Slashdot Mirror


Is City-Wide Wi-Fi a Dead Idea?

An anonymous reader writes "Remember all those projects to cover cities with Wi-Fi? The BBC wants to know what happened to them. When it comes to underground wireless data access, there are obvious issues regarding implementing a wireless infrastructure in underground stations and tunnels, but above ground the BBC suggests that it may be other advancements, such as Wimax, that have made Wi-Fi a less attractive solution. PCMag, on the other hand, suggests that public Wi-Fi isn't dead at all and will make a comeback due to the increasing popularity of Wi-Fi-enabled smartphones. So, will city-wide Wi-Fi make a real comeback, or have other technologies, such as Wimax or 4G, killed the concept for good?"

2 of 259 comments (clear)

  1. 59 square miles by The-Pheon · · Score: 5, Informative

    Minneapolis has complete downtown coverage now.

    http://www.ci.minneapolis.mn.us/wirelessminneapolis/

    Actually using it right now to post, doesn't really seem like a dead idea from here!

  2. Wifi B/G can't cut it. by WiiVault · · Score: 5, Informative

    Living in a "wifi city" (Minneapolis) I would like to comment on our municipal wifi and its utter failure. The signal is simply terrible in 90% of residences despite the massive unsightly box on the telephone poll out the window. Frankly this is thanks to the terrible range of B/G wireless. To get a decent signal we will need better tech like WiMax or some form of 4g. As it stands it is nearly impossible to get signal to everybody who wants it.