Permanet vs. Nearlynet

Clay Shirky has a good essay on wireless networking, contrasting two approaches to building out a network, roughly akin to the cathedral and bazaar methods of building software.

Comments

the problem with wireless networking

[potaz]

quote: For most of the past year, on many US airlines, those phones inserted into the middle seat have borne a label reading "Service Disconnected." Those labels tell a simple story -- people don't like to make $40 phone calls.

Well, duh. Most people don't like to spend $40 on anything, let alone a phone call. I don't understand how businesses think that hey, if we're dealing with other business people, they'll want to throw money around like it was candy! Treat them like other people (ie: cheap) and you'll find you have more realistic expectations.

summary

[DrSkwid]

it's easier to turn "cheap and lousy" into "cheap and adequate" than it is to turn "expensive and ubiquitous" into "reasonable and ubiquitous" and that people will tolerate the cheaper option if the price differential is sufficient.

Collective Funding

[Anonymous Coward]

The problem is that we are expecting the private sector to do the work of the government. The only reason we have a "permanet" as regards roads is that the citizenry decided it was important and all of us chipped in our small amounts of money each. Imagine how silly it would have been to have had it be a purely private sector undertaking ("I will build out the long haul roads and charge a $100 toll per thousand pounds to recoup the costs from those shipping companies that shift to truck usage").

The private sector should be involved and competition has its place, but it ought to be more like an open competition where private contractors give bids to build the public infrastructure. This will let innovation flourish at the margins of the network where much of the real value can be added.

But they are important to remember

[bluGill]

Sure as a tech I can design a network to be avaiable anywhere. (Even on airplanes during takeoff/landing, where most electronic devices are banned) However this artical make it clear that I shouldn't spend my time doing that unless someone is watching the overall ecconmic costs. Sure as an engineer that isn't my prime responsibility, but I should be aware that other issues exist, and if they are not being watched by someone who understand them (which I likely don't) then I should expect the project to fail.

It has been said that most technological project fails because of bad management. I believe it, because I've seen it. Engineers may not understand or know these issues, but it is the job of management to know they exist and solve them. Technical problems can be solved if resources are unlimited (Mostly money, but sometimes other). However that is not the case. Many projects have solved all the technological problems, but the cost was so high that nobody could afford them.

Not Cathedral/Bazaar!

[mcrbids]

This is not really at all like "Cathedral/Bazaar" but rather, " Worse is Better. (now updated)

The underlying idea is that the "right" way isn't always the best, but rather, that the "best" way is what is "good enough" for cheap.

This is the same force that makes Linux compete against *nix, and is also responsible for the rise of Microsoft against vastly superior technologies.

Failure of the Essay

[aaarrrgggh]

The failure with permanets is not "permanet" vs. "nearlynet", it is about creating a business strategy to bridge between the two.

Simple example: I can't get cell phone reception in the basement of the building I work in. The building has many wireless services, but the only one with antennas in the basement is the Facilities walkie-talkie system.

It will never be cost-effective for a wireless phone company to provide us with better cellular service in our little basement, but it is worthwhile for me to have phone access everywhere in the building. What are the alternatives?

Land-line phones at regular intervals throughout the building so it is easy to get to a phone.

A pager network to know when someone wants to reach you.

A private exchange telephone service (a la original PCS concept), with antennas distributed as required. ...but other people have different needs! Someone else needs their blackberry, and another person needs the iPaq and 802.11.

Ultimately, the only viable solution is software defined radio devices, which take advantage of whatever distribution mechanisms are available.

To put it in terms of the article, the best permanet is a loose network of nearlynets....