Analysis by US firm ABI Research shows that the provision of Wi-Fi devices will grow from 40 million last year, to 249 million in 2011. As a result, many major centers are now building citywide networks to satisfy growing Wi-Fi demands. Some are being built by governments or in partnership with the private sector, while others are being developed solely by commercial organizations.
When private sector companies build Wi-Fi networks they do so in anticipation of revenues generated by users who pay a fee for using the infrastructure. A survey by US firm JupiterKagen shows that Wi-Fi usage grew 43% during 2004-05, but 58% of respondents said they would only use no-cost Wi-Fi networks. In other words, less than 50% of users were prepared to pay for Internet access in public areas.
If governments assume sole responsibility for building Wi-Fi networks, they are likely to make slow progress compared with private sector concerns or joint ventures. In Taiwan, for example, the Taipei Government and Q-ware Systems Inc began a public Wi-Fi network project in September 2004 and have chalked up major achievements after just two years. Thanks to Q-ware's efforts, the number of Wi-Fi access points in Taipei soared to 4,200. Covering some 133 square miles and accounting for about 90% of all Wi-Fi coverage in the metropolis, the new network has made Taipei the world's largest Wi-Fi city. Industry watchers say it is extremely unlikely that US cities such as Philadelphia and San Francisco will be able to match Taipei's Wi-Fi coverage, even within the next two years.
Networks built solely by governments almost always end up being paid for by end-users and taxpayers. In addition, many feel that network performance is rarely as good as that offered by private sector projects. Accepting the fact that most users are unwilling to pay for Internet access, San Francisco has commissioned Google and Earthlink to establish a Wi-Fi network, with a choice of two user plans. Google provides a free service with comparatively slow connection speeds, while Earthlink offers a much faster service for users who pay a subscription.
|
|
