Neff Faces The Council
Posted by Sam Churchill on September 15th, 2005Philadelphia CTO Dianah Neff faced public City Council questions yesterday over the nuts and bolts of their innovative Wireless Philadelphia plan and answered critics who say the wireless-Internet plan is unnecessary, reports Philly.com
The city’s chief information officer, Dianah Neff, told the City Council that the effort was crucial to bridging the city’s digital divide - and assured skeptics that it would not leave taxpayers with the bill. Neff estimated that the effort would cost $15 million to $20 million. “This program is vital,” Neff said, noting that the effort had earned worldwide notice since Street unveiled it in August 2004. “It is a very powerful initiative that will impact businesses big and small in the city of Philadelphia.”
Michael Balhoff, a Maryland-based financial analyst who specializes in telecommunications, questioned whether the numbers added up.
Tom Christie, chief operating officer of the Bella Vista-based Closed Networks, said his firm already provided wireless Internet service to 50 square miles of Philadelphia for $20 a month, the rate Wireless Philadelphia hopes to charge.
“Why, we ask, should Philadelphia build a wireless network when one already exists?” he said.
Neff aimed at critics who she said had suggested that the initiative would be a waste of money in a market where some deals for DSL Internet access cost less than $15 a month.
“Look under the covers to find out what these deals are about,” she said, noting that many were introductory offers, introduced since the wireless scheme was rolled out, that require lengthy commitments or the purchase of other services.
Neff faces powerful skeptics. Several Council members said they had received critical briefings on the effort from officials at Comcast, which could face competition from the plan.
Teams led by Hewlett-Packard and EarthLink are the finalists for the contract to build the network. A decision is due soon.
Wireless Philadelphia expects to attract 78,000 residential customers in its first year of operation. Its business plan says it will break even on an initial $10 million investment, salt away $4 million for network upgrades and spin off $5 million in cash to support digital divide programs by its fifth year of operations - all of it at no cost to city taxpayers.
Philadelphia became the nation’s first big city to buy the muni wireless dream back in August 2004, explains the Mercury News. It will cover all of the city’s 135 square miles with WiFi and sell service to its 1.5 million residents at bargain prices. AirBand currently supplies broadband data and Voice-over-IP to companies in the greater Philadelphia area using Alvarion BreezeMAX gear.
San Francisco Mayor Gavin Newsom, last month, asked bidders to line up to suggest how to build a muni wireless network. San Jose’s information technology department is expected to make recommendations to the city council in November.
WiMax: Go For It!Think for yourself. Consider WiMax. If the IEEE ratifies 802.16e this September, then some “pre-certified” Mobile WiMax gear will likely be available early next year. Don’t you think? What’s wrong with specifying an ALL WiMax city-cloud, right now. Start building summer, 2006. Sure, some of the software won’t be there, but specify hardware that can be upgraded to 802.16-2005. Test 2-3 areas for a year, then build it out in 2007-2008. Let coffee shops (or homes) put up their own hotspots. Inexpensive WiFi hotspots with built-in (or plugged in) WiMax backhaul are coming. D-Link has a hotspot with cell backbone while Flarion & Netgear have a mobile hotspot. Today. With cheap $20/mo Mobile WiMax riding on the “city cloud”, mounting a hotspot anywhere should be a snap. The infrastructure would be faster, cheaper and less risky. WiMax was designed for low-cost, city-wide access. Use it. Hundreds (or thousands) of WiFi nodes would be costly to build and maintain. It just seems too expensive. City clouds costing $75,000 a square mile? Oh, please. It should be $10,000-$25,000. If it costs too much now, just wait a year. Sprint/Nextel is. WiFi “clouds” must be price competive. By December, 2005, the three cellular providers will offer 300-700 Kbps (nation-wide) for $60 per month. Mobile WiMax may be available from Clearwire in 2006, Sprint may offer Mobile WiMax in 2007, and Paul Allen could provide long range WiMax using his 700 Mhz frequecies in 2008. Will “anchor tenants” bail? EV-DO/3G will be unbiquitous nationally this year. Licensed Mobile WiMax at 2.5 GHz and 700 Mhz WILL be compelling at $30-$40/month. Plan on it. An “open access” 5.8 GHz WiMax “cloud” might be a better alternative. It enables competition. Everyone benefits.
Sequans and Fujitsu can power Micro Max basestations while Intel chips are available for clients. Airspan has a line as does Alvarion. Motorola’s Wi4 line includes a light infrastructure solution as well as a carrier class platform. Doubling the range cuts costs 75%. Mobile WiMax doubles range (upstream) by transmiting all the power in a fraction of the channel bandwidth. Downstream range is doubled by allocating more power to the carriers assigned to distant users. The WiMax Forum says that Non-LOS service at 3.5Ghz, using these new Mobile Wimax techniques, will improve range from 1-2 km to 4-9 km (pdf) - a huge improvement. Subchannelization and Scalable OFDMA is the key to long range and low cost. You won’t get it with WiFi. It might not be mobile, but 5.8 GHz WiMax would be cheaper and faster than WiFi. Licensed 4.9 GHz public service could ride shotgun on the fiber/mesh backbone. So could highway-oriented DRCS at 5.9 GHz. Will (proprietary) mesh vendors be able to swap out their gear? It might be tricky. WiMax. It’s a competitive strategy. If an ISP can offer a $200, self-install box, delivering both broadband and voice at $40-$50 a month, then it’s a real business. Real competition. If the operating company could sell 512kbps for $10-$15/month (wholesale), and each “node” averaged 100 subs, that’s more than $1K/mo revenue on each $5K node for the infrastructure operator. It’s a good thing for consumers as well as Qwest and Comcast. And the public service users are “free”. WiMax is no slam dunk. It is largely unproven and untested. But engineers have done a commendable job, wringing out every last ounce of performance from this platform. Let’s see what she’ll do. - Sam |
Related DailyWireless stories include; Free Cloud Pays NYC, Airband in Philly, Portland Cloud Workshop, Philly Picks TWO Winners, City Clouds Save Money, One Percent for Art, Corpus Christi Cloud, San Francisco’s Location-Based Ads, Toyko WiMax Cloud Expands, Intel: Cloud Apps R Us, Oregon’s 700 mile Cloud in NY Times, NYC Public WiFi, NYC Cloud Gets Advocate(s), High Noon for City Clouds, Philadelphia Seeks Cloud Providers, Philadelphia’s City Cloud, Philly Fallout, Philly Negotiates a Cloud, Verizon Blocking Philly Cloud?, Clouds for Phat Tuesday, Oregon Fiber for Google, Portland Wireless Cloud Announced, The Battle of Lafayette, NYC’s Next Big Thing, Metcalf’s Law, U.S. Broadband Laggard?, Broadband: A National Scandal, Political Clouds & the Write Spot, Highway Patrol, Regional Roaming Roundup, D.C. Hotspots, Treasure of Rio Rancho, Sprint + Nextel = Cable?, Alvarion Promotes Mobile WiMax, Will 802.20 Challenge WiMax?, WiFi Vrs WiMax, Unlicensed Spectrum: The Sum of All Fears, CapWIN Becomes Self-Aware, City Clouds Sell Out?, Anti-Municipal Broadband Kit, Broadband Manifesto, and DailyWireless City Cloud Report.





























