(keitai-l) Re: Forrester: WI-FI is going to crash

Benedict,

Thanks for adding your perspective.

1)Wi-Fi is the term I used versus WLAN as Wi-Fi systems have greater
coverage capability than WLAN implies.  Again, let me refer you to Vivato's
website where the technology is explained which allows them to achieve
coverage of 9km.  They have developed a switch using their own technology
called "Packetsteering".  http://www.vivato.net .  Of course, they aren't
the only ones expanding the range of Wi-Fi.  I'm sure Goggle can provide
more examples for those interested.

2)You make an important distinction.  3G does increase capacity for voice
and that's a very good thing for the operators.  Wi-Fi is a much better
solution for data.  It has the same characteristics at ethernet minus the
cables, of course.  The increased bandwidth afforded along with addressing
backhaul issues via the use of mesh and or manets (mobile ad hoc networks)
the Wi-Fi story gets increasingly powerful.

3)I didn't provide any numbers at all for Wi-Fi coverage of UK.  I stated
that I hadn't yet performed that analysis.  If you're interested, I'll be
happy to include you in the distribution email when the research is
completed.

...Debi

----- Original Message -----
From: "Benedict Evans" <ben@ben-evans.com>
To: <keitai-l@appelsiini.net>
Sent: Tuesday, June 24, 2003 12:10 AM
Subject: (keitai-l) Re: Forrester: WI-FI is going to crash


>
> As a matter of fact, in the UK the gung-ho operators are planning to
> spend maybe GPB5bn each on building a complete national network; the
> others maybe 3-4. That works out at about GBP 85 per head in the UK.
> Arguable a more meaningful number would be cost/current mobile
> subscribers of the operator doing the deployment - 5000/12= 415. Add
> licence costs of say 6bn...
>
> But now, divide 415/12 months/10 years, and you get to around GBP3 per
> month, or double that if you include licence costs...
>
> You figure on WLAN costs seems frankly bizarre to me. A single 3G
> basestation now costs less that $50k, yet has a range measured in tens
> of miles in all directions (no pringle cans) and can cary 256 separate
> calls simultaneously. How many WLAN access points are needed for that
> coverage? 50? 100? 500? What does it cost to send a man with a van to
> all those locations? What is the backhaul - what are those access points
> connected to?! Wide area, large scale public WLAN is like trying to
> transport an infantry division in a whole lot of rowing boats. Sure, the
> rowing boat is a lot cheaper for one person - but not for 10,000.
>
> Out of curiosity, why are there no construction costs in building WLAN?
> Do you really believe that every 500 yards along the m25 some obliging
> person will put up an access point, out of the kindness of their heart?
> Hampstead heath? Brixton? Tower Hamlets? Cherry Hinton? Stow on the
> Wold?
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: keitai-l-bounce@appelsiini.net
> [mailto:keitai-l-bounce@appelsiini.net] On Behalf Of Debi Jones
> Sent: 24 June 2003 06:13
> To: keitai-l@appelsiini.net
> Subject: (keitai-l) Re: Forrester: WI-FI is going to crash
>
>
> About a year ago, I did some research into the cost of covering the UK
> with 3G including cost of licenses, tower construction and
> infrastructure.  I did not include the direct costs to users such as
> devices and applications.  To deploy 3G in the UK it would cost $687 per
> population head.  Of course many of the population wouldn't be consumers
> of the technology for some time as they are still in diapers.  :-)
> While I haven't yet completed the same analysis for Wi-Fi, my instincts
> tell me there is a huge difference.  No licenses, real estate leases, or
> tower construction would be required for covering the country with
> Wi-Fi.
>
>
>
> This mail was sent to address djones@wireless-one.org
> Need archives? How to unsubscribe? http://www.appelsiini.net/keitai-l/
>