10. Re:This is going to be a joyous thing by Surak · · Score: 1

      That's where fuel cells will come into play. A fuel cell will give your laptop enough power to run all of the wizbang stuff that many people want, as long as they want.

      Don't forget *weight*. Remember, you've gotta carry this thing around all day... fuel cells are heavy in case you hadn't noticed. And they can explode too. I don't want my laptop to be considered munitions.

    11. Re:This is going to be a joyous thing by Surak · · Score: 1

      Weight...I gotta carry this thing around all day. Sure I can get my 8 hours...I could probably get 8 hours or even more if I lugged around a car battery, too, but you don't see me doing that! :)

    12. Re:This is going to be a joyous thing by Surak · · Score: 1

      Version control. A while ago, I juggled three computers, home computer, work computer, and a laptop. Could never tell where the latest document was, and would often fork my own documents constantly, or not have the info I thought I had because it had been done on one of the other systems. Which one? Who knows.

      That's not the fault of the laptop...that's the fault of having no centralized document management system. With wireless internet connectivity, you could maintain all of your documents on a server somewhere over a VPN connection and just make sure that you upload your latest changes whenever your finished, no matter where you are. Not unlike how software development is done -- when your finished for the day, you "check in" your changes.

    13. Re:This is going to be a joyous thing by ePhil_One · · Score: 1
      Version control. A while ago, I juggled three computers, home computer, work computer, and a laptop. Could never tell where the latest document was, and would often fork my own documents constantly, or not have the info I thought I had because it had been done on one of the other systems. Which one? Who knows.

      That's not the fault of the laptop...that's the fault of having no centralized document management system. With wireless internet connectivity, you could maintain all of your documents on a server somewhere over a VPN connection and just make sure that you upload your latest changes whenever your finished, no matter where you are. Not unlike how software development is done -- when your finished for the day, you "check in" your changes.

      I blame the laptop. just like I blame the table I stubbed my toe on last night :^) Seriously, the laptop is a tool, and I found having three tools for the job caused problems. But your idea has merit...

      I'd could put my ultra-portable in some sort of "fast doc", then initiate a syncronization script. Yes, it could work :^) I could even call the scripts "Hot Sync" and kick them off with a button on the dock, which I could call a "cradle". Maybe even go way ultra-portable, maybe Palm(tm) sized. But wait, I got one, my Palm Tungsten T :^)

      Certainly the challenges can be surmounted, and in todays massively connected world its easier than ever. But it requires effort, and a system (MS's "Briefcase" initiative didn't work well as I recall), and might not be immediately obvious to joe user who thinks he'll get a cool micro laptop to impress his friends

      Personally I'm getting ready to buy a laptop, and I think a desktop replacement is the way I want to go for how I intend to use it (pursuing an EMBA, I think big screens will be an advantage, and I doubt I'll be far from a wall plug for extended periods; if I am, I suspect I'll be on the beach or somewhere where I don't want to use it, or hanging in Starbucks for 30 minutes sipping a double half decaffe mocha super latte (complete with silly straw).

      Point being, I'm not buying a big screened power hungry monster because I'm brain washed by greedy corporate marketing guru's, but because it fits my needs. :^b

      --
      You are in a maze of twisted little posts, all alike.
    14. Re:This is going to be a joyous thing by brettper · · Score: 1

      That's when you order a side of laptop-juice along with your latte or happy meal

    15. Re:This is going to be a joyous thing by tomrathbun · · Score: 1

      Verizon is launching 1x-EvDO soon in two cities(2.5 Mbps peak) and Sprint can't be to far behind. So if you can get 600-800 Kbps reliable downloads through your cell phone plan, then why would you pay more to access the internet at a coffee house? WiFi lacks security, has interference problems, and no roaming yet. If companies can't make money then they will go away.

  2. What about the Security by Montgomery+Burns+III · · Score: 5, Insightful
    I have read several of the recent BW articles lauding the beaty and wonder of WI-FI. I was apalled at the lack of concern about the security issues associated with wireless communications.
    While it is great to talk about the productivity gains of the tools, we dare not ignore the threats against:

    Confidentiality
    Integrity
    Availability.
    --

    'ta
    1. Re:What about the Security by samhalliday · · Score: 3, Insightful
      the security issues are the same as they are with a hard line connection on a local network... regards snooping and so forth. if you want a secure connection, you dont use telnet, and you dont trust unknown keys in ssh/ssl. if you want your actions recorded for all to see, better use telnet :-/

      'nuff said.

    2. Re:What about the Security by timeOday · · Score: 2, Insightful
      What about the security? The good ole' wired Internet doesn't provide confidentiality or integrity anyways. That's why we have ssl. And supressing WiFi isn't going to increase availability of anything.

      Treat a WiFi adapter just like a connection to the Internet, and you can't go far wrong.

    3. Re:What about the Security by Toasty16 · · Score: 1
      i wouldn't know what it takes to secure wireless access in a public/corporate setting, but here at the "crib" I secure my wireless network by restricting access to specified MAC addresses, limiting the router's IP broadcast to 3 IP addresses (the number of computers on the network), requiring a password for logon, and having each computer running a software firewall restricting all but the required ports.

      I don't enable WEP encryption because I find that it cuts down bandwidth by 30-40%. Does that mean I'm asking for it? Calling all h4x0rs in Columbia, MO!

    4. Re:What about the Security by arvindn · · Score: 2, Insightful

      True. Too often a technology rapidly gains popularity and then the world finds that it is missing some vital component which, with hindsight, should have been built into the protocol in the first place. Worse, the extra feature can not be tacked on to it without breaking compatibility. Had SMTP had a better authentication system, spam would probably not exist today. Another example is gnutella - it didn't scale. But there is often no way to provide for the future since it is impossible to know what direction a technology is going to take. Burdening it with too many security related features early on might prove a barrier to adoption. One way out could be to make it extensible at every level (like X window. See how well it has withstood the test of time.)

    5. Re:What about the Security by Montgomery+Burns+III · · Score: 2, Insightful
      With all due respect, I am not attempting to stifle or suppress WI-FI technology.
      I sincerely believe that the security issues associated with WI-FI are somewhat more challenging than "connectivity to the Internet" in that, many folks are tempted to simply plug WI-FI into their internal corporate network without knowledge that they may be leaking their confidential data to bypassers.
      --

      'ta
    6. Re:What about the Security by Matey-O · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Not if you don't mind folks seeing your bills as you pay them.

      You can secure the transactions by running through SSH or setting up a vpn tunnel...there's some overhead, but I'd guess your computers could encrypt faster than the hardware in your 802.11 setup.

      --
      "Draco dormiens nunquam titillandus."
    7. Re:What about the Security by edstromp · · Score: 1
      There is certainly a place for those things, but I am currently working under an IT department that is absoultly paralized due to their security fears.

      They won't look into making WiFi a "permitted" standard, but they will buy the equipment to do security sweeps to make sure no one has set up a rogue WiFi access point.

    8. Re:What about the Security by EvilTwinSkippy · · Score: 1
      And precisely how much security exist now?

      If you are securing against unauthized users you clamp down at the DHCP server. If your are securing against unauthorized people leaching your connection, you secure at the NAT gateway. If you are securing from unauthorize people externally, you do it at the firewall.

      All of this is network level stuff. It doesn't matter if they are getting in through a hard-line, a wifi connection, or a some well trained rats and a fiber splice.

      --
      "Learning is not compulsory... neither is survival."
      --Dr.W.Edwards Deming
  3. this is a nice idea... by sickboy_macosX · · Score: 4, Interesting

    But it would be nice if we could see wifi hotspots in other smaller cities like Seattle Wireless has set up in their town. I think if ISP's could lower the equipment costs for their WI-FI equipment down from 600 dollars to about 100, or 200 more people would catch on. That and someone needs to come up with a way for the Wireless Providers to be able to shoot over the hilly and rocky mountains like we have in Southeast Idaho. And if we could fix the speed barrier, get the bottle neck up from 11mbps to 54 or even higher, that would rock!

    --
    --- /* In Soviet Russia, the Mac OS X kernel panics you! */
    1. Re:this is a nice idea... by Xerithane · · Score: 2, Informative

      I think you mean Seattle Wireless (.net). seattlewireless.org doesn't resolve for me.

      --
      Dacels Jewelers can't be trusted.
    2. Re:this is a nice idea... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Informative

      I was under the impression that 802.11b's range was anywhere from 100-5000ft depending on the antenea. It doesn't sound like you'll be bouncing the signal over any hills or mountains without several relay points...

    3. Re:this is a nice idea... by sickboy_macosX · · Score: 1

      That is the problem, people here in south east idaho think they can get around with out having to have repeaters, or signal amplification equipment, and so the people who live where Qwest Communications is too lazy to roll out DSL, or Cable One Television dont want to work with the coax to make it so cable broadband is available. I personally think it is shit, that people can get away with over pricing, like Cable one and their 40.00 bill if you have cable internet. more Subscribers=more revenue-overhead=Lower prices for the end user. I wish they would make it available for everyone!

      --
      --- /* In Soviet Russia, the Mac OS X kernel panics you! */
    4. Re:this is a nice idea... by EvilTwinSkippy · · Score: 1
      Hmm. Considering the range for Wifi is measured in miles even with te fancy boosters, you are going to need at least one neighbor with a Broadband connection.

      Just make sure that's a neighbor on the top of a hill.

      --
      "Learning is not compulsory... neither is survival."
      --Dr.W.Edwards Deming
  4. What about free-as-in-beer by pork_spies · · Score: 3, Insightful

    We really have a chance to make this wave of the 'net' very different from the previous round - and that means taking control and offering an alternative vision (see Consume).
    Who care about what Business Week says? It's about as interesting as 3G phones from their end - ie not at all interesting, just another way to part us from our money. Yes, let's all buy wireless cards, but learn the lesson of P2P and make them available to all.

  5. Wow by arvindn · · Score: 2, Informative

    Business week seem to have got a really good tech section. Check out some of the articles in the "recent tech features" sidebar on the left.

  6. business travelers... by garcia · · Score: 5, Insightful

    this is my biggest problem w/Wi-Fi "hot-spots". There has to be more people than just "business travelers" that want wireless Internet connections...

    This is NOT a good business model people. I do NOT want to have to goto the local airport or downtown coffee shop (not my type of place) in order to get connected while I am out of my house.

    I want connections EVERYWHERE and ANYWHERE. I want to goto the local bar, sit down w/my NTN Playmaker, my Budweiser, and my 12 Wild Wings, watching Football, and hop on the net to surf, AIM, ssh, etc.

    I am NOT a business traveler. I will probably never be one.

    Good business models include a LARGE cross-section.

    1. Re:business travelers... by Shenkerian · · Score: 2, Insightful
      Good business models include a LARGE cross-section.

      If you meant to imply that all good business models include a large cross section, you're absolutely wrong. That mentality fostered the .com business models of "building brand recognition" that ultimately went nowhere. There are many spectacularly successful business models that are very narrowly targeted, but do very well at saturating their target market (think Mercedes-Benz).

      --
      You tell me how "whilst" differs from "while," and I'll stop calling you a pretentious jackass.
    2. Re:business travelers... by Thud457 · · Score: 1

      Maybe he's using the wireless laptop to drive chicks away so he can drink his beer, eat his wings and watch the goddamn game on tv in peace for a fucking change!

      --

      the preceding comment is my own and in no way reflects the opinion of the Joint Chiefs of Staff

    3. Re:business travelers... by garcia · · Score: 1

      actually I don't mind being friendly, but I have had the same gf for quite some time. She's actually the one that drives off the other girls ;)

    4. Re:business travelers... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yeah, right. You found the one that would have you, you ugly fucker.

    5. Re:business travelers... by tigheig · · Score: 1

      A good business model must include a path to profitability for the service provider. The business traveler has shown in the past a willingness to pay for services rendered, and so companies that provide services will concentrate on that customer first. In addition, the business traveler may also generate good will inside the companies they work for if the service provided effectively meets their needs. That traveler may later become the executive responsible for selecting service providers for other things, and may remember their positive experience with that vendor. Thus it can become both a profit center and a marketing tool for future sales of services.

      Infrastructure costs are another consideration. The business traveler may go a variety of places when arriving in a new town, but the majority of their time will be at the airport, hotel, car rental agency, and points in between. This means that the requirements of supporting that customer are clearer in terms of the locations the service must be provided, and the places where the equipment must be installed are likely to have internal organizations (Accounts Payble/Receiveable, IT, Operations, Telco, and so forth) that know how to work effectively and efficiently with an external service provider. They may also already have voice or data circuits in place that can be utilized to provide connection to your data backbone. By minimizing the cost and complexity of their initial investment they're going to increase the chances of their long-term success.

      Without a way to generate revenue that more than covers expenses a product or service will only generate red ink. We say that we want ubiquitous wireless data services, but are we willing to pay for those services? If not, what else would motivate a business to provide that service? Most of us on this forum have indicated many times that we don't want to pay for metered data services, and some have indicated that they don't want to pay for much of anything. What would make a business decide that we constitute a good potential market?

    6. Re:business travelers... by /dev/trash · · Score: 1

      Wow. Why would you need to surf the net and all that in a bar? I surf because I am bored. if I'm at a bar, I'm by definition not bored.

    7. Re:business travelers... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      basically.

    8. Re:business travelers... by EvilTwinSkippy · · Score: 1
      I thought rant was a -1 not a +1. Moderators, strike that boy down as a whiner.

      If you want all that and a bag of chips, just buy yourself one of those wiresless web phones and plug it into your laptop. Sprint sells them, Verizon sells them. The service isn't all that expensive. It is a bit slow, but not all that expensive.

      --
      "Learning is not compulsory... neither is survival."
      --Dr.W.Edwards Deming
    9. Re:business travelers... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      whiner? how was it whining? It was stating that "business travelers" aren't the only ones that need WiFi.

      No, I will NOT plug a cell phone into a laptop and use less than 14.4k speeds. I want wireless broadband.

      I thought that Troll was -1.

      Asshole.

    10. Re:business travelers... by GlassUser · · Score: 2, Funny

      Mod this man up. If they're not geek chicks, they need to stay out of my personal space.

    11. Re:business travelers... by telephoneman · · Score: 1

      Business travellers maybe few in number, but as nay mobile Network Operator will tell you, these 3 - 5 % of contracted ( post pay) users account for about 70% of revenue! (Roaming and data traffic being the big earners!!)

      As for wifi becoming hygenic, I attended CEBIT recently and the NOs will be bringing wifi as a business solution, I dont think they have grasped the concept of ubiquity yet...

      They also see embracing Wifi as a way of protecting their revenue as wifi threatens 3G revenue and of course profits...

  7. Why is this so hard to understand? by grumpygrodyguy · · Score: 4, Insightful

    There is also an interesting bit about a business model for wireless carriers.

    There is no business model for wireless, that's why it's so great!

    It's 100% commodity based. Companies build commodity products, and the consumer purchases them to become part of the ISP. Mesh routers, 802X nodes, etc are all self-sufficient "black boxes" purchased by users for users.

    The last thing we need is another middle-man sending us a bill for something that's free!

    --
    The government has a defect: it's potentially democratic. Corporations have no defect: they're pure tyrannies. -Chomsky
    1. Re:Why is this so hard to understand? by stripes · · Score: 2, Insightful
      There is no business model for wireless, that's why it's so great!

      Yeah, but if there is a business model that includes profit there will be a lot more wireless sites to use (if you are willing to pay), and it shouldn't have a big impact on the number of free ones.

      Having a model where some folks "give it away" is great, the lack of a for-profit model isn't great.

    2. Re:Why is this so hard to understand? by div_2n · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Someone has to pay the costs for keeping up the equipment and the high speed connection everyone is using.

      How do you figure that my T1/T3/etc is free? What about the $500-800 bucks for a quality WAP/Router that dies and has to be replaced?

      Look, I am all for free services. But the bottom line is that somewhere in the chain someone has to pay. Are you suggesting mass mooching?

      The only way this would be a truly free endeavor is if the idea of a structured network went out the door and everything was truly meshed down to the web pages you want to visit. No more copper or fiber lines because all data is flowing over the air to and from each device like one gigantic peer to peer network.

      I don't want to think about how ineffecient that would be or how security would cease to exist.

    3. Re:Why is this so hard to understand? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      it shouldn't have a big impact on the number of free ones.

      Until we run out of channels.

  8. Interference by Tweakmeister · · Score: 3, Interesting

    I think you'll find WiFi slowly fazed out for different technologies, namely ones that are...proprietary.

    Interference and crowding may prove to become too much of an issue as everyone hops on the bandwagon.

    This being said, WiFi is a great technology to pave the way in wireless.

    --

    Colossians 2:8

    1. Re:Interference by Shenkerian · · Score: 1

      I think you'll find WiFi slowly fazed in after different proprietary technologies failed to catch on.

      Consumers were appropriately unwilling to be locked into a particular vendor, and eventually these vendors decided to come up with a standard protocol that would make all of their equipment compatible.

      As I recall, there were even incompatibilities among early 802.11 implementations, leading to the creation of the "WiFi" label, which guarantees interoperability with other "WiFi" products from any manufacturer.

      --
      You tell me how "whilst" differs from "while," and I'll stop calling you a pretentious jackass.
    2. Re:Interference by Tweakmeister · · Score: 1

      Take for instance the "recreational" 46/49mhz band. The first wireless phones that came out used these...so did walkie talkies...so did baby monitors...so did intercom systems...etc, etc. Opening up a band like this will eventually cause problems. This being said, we've come a long ways with refining the technology....in the mean time I love my WiFi setup :)

      --

      Colossians 2:8

  9. And the routers.... by lylum · · Score: 2, Funny

    and the manufacturers will continue to ship Wi-Fi access enabled routers for home use that are wide open. So truly everyone can access the internet from anywhere! (and do anything they want since there is no way to track them down...) Isn't that a threat for national security? haha....

  10. Fortune had an article in print... by Xerithane · · Score: 2

    and I was utterly disappointed to read, "This transfers at a rate of 11mbps, that's roughly equivalent to 10 minutes of digital music or 500 single page word documents every second."

    I really wish people would stop using this "roughly equivalent" analogy. What type of digital music are we talking? It doesn't answer anything really. If we're talking about a .WAV or other lossless format, 11mbits a second transfers what... a minute, if that a second? Nevermind the lack of understanding of big-B vs. little-B.

    This is off-topic, just something I read and wanted to bitch about.

    --
    Dacels Jewelers can't be trusted.
    1. Re:Fortune had an article in print... by realmolo · · Score: 2, Funny

      11 megabits per second...

      At that speed, it would take you 50 years to build a highway from the Library of Congress to the Grand Canyon and fill it with enough encyclopedias to fill an Olympic-sized swimming pool.

  11. How will they make money? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    It'll be just like the business model in the Saturday Night Live commercial for that bank whose sole function is to make exact change.

    How do we make a profit? Volume.

  12. Re:fifth post by ZipZapCTB · · Score: 1

    Oh well pegasus mail is better than netscape or IncrediMail!

  13. Also see: E-week by Montgomery+Burns+III · · Score: 3, Informative
    --

    'ta
  14. Profitable by axlrosen · · Score: 1

    Q: When do you think the company will earn its first net quarterly profit?

    A: Sprint PCS became operating-positive last year, and we expect to be free-cash-flow-positive in 2003 and net-income-profitable next year.


    Can anyone explain what the difference is between these three things? And, does any of them actually mean "profitable"? I can't tell.

    1. Re:Profitable by TheSync · · Score: 1

      You become cash flow positive when cash is coming into your bank faster than it is flowing out.

      You become net income profitable when your recognized income is higher than your recognized costs.

      The difference between the two could be due to timing of income and cost recognitions.

      Or their definition of "cash-flow positive" might be "operating cash-flow positive" which does not include capital spending.

    2. Re:Profitable by Surak · · Score: 2, Informative

      Operating positive means that your operating expenses are less than your operating income. Free-cash-flow positive means that you basically always have a positive cash-flow situation -- you always have cash on-hand. Net-income-profitable means that after taxes, overhead, and direct expenses, yada yada, you have a positive net income... Err...IOW you made money after you paid everything out, including taxes.

  15. Re:What about the Security - Toast by Montgomery+Burns+III · · Score: 1
    Corporations turning to wireless networks for operational flexibility without considering the security risks may be carelessly sacrificing the integrity of their systems," said Phil Cracknell, a security specialist with the Institute of Information Security in England, who helped carry out the survey. "The emanations from these wireless networks can and do leak outside their buildings providing access potential to hackers wherever they may be. This represents a real and significant threat to unprotected wireless networks."
    --

    'ta
  16. Wi-Fi.. great for what it is by Fnkmaster · · Score: 5, Insightful
    I mean, it's great that Wi-Fi hardware is so cheap and commoditized and everything, but what people keep seem to be missing is that A) the cheap commodity hardware is designed for small local area coverage, which is fabulous for business LANs and easy home networking, but bad for a general mobile wireless service B) hotspot-only coverage just doesn't provide a strong enough value proposition C) the purely commoditized nature of the hardware makes for a zero barriers to entry business. Anybody can build a network of hotspots on one payment system. But even if everybody used the same payment system, there would certainly be some value from it, but not at such a striking level that it is likely to happen. D) The only businesses that really have a striking imperative to need hotspots there are coffee shops, hotels and other places that make a living off of having people linger. McDonalds wireless - bad idea (I know they are experimenting with it), they want to get you in and out as soon as possible.


    The fact is, 3G wireless networks are going to win out in the long run. Being able to open your laptop in the coffee shop and surf the web is great, but the bigger "wireless" market is vehicular embedded communications devices, fully connected PDAs, email-on-the-go, web browsing from where-ever you want. And no, futzing with my fucking cellphone keypad to send a stupid SMS message just doesn't count, I want it all on my Palm Pilot/Windows CE device, I want it seemless, I want it universal, I want it affordable.

    1. Re:Wi-Fi.. great for what it is by EvilTwinSkippy · · Score: 1
      Amen and amen.

      That said, wherever people sit and congregate with laptops they will want internet access. Wifi can provide it. The trick is to be able to make it worth someone's while to put in the wireless.

      Oh wait, that's me (shameless plug)[etoyoc.com]

      --
      "Learning is not compulsory... neither is survival."
      --Dr.W.Edwards Deming
    2. Re:Wi-Fi.. great for what it is by Locutus · · Score: 3, Insightful

      That's it guys, WiFi isn't going to enable the PDA and handheld. It's too power hungry and please don't try to tell me you can use WiFi on your existing handheld just fine. 1 hour of use and then back to the charger is NOT useful and only allows snake oil salesmen like Bill Gates to do demos. It's not usable in the business market or at home IMHO.

      Bluetooth has alot of the answers. It enables PDAs, handhelds, laptops, etc to have internet connectivity on the road via Bluetooth -> mobile phone connections. Using a Bluetooth WAP, you can get the connectivity at the office or home.

      In a class 2( 10meter ) configuration, you'll typically get 4x longer runtime than WiFi. Security becomes less of a problem because it's security-by-proximity( you can see who's trying to break in ). Heck, you want a secure meeting with wireless connectivity? Put a Class 3( 1-3meter) WAP in the middle of the meeting table.

      IMHO, WiFi should be the secondary wireless system and Bluetooth the primary one.

      LoB

      --
      "Anyone who stands out in the middle of a road looks like roadkill to me." --Linus
    3. Re:Wi-Fi.. great for what it is by GlassUser · · Score: 2, Interesting

      I can use wifi on my handheld just fine. HAH! I'm not lying either. Nice little CF card, and I can tap away for a couple of hours minimum (that's continuous use). External battery sleeves make it easy to stay powered yet free, or I could always plug in if I needed.

  17. Economist by jaaron · · Score: 2, Informative

    The Economist has a set of related articles in this week's edition.

    --
    Who said Freedom was Fair?
  18. yummy. by A+Swing+Dancing+Dork · · Score: 1

    Voice over IP, over Wifi. There are some companies acctually planning this for mobile phones. Is anyone aware of this?

    What does this mean for the future of telephone companies? When can I call from Boston to london at less than $1.50 per min?

    1. Re:yummy. by Sligbot · · Score: 1

      I'm doing consultant work for a company pushing this kind of technology. Think of this: VoIP over WIFI; Video over WIFI; hotspots transmitting video to palms in Starbucks....watch your favorite shows while sipping a coffee...

    2. Re:yummy. by Locutus · · Score: 1

      WiFi in a handheld is dumb. Dumb because it doesn't work but for a very short period.

      Go ahead and use WiFi on your handheld at Starbucks before your next meeting. Any more than 30 minutes of use and you had better hope you don't need your handheld for much of the meeting. Or it's a short meeting. I guess you could bring your battery charger with you to the meeting. ;/

      Makes a good demo but implementation/use is not there.

      LoB

      --
      "Anyone who stands out in the middle of a road looks like roadkill to me." --Linus
  19. Easy: VPN by div_2n · · Score: 4, Informative

    The only real stop gap solution at this point is to have a VPN server on the other side of the wireless connection. That way, your packets can be sniffed all day and would be crackers have to deal with breaking VPN crypto.

    I suspect that in the end, that will be the way to go regardless of new advancements in WEP that may or may not come about.

    The bottom line is that somewhere, the day will have to be encrypted in some way because it is open in the air for anyone to grab. If you put the burden of the horsepower required to encrypt/decrypt on your WAP, then your ability to serve large numbers of clients diminishes.

    In other words, leave the WAP duties up to the WAP and leave the encryption duties up to a VPN server. No changes to current technologies required.

  20. Frequency limitations are to blame by div_2n · · Score: 2, Informative

    The limitations causing hills to be a problem are built into the 2.4 ghz frequency. Physics is to blame and cannot be changed. Signals such as FM radio have a much better ability to penetrate uneven terrain.

    The way to get around the problem of obstruction of signal, multiple repeater sites are necessary. There is a cost associated that makes it hard to justify if there isn't significant population density to cover an area.

    As far as upping speed to 54 mbps in the 2.4 ghz range, 802.11g will make that a reality. It is already here with 802.11a. 802.11a technology is a little more expensive currently though.

    Still, it doesn't matter because the further away from a WAP you are, the lower your data throughput will be. If your WAP is getting interference from another WAP, your maximum data throughput will be much lower than 54mbps anyway.

    Do not look for current wireless technologies to replace wired ones with equivalent functionality anytime soon. The best they can do is fill in broadband gaps by serving up a 128/256/512/1024K connections to those willing to pay for it.

  21. Personal Telco Wireless Project in Portland, OR by mrs+clear+plastic · · Score: 3, Interesting

    It's interesting to notice that none of the articles mentions anything about the Personal Telco wireless project in Portland, Oregon. This is a grass roots effort to provide limited free access to wireless
    internet in parts of Portland, Oregon.

    I also know that there are similar efforts going
    on in other cities.

    I also did not notice (it could be there as I only
    skimmed the articles) anything about the war-chalking that goes on in some areas to identify places where one can get a wireless session.

    Mark

    --
    Cleara
    1. Re:Personal Telco Wireless Project in Portland, OR by ajlitt · · Score: 1

      Could be because Business Week's readership is interested in profitable ventures... Hence the name.

  22. What?? by bartok · · Score: 1
    From one of the artivles:

    "Former Napster aficionados are wirelessly linking their PCs to their stereos to better enjoy their MP3 collections."

    And how are they doing just that? Is there some kind of WiFi gear I can plug in my Amp's audio input? ... fooling it that it's receiving a signal from a CD/radio/tape or something?

  23. Re:What about the Security - There are answers by Montgomery+Burns+III · · Score: 2, Informative
    Unfortunately, fear can bring paralysis. I believe that a thoughtful review of the subject will reveal that there are mechanisms available to bring about secure WI-FI functionality, e.g.: 1. Access Points must be placed on an isolated network segment connected to a firewall. 2. End users must be authenticated through the use of strong, two-factor authentication before being allowed to connect to the wireless network. 3. All wireless communication must be strongly encrypted (triple-DES or AES). This encryption must be through the use of an add-on product, such as a VPN concentrator. 4. WEP should be used (in addition to the other requirements listed above.)

    Lets provide secure solutions, they exist.
    --

    'ta
  24. WEP = worthless equivalent privacy by div_2n · · Score: 2, Insightful

    #1: Exactly what I was getting at. The first stop data should travel through to be secure is a VPN/Firewall before it gets anywhere else.

    #2: Not a bad idea. I assume you mean authenticate via RADIUS to get access to the WAP and then VPN to access the other side.

    #3: Absolutely. This is the ONLY way currently to guarantee security of data.

    #4 I disagree with completely.

    WEP is clearly and easily breakable. It can be a pain to keep up with WEP keys.

    At best it keeps complete beginners from viewing data packets.

    At worst it adds overhead to WAP's that doesn't need to be there with a VPN solution filling the void.

    The issue of additonal overhead is especially important if you are trying to serve greater than 50 clients per WAP. Actually many manufacturers currently recommend no more than 30 to 50 clients per WAP. If you throttle bandwidth and don't use WEP, you can get more without too much of an issue though.

    The quick, easy and practical solution to securing wireless is:

    1) Securely authenticate with an encrypted password (not WEP).

    2) Encrypt data via VPN once authenticated.

    Anything else is added overhead. The above two step process is EXACTLY what happens when using VPN over the wires. No WEP present there.

  25. Re:WEP = worthless equivalent privacy ;-) by Montgomery+Burns+III · · Score: 1
    I understand your position on WEP.
    I think that reasonable people can disagree on this point.
    One of the proposed reasons for using WEP is to put a "No Trespassing" sign around your WI-FI net.

    If the first three steps are done properly, WEP can get tossed.
    --

    'ta
  26. Abbreviaton? Acronym? by Stiletto · · Score: 1


    Could someone tell me what exactly does "Wi-Fi" stand for?

  27. Re:Abbreviaton? Acronym? by rushfan · · Score: 2, Informative

    WiFi stands for "Wireless Fidelity"

    More info + propaganda available at:
    See http://www.weca.net/OpenSection/why_Wi-Fi.asp?TID= 2

    Rushfan

  28. Re:Abbreviaton? Acronym? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
    More like INFidelity! Just like your wife's nightly escape to bang our President!

    And notice the word "infidel" there. You all should die like the godless dogs you are.

  29. the path to wi-fi bliss by gummint · · Score: 1

    To get to wi-fi bliss, we have to pass through an old regulatory morass. Time for some revolutionary ideas for radio regulation!

  30. Re:Easy: VPN by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    How do you propose security for public access points, where VPN capability traffic isn't readily available? Or just jumping from network to network as a public user?

    Lots of hurdles, because of that server on the other end. I think we'll soon be seeing a standard for VPN ISP connectivity.

    We don't use wireless because what isn't broken or cracked today, could easily be cracked tomorrow, and the fact that broadcasting recordeable traffic out in public space can be potentially broken, VPN or not, is too risky.

  31. Re:Easy: VPN by div_2n · · Score: 1

    "We don't use wireless because what isn't broken or cracked today, could easily be cracked tomorrow, and the fact that broadcasting recordeable traffic out in public space can be potentially broken, VPN or not, is too risky."

    As opposed to VPN traffic going over the internet that could just as easily be sniffed and recorded and potentially cracked (with the help of a supercomputer)?

  32. www.slimpdevices.com by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Add a wireless bridge from 802.11b to ethernet, and connect it. Simple. Personall I prefer CAT5 for the increased reliability.

    No need for Napster though. The CD's I purchase are all stored on my PC for easy use from my living room. The napster thing is just a troll to say why you shouldn't be allowed to listen to your music the way you want.

    It's sad. I've seen some great projects get cut because the company was concerned they'd have legal problems if they went to market. I always feel very frustrated when going to "high tech" sterio equipment stores.

  33. f#^$%ing sprint liars and cheats!! by kraksmoka · · Score: 1
    i fsckin hate sprint. look at this quote:,br> With wireless local number portability, it will be a very confusing process. Plus, the investment the industry is making to implement this is more than $1 billion. The more we focus on government mandates like this, the less we can focus on improving our customer care and quality of service.

    that's sprint's way of saying that they would much rather keep you locked into your phone number with them, which i have seen keep people around even when they hate sprint. i had sprint for two years. they f$#%'ed up my bill once every two weeks and then cut me off for being two days late on payment, all the damn time. they stink!!!!!

    and since they are being forced to change this odious practice which was acceptible in the infancy of the cellphone age, but certainly in the best interests of providers, now, it is hindering their "quality of service". WHAT SERVICE?

    sprint is the DEVIL

    /endrant

    --
    "You never want a serious crisis to go to waste." - Rahm Emanuel
  34. Re:Easy: VPN by Emugamer · · Score: 1

    One thing about recording VPN traffic on the internet is that it is a bit more difficult to do in terms of keeping a continues trace without a compromised router and keeping it compromised for a significant time. Wireless on the other hand is much easier just to put a wireless relay next to your competition and just tcpdump forever and then some day when it becomes economically feasible find out what was going on.

  35. Question by Cinematique · · Score: 1

    Are there any WAPs out there which have a built-in VPN server?

    Just curious...

  36. Newsflash: Battery isnt important to some people by rsborg · · Score: 1
    Yes, that's right. Some people only use a laptop as
    1. A full desktop replacement with little/no need for battery
    2. A portable desktop replacement, to simply "plug in" wherever you are, but some battery to allow for standby
    3. Strong battery, with adequate processor power for usage on the go (centrino/ibook)
    4. Full battery-powered operation, with little/no usage while "plugged in", and minimal processor power

    Now, since #2 and #3 are the "sweet spot" (due to business usage), and #1 can be fulfilled by a #2 class laptop, and #4 is pretty much a high-end PDA/palmtop, that leaves little room to have a #3 that can fulfill roles of both #2 and #4. Thus, a strong #2 is the clear "sweet spot" of functionality, since it can play all the roles (esp. since people who are serious about battery life carry spares).

    --
    Make sure everyone's vote counts: Verified Voting
  37. another link by sharkdba · · Score: 1

    cnn also have an article about wireless technology.

    --
    The purpose of life is to find the purpose of life.
  38. HEY FUCKER NICE TO MEET YOU! OPEN YOUR MOUTH! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0


  39. Re:Now THIS is a Troll... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    The Electoral college has been co-opted and isn't going to be given back to the people unless we stand up and fight.

    Are you advocating the violent overthrow of the government of the United States? Because that's subversion, you know, and it's against the law. And because our country is at war right now, you can be shot on sight for that kind of thing.

    Saddam Hussein had NOTHING to do with September 11th. A lot of Americans have been hornswagled into believing that there is a connection ebcause they HAVEN'T BEEN PAYING ATTENTION!!!

    Guess what, asswipe. Nobody ever said Saddam had anything to do with 9/11. Ever. And you can't provide a single source to back up your claim that somebody did.

    The only way to get any reliable news about what is happening if you live in the US is to listen to a shortwave radio and get the European news broadcasts.

    Yes, because you're being lied too. By the evil corporations.

    It's one thing to wear a tinfoil hat, but I think yours is on too tight.

    Have you noticed they sound more rightwing than they used to? This happened directlry after Sept. 11th.

    Yes. That's because after 9/11 most of the moderate lefties realized the error of their ways and became more conservative.

    There is no "liberal media" as the conservatives always spout off. How many liberal pundits are out there?

    I guess you don't read The Nation. Or the Washington Post. Or The New York Fucking Times, for that matter.

    And for CHRIST'S SAKE we have a CRIMINAL on Fox news!!!

    Yes. A criminal with a silver star, a bronze star for valor, and two purple hearts. One who never killed anybody, one who never stole anything, one who was only guilty of poor judgment in service of his country. I wish we could have more criminals like that on television. Or on Slashdot, for that matter.

    Where did all the common sense go? The things that used to be good about this country? Now I'm stuck in this hellhole with no real way of getting out since I can't afford to (thank you Mr. President and the conservative governor of my state for cutting back on funding for public schools and libraries).

    Okay, I get it. "This country sucks because it's not giving me enough money! I'm not smart, talented, or determined enough to get out there and make money on my own, so if the government doesn't give it to me, I'll never get out of this stinking hellhole! This country sucks! Waaa!"

    You're an idiot, and a whiner. I tell you what. I will PERSONALLY buy you a one-way ticket to the socialist paradise of your choice. You just let me know where you want to go, and I'll buy you the ticket.

    The eagle weeps.

    You wouldn't know an eagle if it tore out your eyes and feasted on the jelly inside.

  40. Last Post! by alpg · · Score: 0

    Nature abhors a hero. For one thing, he violates the law of conservation
    of energy. For another, how can it be the survival of the fittest when the
    fittest keeps putting himself in situations where he is most likely to be
    creamed?
    -- Solomon Short

    - this post brought to you by the Automated Last Post Generator...