×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

WiFi Hotspots to Cost Wireless Carriers $12B

CmdrTaco posted more than 9 years ago | from the thats-a-lotta-bits dept.

Wireless Networking 222

j.e. writes "Commercial WiFi hotspots and open WiFi networks will take about $12 billion out of wireless carrier revenue pie, says Starategy Analytics. With high prices of mobile data services from wireless carriers, the users are more prone to use a cheap WiFi connection, if one is available."

cancel ×
This is a preview of your comment

No Comment Title Entered

Anonymous Coward 1 minute ago

No Comment Entered

222 comments

In other news (5, Funny)

Danimoth (852665) | more than 9 years ago | (#11497457)

things cost money...

Re:In other news (4, Insightful)

White Roses (211207) | more than 9 years ago | (#11497485)

In other other news, when given a choice between otherwise highly similar products, consumers will choose to pay less money . . .

Re:In other news (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#11497586)

Which is why 802.11a isn't popular, Gamecube is popular, and why Windows is popular . . .

Re:In other news (1, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#11497590)

In other other other news, when given a choice between buying and 'infringing' of the 'net, slashbots will choose 'infringing'.

Re:In other news (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#11497604)

One more reason it's nice and friendly to leave your wireless access point open!

Re:In other news (1)

cpeterso (19082) | more than 9 years ago | (#11497828)


but if you leave your wireless access point open, then (eventually) YOUR internet costs will be raised by your internet provider.

Re:In other news (3, Insightful)

hhawk (26580) | more than 9 years ago | (#11497909)

And free air, even the dirty air in our big cities takes probably 500 Billion if not more a year away from the Bottled Air business; there is one.. its just not large.

That they dont' tell you also, is that data used to be part of my Sprint Plan. Someone they removed it and now want to charge for data; I used 14.4 on Amtrack with my laptop to sync email in 2000; now they have fast speed and they want much more $$$.

Any serious business user is going to buy a business grade service. Meaning they are using it to make $$$ or the inverse, without it they loss sales, jobs, etc. Everything one else doesn't have a real need and yes, they are NOT going to pay huge sums for it.

fp (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#11497465)

fp from mt

Having used Cingular's EDGE plan. (4, Interesting)

Eunuch (844280) | more than 9 years ago | (#11497466)

I used the EDGE from Cingular wireless data plan. $80 (0x50 dollars) a month! It worked decent but the worst part was the latency. I was getting 1-2 second latencies. Do not try to game with it at all. Yet I'd still like a single everywhere-network rather than dealing with lots of accounts with various wi-fi hotspots. If they could just get the latency down and improve reception (if your cell is showing half power don't even bother with trying data).

Re:Having used Cingular's EDGE plan. (1)

Oculus Habent (562837) | more than 9 years ago | (#11497511)

latency isn't fixable with traditional cellular networks. Have you ever called another cellphone and listened to the same TV show or radio station? The network is much too slow for decent ping times.

Re:Having used Cingular's EDGE plan. (1)

asv108 (141455) | more than 9 years ago | (#11497564)

I was planning on using Cingular's EDGE network with the upcoming Treo 650 and bluetooth DUN, but of course, cingular decided to disable the bluetooth DUN profile on the Treo 650 [engadget.com] and rain on my parade..

Re:Having used Cingular's EDGE plan. (2, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#11497961)

Haven't tried edge myself but (working for an opco) we have been a bit embarrassed by the latency of GPRS....typically around 800ms, sometimes worse. Also true as you say that you want a good signal level. With the data cards we sell we include an external antennae as the results with the one built into the card are not wonderful

The good news is that we are seeing much reduced latency with 3G, down to about 200ms. OK, that is still not wonderful compared to a good broadband connection, but is a big improvement.

But as another response indicates, there are going to be limits to how low we (or rather our suppliers) can get the latency.

Statistics Bullshit (5, Insightful)

Oculus Habent (562837) | more than 9 years ago | (#11497477)

This sounds like crap statistics if I've ever heard them. Cost $12 billion is a little different than "Won't make $12 billion because the services are overpriced."

Re:Statistics Bullshit (1, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#11497541)

Next you'll be saying that a 48X CD-R drive is different from 48 separate CD-R drives!

Re:Statistics Bullshit (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#11497740)

Next you'll be saying that a 48X CD-R drive is different from 48 separate CD-R drives!

it IS different... with 48 seperate drives, you will get 48 disks written faster... (consider that 48x is a max speed, while 1x, being pathetic, is pretty damn constant.)

Re:Statistics Bullshit (3, Informative)

raitchison (734047) | more than 9 years ago | (#11497609)

Exactly what I was thinking. When I read the headline I was imaginging that cellular data use was way more popular than I imagined and that WiFi hotspots are eating into that side of the business.

Just because the wireless carriers projected ridiculous revenue from their own WiFi hotspots that they won't make doesn't mean the carriers are "losing" anything since they never had the money in the first place.

I have a suggestion for the wireless carriers to "regain" some of the money they never had to begin with. Charge competitive rates for your WiFi services and you will get more of that business.

What about me? (5, Funny)

tyler_larson (558763) | more than 9 years ago | (#11497644)

I've already lost trillions on my canned-air venture this year alone. I figured that, as vital as breathing air is, people would be willing to pay my reasonable rate of $200 per cubic foot.

Apparently there's a free alternative that people are taking advantage of, driving my company out of business. How can I undersell free? Better label those free-breathers out there as "air pirates" and start a "get the facts" campaign about the total-cost-of-breathing.

Re:What about me? (5, Funny)

MAdMaxOr (834679) | more than 9 years ago | (#11497792)

1/2 liter per breath
= 0.017657 cu. ft. / breath
= $3.5314 / breath
= $42.4 / person /minute
= $22,273,246 person / year
= $1.56 * 10^17 / planet / year

Looks like you lost about 156 quadrillion dollars!

WIMAX (1)

kherrick (843877) | more than 9 years ago | (#11497486)

I wonder if WIMAX if ever ubiquitous will increase this nice sounding trend? Hopefully open hot spots will only increase.

Re:WIMAX (3, Interesting)

merreborn (853723) | more than 9 years ago | (#11497634)

An open hotspot with WIMAX-class range would attract an awful lot of leachers in any tech-savvy neighborhood. Likeley far more than most residential broadband connections could handle.

I doubt we'll ever see many free, open WIMAX hotspots. Open WiFi hotspots only really work because the limited range effectively limits the number of people that can leach any such connection to a handful.

An analogy (4, Insightful)

DamienMcKenna (181101) | more than 9 years ago | (#11497500)

"With all these free radio stations people won't buy our records."

"With all these free movies on TV people won't go to the movies."

Having said that, cellphone service is nowhere near what it should be in terms of reliability and quality. How many of the main carriers allow you to do what you want with your phone (e.g. bluetooth restrictions in many phones) and your service (forward messages & voicemail via email, etc)?

Damien

Re:An analogy (2, Funny)

rjelks (635588) | more than 9 years ago | (#11497618)

I'm actually posting from my cellphone right now. You can't get much more reliab....[NO CARRIER]

Re:An analogy (1)

nacturation (646836) | more than 9 years ago | (#11497786)

I hijacked your wireless session when I saw you disconnect and finished your post for you. You're welcome.

Re:An analogy (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#11497793)

Those are awful analogys are you a fucking retard?

There are different movies in the the theater and on tv.

when you buy a record you get to chose when to listen to the songs you want to, with the radio you do not. And you only have to listen to what you want to listen to.

With wifi its the same thing everything, pay or not.

Re:An analogy (1)

valkraider (611225) | more than 9 years ago | (#11497846)

A Verizon manager last night told me that they (Verizon) don't cripple any functionality, that it was the Phone manufacturers who crippled it.

But I did learn that if you make a big enough stink in a crowded store in a mall, they actually start to work with you...

Re:An analogy (3, Informative)

linuxtelephony (141049) | more than 9 years ago | (#11497873)

And what is worse, the effective usability of cell phones is now WORSE than what they were just 4 to 6 years ago.

Yes, things were still mostly analog, with a few early adopters having digital, but for roaming your analog service was virtually seamless, especially along major interstates.

I recently drove west along I-10 with a digital phone, and spent literally hours where I could not get a call out. Yes it was in some of the "mountain" areas, but it was an area that used to have analog coverage that worked (because I drove it and know).

It really infuriates me what they've done. I spent several years building cellular (analog) networks, even in some mountain areas. I know the service is possible in these areas, but since the "new and improved" digital phones include the ability to restrict what services the phones may roam on (and in some cases, the newer phones won't even do analog), we've gone BACKWARDS. It's pathetic!

Just so you know.. (3, Insightful)

Prophetic_Truth (822032) | more than 9 years ago | (#11497501)

97.576% of all statistics are inaccurate.

Boo Hoo (4, Insightful)

jgerry (14280) | more than 9 years ago | (#11497505)

Get a better business model. Or better yet, just go away. Just because people want something, doesn't mean they have to pay YOU to get it. More and more, they may not have to pay at all (open WiFi access points, Linux, etc).

Re:Boo Hoo (1, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#11497651)

Ouch! You sure zinged the wireless industry! Snaps!

Making up numbers is fun! (3, Funny)

Superfreaker (581067) | more than 9 years ago | (#11497509)

$12 billion out of wireless carrier revenue pie, says Starategy Analytics


Reading /. has cost my company $101 gabozillion dollars in lost productivity!

Re:Making up numbers is fun! (1)

superpulpsicle (533373) | more than 9 years ago | (#11497613)

But you can wow your managers with the fact that you know wireless hotspots cost $12 billion. So now you look smarter and see an increase in your salary +$20.

Greed. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#11497514)

Same as the airline industry, greed kills these mega -comm's, they overprice things and are slow to adapt in hope of squeezing out more blood from each quarter you spend on their services, then lose customers as soon as something worthwhile and alternative to their scheme comes along. No shit, sherlock.

Doctor, it hurts when I do this... (1, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#11497517)

"With high prices of mobile data services from wireless carriers, the users are more prone to use a cheap WiFi connection, if one is available."

It was also discovered people are more likely to choose chocolate than liver. The remarkable people chose chocolate over liver.

Boo hoo! (1)

hypergreatthing (254983) | more than 9 years ago | (#11497524)

So what? I would love to see the fantasy math and faked statistics that they used to come to this number. Exactly how are you supposed to guess how many potential sales you would have lost in the future? Look at trends and then put a money count of the growth?

I'm sure the salesmen of horses lost many potential sales due to cars back in the day. Does it mean anything?

Re:Boo hoo! (2, Informative)

sr180 (700526) | more than 9 years ago | (#11497649)

No, you look at how much traffic is now going through the cheaper or free wireless network, and then work out how much it would cost if it was going through your expensive and overpriced wireless carrier. That is how much money you are losing.

Obviously completely incorrect because people will use it A LOT at the lower price, and almost NOT AT ALL at the higher price. Smells like RIAA and MPAA maths to me.

Don't think so (4, Interesting)

DustyShadow (691635) | more than 9 years ago | (#11497526)

I won't buy wireless service from a provider and this has nothing to do with wi-fi hotspots. I've never even used a wi-fi hotspot. The main reason that I won't buy wireless service from a provider is because of the insane price. I'm sure most people are in my boat.

WiFi Hotspots to Cost Wireless Carriers $12B (4, Funny)

stendec (582696) | more than 9 years ago | (#11497533)

WiFi Hotspots to Cost Wireless Carriers $12B

They shouldn't have bought all those hotspots if they're going to complain about the price! It's amazing how stupid some people can be.

This is step 1 (5, Insightful)

ENOENT (25325) | more than 9 years ago | (#11497542)

Step 2 is getting laws against free WiFi accessed passed in Congress.

Hey, it worked for the RIAA!!!

Moderate Insightful (5, Insightful)

Blackbrain (94923) | more than 9 years ago | (#11497689)

This should be +5 insightful, not funny. It is only a matter of time before some "media friendly" senator attaches a rider to an education package that bans open WiFi access. Or more likely, a Homeland Security bill because Terroists might use open WiFi links in an attack.

Re:Moderate Insightful (1, Funny)

Slashdot Insider (623670) | more than 9 years ago | (#11497810)

That's rather un-American of you to be criticizing your own government!

Re:Moderate Insightful (1)

Blackbrain (94923) | more than 9 years ago | (#11498003)

"I know not which mortifies me most, that I should fear to write what I think, or my country bear such a state of things."
--Thomas Jefferson 1798

Re:Moderate Insightful (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#11498029)

You /. butt tards are so dilusional that it would be funny if it wasn't so pathetic.

Re:This is step 1 (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#11497866)

Just wait for the RCIAA/MPAA to start suing libraries and other public facilities that provide "free" wi-fi access to "John/Jane Doe's"!

Looks like fun (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#11497548)

Where's my phone that does gsm & switches to voip when on a wlan :) It would be worth it for the international calls, if nothing else.

I thought the Airwaves were a Public Trust? (3, Insightful)

CygnusXII (324675) | more than 9 years ago | (#11497557)

I thought the FCC gaurded the airwaves and held them in trust, for the American people? Does Joe and Sally Citizen need for the FCC to auction off the Bandwidth to the highest bidder? I think not. The sad part is all the hobbiest that are gonna get screwed, when the bandwidth they propogate is wanted for some other new technology. All this is is a sign that Joe and Sally Citizen are willing to do some grass roots, initiative type activities and spread the Bandwidth around.Screw the MAN!! so to speak, and for once utilize what is rightfully theirs. I understand that not all WiFi spots are opened purposfully and meant for use, but you cannot say that all of them are not meant to be so, either. I check for available spots before I go on any trips, and I keep Netstumbler and a few other tools with me always.

Re:I thought the Airwaves were a Public Trust? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#11497731)

True, but keep in mind they still have to pay for the (wired) connection to the Internet.

wireless overpriced (5, Insightful)

dslbrian (318993) | more than 9 years ago | (#11497562)

Poster forgot some words, it should read:

With the artificially inflated exorbitantly high prices of mobile data services from wireless carriers, the users are more prone to use a cheap WiFi connection, if one is available.

No sympathy for wireless carriers here, now they get to suffer for their own bad pricing plans...

Re:wireless overpriced (1)

Jeff DeMaagd (2015) | more than 9 years ago | (#11497716)

I think it shows people are willing to pay a "fair" price for poor coverage area than a high price for far better coverage area. Do not forget the coverage area. "Wi-Fi" generally can't do a few thousand feet without a huge antenna on both ends, cell phones often get several miles from any one of the plethora of towers, and the phone end of the antenna is pretty small.

headline should read... (4, Insightful)

sootman (158191) | more than 9 years ago | (#11497565)

"Wireless carriers will not earn $12B because better options exist."

Note: you can't lose what you don't yet have.

Interesting fact: you are not entitled to a profit. If your business model sucks, or if your product is too costly, it will fail. See also: airphones. Remember them? All gone now, because using cell phones (which everyone already has) before and after the flight is good enough.

Re:headline should read... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#11497766)

..."Wireless carriers leave $12 billion on table"

lies, damn lies and statistics (0, Redundant)

hurfy (735314) | more than 9 years ago | (#11497593)

Oh wait, they didnt even bother with statistics.

Jeez, it is just a bunch of overinflated revenue estimates being revised. They arent gonna get the $12 per MB downloaded they 'projected' etc. Blame it on others maybe your stock won't get hurt as much....

Talk about a non-story, well i'm sure you will but...

Outside the US (4, Informative)

Datasage (214357) | more than 9 years ago | (#11497597)

There are some places in the world were gprs is a cheaper option to dialup. For my girlfriend in jakarta, the dialup option charges her for how much time she spends online. While she can get unlimted access via gprs for about $20-$30 per month from indosat. Other than some major latency and connection issues to a couple sites, she can get dialup speeds pretty easily.

Re:Outside the US (1)

antdude (79039) | more than 9 years ago | (#11498024)

GPRS? Is that satellite Internet like DirecPC? I never heard of this. I am also on dial-up (3 KB/sec) and not able to get DSL (too far or too expensive) and cable modem services. :(

panic (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#11497599)

jews are spreading financial panic again. again what are wireless providers in your city that you can use to access broadband, like > 12Kbytes a second?
Cellular data connections are expnensive, slow and unreliable.
jews always complain that they don't get enough money, look at insurance companies. Play a game spot - a - jew in your company to get fired.

Re:panic (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#11497623)

Well it's not too hard to spot an idiot on slashdot, that I can tell you! How are you even able to work a keyboard I wonder? (Though from your post, it's pretty obvious that operating a keyboard is about 10% above your level of mental ability)

Donations (1, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#11497660)

Quick, let's start donations rolling.
What's Verizon's PayPal account?

Why buy when you can WiFi? (3, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#11497673)

Having watched many MANY people gleefully tout their new "connected" "enabled" or otherwise crappified phone only to be disappointed by the utter lack of basic service requirements like convenience, reliability, ease-of-use, I can assure you the only thing that's costing them $12B is their lack of those three and a failure to understand what people really want. They want it all and they want it now and they want it free. WIth the proliferation of WiFi hotspots, they can get it... so... you can't sell snow to eskimos... whatever.

Besides it doesn't COST you $12B when you haven't spent $12B. duh!

I know. run-on. bad punctuation, but hey, you didn't pay to read this!

Probably Makes them $50Billion a year (1)

random coward (527722) | more than 9 years ago | (#11497687)

In people subscribing to these services knowing that they can use them at wifi hotspots also.

jerks (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#11497690)

Just like the RIAA says the music industry is losing billions of dollors to P2P networks and mp3 pirates all the while posting profit gains.

The cellular industry is the only sector of telecommuncations that can't run their mouths about hurting for cash.

Well look at that. (1)

laughingcoyote (762272) | more than 9 years ago | (#11497694)

Charge too much for something, and people will find another way to get it.

I wonder if there are any other businesses that could learn that lesson out there right now?

When in Roam (1)

Doc Ruby (173196) | more than 9 years ago | (#11497748)

This will all come together when we have UMA [umatechnology.org] phones. UMA lets a voice call roam between WiFi and 3G networks seamlessly, like moving between cells on the same network. It might even let a call roam between two overlapping 3G networks, like Cingular and T-Mobile, depending on which one has a cheaper or better signal at the moment. Then our smartphones can be really smart, choosing which network to access based on our own rules (maybe downloaded from a phone blog).

Step 2: legislate.... (1)

rbird76 (688731) | more than 9 years ago | (#11497903)

Why? Then cellular companies would have to compete on price, reliability, and service instead of locking their customers into cell plans and pillaging them. The whole point of cell phone plans is to lock your customers in and beat them silly. Anything that prevents cellular companies from doing that will either be neutered or prohibited; after all, isn't it Congress's job to fund unprofitable industries for their donors^H^H^H^H^H^Hcitizens?

Re:Step 2: legislate.... (1)

Doc Ruby (173196) | more than 9 years ago | (#11498030)

Because without UMA, cell carriers will get shut out of the equation entirely, as their customers stay confined to cheaper, higher bandwidth WiFi hotspots for most of our calls. With UMA, they can avoid being relegated back to the days of "for emergencies only", while WiFi VoIP capitalizes on all their $billions in investments in capital and marketing.

Maybe Not (1)

SteveM (11242) | more than 9 years ago | (#11497916)

This will all come together when we have UMA phones.

If only UMA can come together, see here [slashdot.org]

SteveM

Having RTFA I scrolled down to the real news (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#11497753)

I know, off topic.

17 automakers to support Bluetooth in 2005

who needs WiFi? Just blue-jack a car and hit the high-road.

plus, they claim they will have in-vehicle navigation for those who can't find their way from the glove box to the backseat. weeeee.....

Re:Having RTFA I scrolled down to the real news (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#11497929)

I am sure glad my new Lexus support Bluetooth. The car is as secure as ever.

Misleading title (5, Insightful)

argent (18001) | more than 9 years ago | (#11497755)

Should read, "WiFi to save wireless users $12B", or "WiFi to get up to $12B slice of wireless pie".

Not making as much revenue as predicted is not a "cost".

Oh, come off it. (1)

kapella (3578) | more than 9 years ago | (#11497764)

I'm selling ballpoint pens at $5 each. Each of you should buy them if you need something to write with.

What, it's too expensive? You can get pens cheaper somewhere else?

Damn it, you're costing me millions!

How much will the WiFi hotspots make? (1)

EvilStein (414640) | more than 9 years ago | (#11497772)

"Just find an open WAP" is most definately NOT always an option. That said, how much do the Hotspot providers make? I rarely see coffee shops with free wifi anymore. They've all settled on some for-profit wifi service, like jwire or the t-mobile hotspot setups.

Did I mention that I'm now in the Silicon Valley? Definately not BFE. I have an account with T-Mobile because I know that I'm very likely to find a hotspot when I need one. If there were more free hotspots, I might not really need such a service. Sadly, that's not really the case.

Re:How much will the WiFi hotspots make? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#11497849)

ok but i have a hard time believing this is the norm in medium- to large-sized cities. here in seattle, i can't go two meters without finding an open wifi connex. and sure, $tarbuck$ makes you pay for access, but there are more and more independent places putting a cheap linksys in their store/restaurant/etc. to get people to "come hither"...

i just can't see ever paying for wifi access under the current model, unless i want a private, 100% reliable & relatively secure connex in my own home. even then, i'd probably just get DSL and a wireless router!

ideally, people will find ways to make wifi a shared expense for urban dwellers, where we all chip in a buck or two and we all get cheap wifi.

vive la revolution

They have this backwards. (2, Insightful)

hal2814 (725639) | more than 9 years ago | (#11497780)

Lack of decent bandwidth and latency issues are costing wireless plans billions. WiFi's not the best thing on earth, but it sure beats the wireless broadband provided by Verizon. That money didn't belong to wireless providers to begin with. Another alternative could be that lack of hotspots costing WiFi programs billions since users are stuck with wireless in that case.

On other news (0)

Kurt Gray (935) | more than 9 years ago | (#11497825)

Several companies predict that bad business plans will cost them billions in 2005. Industry lobbyists would like Congress to pass a law restricting the use of bad business plans. It is estimated that bad business plans are already in progress in up to 80% of new tech companies and analysts say they that number to double to 160% by year 3010 which does not make sense mathematically but makes perfect sense to the former CFO of Enron.

so what (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#11497844)

if carriers start chasing/suing/bitching/(your rant here) free hot spots, this only will cause people to create their own wireless networks cutting out the middle man carrier, so what, is better to still make a profit or get no profit at all?.

In other news... (1)

jonniesmokes (323978) | more than 9 years ago | (#11497845)

Bottled water companies lost $112bn to public water works agencies of cities and towns last year! I knew tap water was a communist subversion.

WIFI from the bottom up? (2, Interesting)

Raindeer (104129) | more than 9 years ago | (#11497868)

Whenever I hear discussions on Wifi hotspots I get the idea that we're building wifi connections the wrong way round. We're building wifi on the open road, that sometimes reaches into our houses/businesses. We could do it from the bottom up, based on the wifi access points in peoples houses.

How hard would a standard be, which would make it possible to extend the official network of the ISP to a users access point, maybe with a VLAN solution. This way if I open up my laptop and there is an access point available of Joe User, I can only hook up to it by propperly logging in to the ISP's network or use the airport/credit card system. This will require many roaming agreements etc, but it would bring security and convenience at the same time. It should be done in such a way that the person opening up his network in this way can throttle the speed of the guest users and/or the times they can access. So I would like to see a rule like "Guests can only connect when I am not connecting" or "Guests only get 1mbit"

Community built VoIP WiFi phone (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#11497904)

Commercial wireless carriers are too expensive. Maybe it's time to build a wireless lan voice over IP phone which runs an open VoIP protocol and which uses open wireless hotspots which are connected p2p to each other (like a grid).

Aw jeez, it's the RIAA all over again (4, Insightful)

serutan (259622) | more than 9 years ago | (#11497905)

I'll believe wireless carriers lose $12 billion when I see their gross revenue actually drop by $12 billion. As our massive experience with file downloads and other things has shown, many if not most of the people who use a free service either wouldn't use it if it weren't free, or are already paying for the same service from someone else anyway.

I wish wireless carriers and others would grow up and quit whining when people figure out that their products and services can be had for free.

These are just market forces in action... (2, Insightful)

nickfrommaryland (793020) | more than 9 years ago | (#11497996)

Let's face it, WiFi technology is still in it's infancy. When new technologies come to market, two things happen:
  1. The suppliers of a technology will try to make as much money as possible from the technology.
  2. The consumer of the technology will try and get the technology for as little as possible.

Take the T-Mobile hotspot, for example. If you plan on using it a lot (and that's a lot of time spent at Starbucks), you can get away with spending a mere $29.99 a month. If you're not so sure, the price jumps to $39.00 a month, but you're free to quit. The price will jump even higher if you move to a per day or per hour plan.

Now take many local public venues (e.g. libraries, coffee houses, etc.) Many of these places will offer free access for their patrons. We have become quite spoiled by these free hotspots (I know I have, and I will prefer one of these places any time).

If there are more and more of these public access points offered, we will find more and more that, because of competition and free market forces, the price of WiFi access will plummit, possibly to near-zero. We (the consumer) just need to keep at it. If the technology is not profitable for businesses, wifi may become relegated to the realm of "promotional offer" or "advertising gimmick."

When will companies, governments, etc realize: (1)

tadd (51292) | more than 9 years ago | (#11498010)

That if you didn't EARN the money, you didn't LOSE the money. If I pirate XP, MS lost nothing, 'cuz I ain't gonna BUY it. If I use a wifi hot spot rather that whatever (enter wireless carrier crap du jour here) is ofering, they didn't LOSE money! They failed to make a sale. Why does the public allow concepts like: projections that fall short, missed sales, "losses" due to "piracy", "street value" of drugs and/or goods - legal or otherwise, to be counted on real numbers when they are largely based on fantasy and wishful thinking? Are people really that stupid? (Don't answer that, I already know the answer). But it just makes me want to scream. /end rant

Thanks for your attention.

The obvious answer... (1)

Trailer Trash (60756) | more than 9 years ago | (#11498043)

is to buy some legislation to outlaw these communistic "free" services so that the for-pay providers can make money, pay taxes, and help the economy (did I miss anything?). Let's get Dan Lyons to write a brilliant article about how the free hot-spots aren't as good as the for-pay ones...

Stay with dialup, it's better (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#11498051)

Having said that they want it all and that, cellphone and meant to be disappointed by the use of bad business model sucks, or if your service from indosat. Other tools with your product is too costly, it will cost them are not entitled to come together when we have an account with your phone and a failure to understand what you can't sell snow to eskimos. Charge too much do the highest bidder? I think not. Then our own rules. That money didn't belong to do some places in the same networks seamlessly, like Cingular and analysts say they want with your product is too costly, it will cost them billions in 2005. Industry lobbyists would like jwire or the FCC to auction of WiFi connection issues are more free hotspots. I've never even used a wi-fi hotspots costing wireless in up to 80% of new tech companies and spread the Bandwidth to the Hotspot setups.

Did I mention to dialup speeds pretty easily. Having said that number. Exactly how are you supposed to guess how much do the Hotspot when I need one. If there were gprs for about $20-$30 per month from the bottom up, based on some for-profit. If your product is too costly, it will all come together way to get it. This will find another tools with free wifi service requirements like moving between cells on the bottom up, based on the wifi connection, if one is available spots I get the idea that we're building wireless broadband providers make? I rarely see coffee shops with your product is too costly, it will cost them in trust, for the American people really smart, choosing which one has a cheaper or better yet, just go away. Just because I know that I won't buy wireless service, like Congress to pass a law restricting that's costing wireless in that sometimes reaches into our houses.

How hard would a standard be, which one has a cheaper option charges her for how much do the Hotspot. They've all settled on our own rules. That said, how much time she spends online. While she can get unlimted access based on our smart, choosing which does not the best thing to do some for-profit. If your service. Sadly, that bad business model sucks, or if your phone service, like convenience, reliability, ease-of-use, I can assure you to do what is rightfully theirs. I understand then put a money count with wi-fi hotspot. They've all settled on the future? Look at trends and spread the Bandwidth to the Hotspot setups.

"WiFi Hotspots to Save Wireless Users $12B" (2, Insightful)

ewg (158266) | more than 9 years ago | (#11498057)

It's all a matter of perspective.

The casino gaming industry talks about its "earnings", not "winnings", or heaven forbid, its customers' "losses".

Load More Comments
Slashdot Account

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?

Don't worry, we never post anything without your permission.

Submission Text Formatting Tips

We support a small subset of HTML, namely these tags:

  • b
  • i
  • p
  • br
  • a
  • ol
  • ul
  • li
  • dl
  • dt
  • dd
  • em
  • strong
  • tt
  • blockquote
  • div
  • quote
  • ecode

"ecode" can be used for code snippets, for example:

<ecode>    while(1) { do_something(); } </ecode>
Sign up for Slashdot Newsletters
Create a Slashdot Account

Loading...