An ambitious plan to blanket the city with wireless broadband Internet will be shelved because it is too costly and too few residents would use it, Chicago officials said Tuesday.
As Spring City Chronicle posts, on the heels of San Francisco’s scrapping of Wi-Fi plans and Houston about to also, Waukesha Wi-Fi will probably not happen either.
UPDATE: Sean Hackbarth has a post with the same conclusions, which tells us why
Muni WiFi is bound to fail when it’s being judged by unrealistic expectations — as so many muni networks are. Vendors and politicians have whipped up a frenzy around the networks, while a willing media lapped up the stories and fed them to an easily excitable public.
UPDATE II: Lo and behold what I find online (and, presumably, in Monday’s Journal Sentinel) but an article headlined Is Wi-Fi a losing strategy?
In many cities, Wi-Fi projects are dead or faltering, saddled with growing equipment expenses, reception problems and little interest by governments in pumping tax money into them.
Unreliable business plans of prospective Wi-Fi firms, mounting expenses and undependable technology have delayed some projects or led wireless providers to walk away from others.
Then locally,
In Waukesha, officials on Tuesday are expecting a report from Colorado Wi-Fi firm RITE Brain, which built and tested a trial transmission network on the city’s north side. An early run uncovered enough problems to raise concerns about the project’s viability there.
Money is a problem.
Even in communities where Wi-Fi has gained footholds – including Corpus Christi, Texas; Minneapolis; Philadelphia; and Portland, Ore. – Internet providers are talking about asking for more government money.
Especially in Milwaukee,
Midwest Fiber executives told Milwaukee aldermen July 18 that it was possible the company could walk away from the deal if it is not financially viable.
What is likely to happen is what Waukesha alderperson Joan Francoeur envisions happening.
Francoeur said the service likely would take hold if small groups of businesses come together to provide Wi-Fi in about a 10-square-block area.
September 4, 2007 at 9:06 am
Inneresting. I wonder why it worked in Madison. This weekend I saw an ad in The Isthmus newspaper for wifi broadband access for $25/month in the downtown area ($15 if you’re a student). See http://www.madcitybroadband.com
Like all these deals, the wifi network was set up at no cost to the city. Perhaps it was financially doable because they just offer the service in the downtown area?
September 4, 2007 at 7:22 pm
I think that may be part of it. I just saw another article on GCN.com about municipal Wi-Fi and they mentioned one reason it works in some cities is they limit the reach, as you mentioned Madison does, and they don’t overhype the benefits. Another is the city becoming the anchor tenant of the network, guaranteeing a minimum number of subscribers.
I’m not sure how much of this fits the Madison situation, but Minneapolis, Philadelphia and Providence, RI were mentioned as success stories.
I’m not a geek so I understand about a third of what they’re talking about.
It seems it is possible, if the cities don’t see it as the best thing since sliced bread.
September 4, 2007 at 8:35 pm
[...] Posts A Waukesha Carnival 9-2-2007Say “Chequamegon”Chicago scraps city Wi-Fi planBurkee and Walz sign the pactMore on Adams vs. JeffersonVicki McKenna’s Milwaukee radio showBook [...]