Forget 4G 2013 could be wifi's year

funnyname

Interesting article

With the continued proliferation of wifi do the vast majority of the general public really need 4G?

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/technology/broadband/9769785/Forget-4G-2013-could-be-Wifis-year.html

oscarBravo

funnyname wrote: »

Interesting article

With the continued proliferation of wifi do the vast majority of the general public really need 4G?

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/technology/broadband/9769785/Forget-4G-2013-could-be-Wifis-year.html

I've been in the US for the past 3 weeks. To save on roaming charges, I haven't turned on data roaming on my phone. Everywhere I go, I look for wifi, and it either isn't available, or it's as slow as hell. It's fairly unusual to get a usable wifi signal, and when I do, I'm conscious of the fact that it's unencrypted. And that's leaving aside the fact that sometimes I've needed to get online while driving (as a passenger!) down an interstate highway, where hotspots are not exactly a useful option.

The idea that we don't need to pay for a service because sure, won't someone somewhere give it to us for free, is a strange one, and very urban-centric.

bealtine

oscarBravo wrote: »

I've been in the US for the past 3 weeks. To save on roaming charges, I haven't turned on data roaming on my phone. Everywhere I go, I look for wifi, and it either isn't available, or it's as slow as hell. It's fairly unusual to get a usable wifi signal, and when I do, I'm conscious of the fact that it's unencrypted. And that's leaving aside the fact that sometimes I've needed to get online while driving (as a passenger!) down an interstate highway, where hotspots are not exactly a useful option.

The idea that we don't need to pay for a service because sure, won't someone somewhere give it to us for free, is a strange one, and very urban-centric.

surely the lesson you've learnt from the rollout of DSl,Cable,4G and Comreg's focus is that if you don't live in a city then move...we don't need no steenking country people on this island or even the other island

Arciphel

I don't think it's realistic that every house in the middle of nowhere should have a fibre connection to the Internet and a mobile phone mast next to it. Do you?

swedex

Arciphel wrote: »

I don't think it's realistic that every house in the middle of nowhere should have a fibre connection to the Internet and a mobile phone mast next to it. Do you?

Do you also think that every house in the "middle of nowhere" should not have electricity too?

bealtine

Arciphel wrote: »

I don't think it's realistic that every house in the middle of nowhere should have a fibre connection to the Internet and a mobile phone mast next to it. Do you?

I don't see what that has to do with wifi but ok...

I assume this is a cost argument?

As should be clear from reading this forum that a large scale fibre rollout is not a choice or wishful thinking, countries such as Finland, Israel and others have done it or are in the process of doing it. They have seen the future and that is fibre, perhaps not up every boreen but still a wide-scale rollout.

Further more we were promised exactly that by the FG/Labour government before they got into power.

The cost argument can be paraphrased as "sure don't they have paraffin lamps why would they ever need that electricity stuff for?" Our grandfathers generation saw the need for electricity to every home and just did it for the benefit of all

Arciphel

The difference with electricity is that the need to provide the transmission network infrastructure means you already have electricity supply in low population areas as it is carrying the power to and between higher density areas. Not the same model for 4G masts or fibre Internet.

Arciphel

So you believed the governments pre election promise that every house would get fibre broadband? The difference is that fibre rollout in this country unfortunately is covered by private companies who only are interested in the return on their investment. There is no Broadband Supply Board of Ireland (mores the pity) and very little joined-up thinking when it comes to this kind of infrastructure project. Go back 100 years, the government of the day took a massive risk in going ahead withal dive public works like Ardnacrusha, would never happen now.

bealtine

Arciphel wrote: »

The difference with electricity is that the need to provide the transmission network infrastructure means you already have electricity supply in low population areas as it is carrying the power to and between higher density areas. Not the same model for 4G masts or fibre Internet.

How is it different? If you have a decent fibre network to within 20 kms of every home it's fairly easy to splice into "access points" and supply the whole country almost exactly like electricity

bealtine

Arciphel wrote: »

So you believed the governments pre election promise that every house would get fibre broadband? The difference is that fibre rollout in this country unfortunately is covered by private companies who only are interested in the return on their investment. There is no Broadband Supply Board of Ireland (mores the pity) and very little joined-up thinking when it comes to this kind of infrastructure project. Go back 100 years, the government of the day took a massive risk in going ahead withal dive public works like Ardnacrusha, would never happen now.

Exactly very true...

We follow the UK model without thinking or analysing the model in any way.

Take the railways for instance, in the English model private funds were pumped into building railways to all sorts of places and when the investors got bored the railways were ripped up and junked.

Now in Belgium the state built the railways between cities and major towns as a centrally planned enterprise...

Now I ask which model has worked better? The English "boom and bust" model or the Belgian model, which country still has a functioning railway system?

So during the "electricity building" model of our grandfathers it was done for the benefit of all and the greater economic benefit of the country, we should take a leaf from the book and invest in our country...

Cheerful Spring

Vodaphone, said Kilkenny will have 4g in March or April ( first place to have it from them)

So their doing the exact same thing the cable broadband providers have done in the past. Which is to provide their service to large towns and cities location first ( and there only?)


Look the only hope for better broadband for rural customers is for the government to get actively involved, and honestly who sees that happening.?They've got their big payday from the spectrum auctions, the next time we'll hear from pat rabbitte will be when hes attending a dinner provided by the telco companies.

If he was serious about rural broadband been improved for rural Ireland. I would have expected some announcement by now from our friend Pat.

PogMoThoin

oscarBravo wrote: »

I've been in the US for the past 3 weeks. To save on roaming charges, I haven't turned on data roaming on my phone. Everywhere I go, I look for wifi, and it either isn't available, or it's as slow as hell. It's fairly unusual to get a usable wifi signal, and when I do, I'm conscious of the fact that it's unencrypted. And that's leaving aside the fact that sometimes I've needed to get online while driving (as a passenger!) down an interstate highway, where hotspots are not exactly a useful option.

The idea that we don't need to pay for a service because sure, won't someone somewhere give it to us for free, is a strange one, and very urban-centric.

Depends on where you are in the USA, I had 6 days between Philly and NY late last year and found the WiFi out and about in Cafe's and the likes to be very efficient for browsing, Twitter, FB etc. I used it to upload my pics to Google+ to share with the family. Even the WiFi on the bus between Philly and NY was fine, very usable. Everywhere had WiFi, even the little side street bagel bars.

oscarBravo

PogMoThoin wrote: »

Depends on where you are in the USA...

Well, yeah, that's partly my point. In downtown Denver, there's usually wifi somewhere nearby that you can use (although I often found myself piggybacking on a conference room SSID of the hotel next door). When I was in Cheyenne yesterday, not so much.

And that's still ignoring the fact that you're connecting to an unencrypted access point controlled by someone whose motivations are completely opaque to you.

watty

A VPN to a home server is now the only way I'd like to use a "free" WiFi. Man in the Middle attacks can even be installed on badly setup WiFi access by a 3rd party. If the WiFi point owner is trustworthy then it can be deliberately snooping.

cgarvey

funnyname wrote: »

With the continued proliferation of wifi do the vast majority of the general public really need 4G?

Yes. For net on the go. WiFi doesn't work for someone walking down the street, and having to register / get a code from the owner rules it out as a mainstream access network. Nevermind the security concerns raised by oscarBravo.

Arciphel wrote: »

I don't think it's realistic that every house in the middle of nowhere should have a fibre connection to the Internet and a mobile phone mast next to it. Do you?

No need for phone masts beside every house. I assume that's just exaggeration for dramatic effect!

It is realistic to have fibre to damn near every house (and businesss, and farm!) in Ireland. IrelandOffline published very rough estimates before, and other countries (even of similar geographic characteristics) are doing it.

It would require state funding, joint private funding, and a new joined up way of thinking (probably state-led). Money is not the object, nor is geography or demographics; politics is. Unfortunately your line of thinking (you're by no means alone) is the reason we are in a mess now, with at least a decade to go before we catch up (if we start now). "There's no demand"; they said the same about electricity, group water schemes, central sewerage schemes.

watty

440,000 Septic tanks. Who would believe it in the 21st Century?

bealtine

cgarvey wrote: »

"There's no demand"; they said the same about electricity, group water schemes, central sewerage schemes.

Mustn't forget broadband in that list..I remember the excuse eircom used to give for not rolling out DSL was "there's no demand", what they "forgot" to mention was that there was no broadband at that time. This is a mere 10 years ago too.

funnyname

Well the railways is a bad example as Ireland was part of the UK when the railways were built here, maybe the motorways might be a better example.

But from reading some of the articles on here they are doing a bit better with broadband rollout than ourselves and a lot of it seems to be community based however we (myself included) seem to be too apathetic to get off our holes and do this here.

http://recombu.com/digital/news/?

bealtine wrote: »

Exactly very true...

We follow the UK model without thinking or analysing the model in any way.

Take the railways for instance, in the English model private funds were pumped into building railways to all sorts of places and when the investors got bored the railways were ripped up and junked.

Now in Belgium the state built the railways between cities and major towns as a centrally planned enterprise...

Now I ask which model has worked better? The English "boom and bust" model or the Belgian model, which country still has a functioning railway system?

So during the "electricity building" model of our grandfathers it was done for the benefit of all and the greater economic benefit of the country, we should take a leaf from the book and invest in our country...