Philadelphia Approves Contract For City-Wide Wireless Internet

• May 13, 2006

I see that Philadelphia has approved a contract with Earthlink to provide city-wide wireless internet.
Personally, I think this is a mistake. It would not be something I’d support in my area.
With this contract the City of Philadelphia is essentially giving Earthlink a monopoly on internet service in the city. It will be tough for other internet service providers to compete. After all, what citizen (outside of certain power users who may want to pay for a higher performance connection to the internet) will want to pay for internet if they can get it for “free” (though it is costing them tax dollars)? To me anything that reduces the amount of competition in the marketplace also reduces the overall quality of the product being provided to the public.
My hometown, like a lot of cities, has a contract similar to this one with a cable television provider (Midcontinent). The service we get from that provider is awful (I don’t personally have cable but I’ve observed problems my friends and family have had). Their billing is often wrong, and their customer service is less than adequate. Scheduling a technician to come to your home for installation or maintenance is almost like trying to get an audience with the President. The last time my parents requested a technician they were told that someone would be at their home “between 10:00am and 6:00pm.”
Why is this service so bad? I think it is because our cable company has no one to compete with. They can get away with less-than-exemplary service because…who are you going to switch to? Things have gotten better since satellite television has become more prominent and accessible, but it is still pretty bad, and I can’t imagine the situation with wireless internet is going to be all that different.
Plus, why should the people of Philadelphia who don’t have any interest in wireless internet subsidize those who do use it? Doesn’t seem very fair to me.
Any time the government gets involved with this stuff they just make things worse. They’d be better off just letting citizens purchase their own internet. They’d get better service and, ultimately, it would probably cost everyone less money.

Tags: Cultural Marxism, Doug Goehring

http://Array Todd

The government has no business supplying internet to the entire city.  This opens up Pandora’s Box.  If they pay for it, even though it is taxpayer money, they will believe they can regulate it, and that is something that everyone should fear.  Nothing good can come of this.
http://SayAnythingBlog.com The_Whistler_ofnd

I would think that high-use internet users will still prefer other services.

Businesses aren’t going to rely on the public network, obviously.

The phone companies are still going to be able to provide DSL to residents and the cable companies will have their infrastructure in place to provide their form of service for those dissatisfied.

Other city wide wireless systems were limited to 256K.  

I think it will dry up dialup networking but dialup sucks sobeit.

 If I were there I think I’d continue my personal DSL service.  However I think I’d like it that anywhere I went in the city I’d have coverage.
http://www.tomshakely.com/ Tom Shakely

Hey Rob,

I should’ve been clearer, I’m sorry. The way I understand it, Earthlink is creating the citywide structure itself, so it’s not costing the taxpayers much if anything. Additionally, access to wireless internet in Philadelphia will only be free in some locations, not to the entire city as a kind of subsidized utility, though I tend to view it as a kind of "utility" since it’s government sponsored.

 For the majority of users, Earthlink will be providing low-cost broadband wifi. The thinking is that low-income households who wouldn’t have been able to afford a $50 monthly bill from Comcast now at least have the option for $10-20 monthly wi-fi service from Earthlink.

Comcast, the nation’s largest internet provider, is actually headquartered in Philadelphia. They’re building what will be the city’s tallest skyscraper, too, the Comcast Center, of which they’ll occupy a little more than 50 percent.

I should’ve put all this in the original post. 
http://SayAnythingBlog.com The_Whistler_ofnd

The problem with the cable company is that local governments (used to ) give cable companies monopolies in "their" cities. 

Now with satellite there is a choice. 
http://www.freerepublicans.com/ FreeRepublicans.com

Rob,

Your looking at this all wrong.

If everyone in a city were to have access to WiFi infrastructure, then we are that much closer to being able to scrap the current education system and have direct-to-home schooling.

Plus, look at all the added potential readers you will have!

SayAnythingBlog.com

Philadelphia Approves Contract For City-Wide Wireless Internet

Create a SAB Readerblog

Recent Comments