United Airlines announces in-flight WiFi plans
posted Jun 6th 2005 10:49AM
It really isn't the flying itself we're afraid of—it's the prospect of being without our nurturing tether to the
internet that makes us all nervous and agitated. Which is why we're filled with heady anticipation at the news that
United Airlines is planning to become the first domestic carrier to offer WiFi access on all of its flights (assuming
that they don't go out of business first, that is). It'll still be a while before you'll actually be able to get online
(they're aiming to have this rolled out by the end of next year), but they've gotten the proper FAA approval to start
installing and testing the equipment, and now all they need is for the FCC to auction off the necessary bandwidth. They
haven't announced what they're planning to charge for in-flight access, but other airlines that offer in-flight WiFi,
like Lufthansa, SAS, Singapore Airlines, and Japan Airlines, usually charge about thirty bucks a flight to get your
WiFi on.
[Via WiFiNetworking News]
How long before somebody pays their $30 and offers it to everyone else on the plane for $5 a head via PayPal?
ah...inspired move there grasshopper!
ha ha ha! now I can make voip calls to the guy sitting behind me!! I just love abusing technology!!!
Interesting. I flew on United a couple weeks ago and therw was no way in hell that I could hope to use my laptop on the flight. Maybe they'll include a little extra elbow room in the $30?
Remember the story concerning "cellphone use in flight as a terrorist threat" a couple of weeks ago?
http://www.engadget.com/entry/1234000590044880/
Americans are very smart aren't they?
#3, I was just thinking something similar. It seems like the engadget crew is excited about this, but seem to be trembling in fear about the allowance of cell phones in flight. What do you think Petey R., is WiFi looking that great if someone can jabber around you on VoIP?
It's definitely something we've touched on before:
http://www.engadget.com/entry/1234000823038322/
and
http://www.engadget.com/entry/1234000887024029/
I've heard conflicting reports. Some people say that doing Skype at 30,000 feet works just fine, others say that the latency issues make it too difficult to carry on a conversation. So there's definitely a trade off!
hmmm... google maps with satelitte images, and wireless access to them (although you could just save them to your computer) you could look at your surroundings, hijack the plane and steer your way to the pentagon. not to mention msn to coordinate with other planes to crash simultaniously. I dont want to even think about people bringing their laptop into the lavatories for "work purposes"
"How long before somebody pays their $30 and offers it to everyone else on the plane for $5 a head via PayPal?"
And your sales would be tax free on flights over international waters. :P
Ammusing, but they'll probably find a way to filter those sort of shenanigans...
Personally I hope this takes off. Sniffing other peoples traffic and reading their e-mail and exploring their systems for 10 - 15 hrs sounds much more entaining than watching 'Paycheck' 6 times...
>I dont want to even think about people bringing >their laptop into the lavatories for "work >purposes"
I'm sure people allready do that with PDA's and pre downloaded *content*.
I don't think there's any way they could block against ad-hoc networks. Of course, they could possibly run all connections through a proxy that only allow someone with the username and password to enter.
I can see it now, me, sitting in the window seat in the very back row, watching the flight attendant walking around with a directional antenna and a laptop, trying to find my network named "FreeAccessUsername-freePassword-payingforstuffsucks