Akron, Ohio to provide free citywide WiFi, inevitably fail within a few years

Municipal WiFi systems in the US have been pretty much failures across the board, but the good people of Akron, Ohio are apparently in for another go-round -- the city's just committed some $800,000 to build out a free wireless network over the next five years. The service will be installed and operated by a nonprofit called OneCommunity, which just received a $4.5M grant as part of a $25M commitment from the John S. and John L. Knight Foundation to implement digital access projects in 26 cities. The University of Akron has kicked in another $350,000, since the signal will cover its campus as well as the downtown area -- all in, some 90,000 residents and 31,000 workers will get access through the project. The network will start lighting up in the next year -- let's hope it fares better than other city WiFi projects.

[Thanks, Glenn]

[vdogg89 @ Jul 1st 2008 4:10PM]

how much does it cost for users?

[Prasand J. @ Jul 1st 2008 4:14PM]

"to build out a free wireless network over the next five years"

[rcappo @ Jul 1st 2008 4:16PM]

Akron, Ohio to provide free citywide WiFi...I bet it will be free, like it should be. And if this non-profit manages it right and it doesn't get taken down by Cable/Phone ISPs that are going to lose $500/year per customer in inet fees, it will work.

[vdogg89 @ Jul 1st 2008 4:41PM]

i thought the other city wide wifi's were supposed to be free as well, but ended up costing users. Nothing is free in life or else it fails.

[Steve @ Jul 1st 2008 4:59PM]

Actually, not a dumb question. I tried the Philadelphia program... the "free wireless" cost $10/month, plus rental of the signal booster.

From a logistical standpoint (not sure of the behind the scenes finance issues) the whole thing fell apart because they never were able to get a consistent signal through walls -- which kinda undermined the whole mission statement. The new vision (there's still a vision, apparently), is to provide actual free outside service to the whole city.

[Prasand J. @ Jul 1st 2008 5:17PM]

Until the network is up and running, and / or the operating costs are factored in ... considering the grants, commitments, and all ... it is then that "if" there will be a price it will be known.

Until then, the goal is free. With the other projects I imagine that too was their goal, until reality hit them in the back of the head with a louisville slugger.

So regardless of how you chalk it, the question's still stupid. Engadget's not clairvoyant.


--

"Albanese said Akron will be a model of how a city can offer universal free access to the World Wide Web for its residents as well as provide the latest digital infrastructure for business and residents."

[I LOVE THE CAPS LOCK KEY @ Jul 1st 2008 10:53PM]

@Rcappo

Free does not mean better. Like socialist healthcare, that is of poor quality; socialist internet access is likely to be very slow, insecure, and limiting. Private companies will do fine, given that they provide a service that is far superior to the free one.

Like all socialist ideas that have been tried since the late 1700's-early 1800's this one too will fail in due time. History repeats it's self and socialists (NAZI's) never learn from it.

[rcappo @ Jul 2nd 2008 2:11PM]

The free alternatives would be better than expensive ones if they provide
the same service and are funded by local businesses and power users. The problem is once something is free, it is perceived to have no value and you can't show it off to your friends and neighbors because anybody can have it. Linux is free and it isn't worried about going under anytime soon. Then again, they don't
have to buy stuff like bandwidth from telcos. But, not everyone is smart enough to setup and use something like Linux with no corporate limits imposed.

The problems come when they have to buy bandwidth or expand. This
project has a grant and the interest earned on that money may be
enough to cover it.

I am viewing this like the library, dorm and campus setup at my
college. Anybody could get on, nothing was logged if you used public
computers and nothing was filtered. Costs were paid out of tuition,
but the initial network setup fee would be the biggest cost. Since
the network hasn't changed much in the past 5 years, there is no
reason to think that the costs would be that bad. The routers and
switches and cat 5 cable don't go bad.

I would like to see the private companies do yearly billing and see
how many people would spend $480/year for internet access instead of
$40/month. I think the local coffee shop would see an increase in
business, or a local non-profit would setup a WiMax setup where
individuals would buy their own network card and pay only for the
bandwidth and administration costs.

[I LOVE THE CAPS LOCK KEY @ Jul 3rd 2008 2:16AM]

You don't hang around Starbucks 24/7 just to get free access. Coffee shops are still a privately owned network, hence they can afford to offer better service, provided you keep buying coffee from them. Deninitly not the same as socialism, which fails.

[Jason @ Jul 1st 2008 4:13PM]

nice its in my region im thinking about moving there or Canton. fee wifi is nice

[Sam Stone @ Jul 1st 2008 4:27PM]

"fee wifi is nice"

Hmmm? You like to pay for your internet!?!

What is the world coming to!?!?!


(p.s, I realise this is a typo...I'm just the funny guy)

[blinkcowz182 @ Jul 1st 2008 5:04PM]

I lived in Akron for 3 years (just moved out) and it's 2 nice streets in downtown surrounded by lots of shody areas and a nicer area called Highland Square to the west. The city continues to pour money into doing nice things but hasn't cleaned up the streets.Akron is a pretty rough area outside of the 8am-5pm commuter time.

[Jason @ Jul 2nd 2008 6:56AM]

thanks Sam for understanding. and excuse my mis-typing

[Kyle @ Jul 1st 2008 4:18PM]

Just wait till someone either hacks it, or starts torrenting stuff. Bye bye bandwidth.

[Lamp @ Jul 1st 2008 4:18PM]

thats my plan :)

[NeverSummer @ Jul 1st 2008 4:26PM]

They can limit the bandwidth per connection.

[DefPo3t @ Jul 1st 2008 5:05PM]

es I agree. Fu$$ the riaa and such but I tend to play devils avocate alot. I was just saying a way they could recoupe cost. Since the riaa and such love to sue poeple and would surly pay for incriminating info.

[Danakin @ Jul 1st 2008 4:23PM]

...what would the legal allegations be for piracy from a free public wifi network...what sort of "user-tracking" would they use?

[DefPo3t @ Jul 1st 2008 4:38PM]

rom a business prospective. If iwere them I would leave it open to piracy but log the he'll out of everything ( I mean EveryThing) which they can do since they would escentilly be the ISP. After they have enough info on the piraters. I would call up the riaa and miaa. For a payday.

[Danakin @ Jul 1st 2008 4:42PM]

...where are you going to store that much data? How would you keep it organized? What will you do when someone sues your for invading their constitutional rights of privacy? You really want to think about all that stuff and prepare for it just for a mere $5k to turn in a pirater?

[DefPo3t @ Jul 1st 2008 4:50PM]

ISP's. Store all the data for 6 years. By law. So they would have too to
and a lawsuit wouldn't hold up due to it being a free public service and I sure as he'll would sell it for at alot more than 5k

[Danakin @ Jul 1st 2008 4:54PM]

I'm glad you will never be in a position to do such a thing...riaa==evil

[thedesolate1 @ Jul 1st 2008 4:47PM]

Come on roll this out in Columbus already!

[CUBSWILLWIN @ Jul 1st 2008 4:59PM]

Chicago needs it the most, really.

[CUBSWILLWIN @ Jul 1st 2008 5:02PM]

Also, if you look at your avatar a certain way, it looks like a bleeding cow skull, with roses on the sides.
(Or I'm just crazy, which most of you most likely will assume because of what I said and/or my name and picture)

[PureBlue @ Jul 1st 2008 4:49PM]

I am so glad I moved to Akron last year!

[totoro @ Jul 1st 2008 4:51PM]

On the bright side, EARTHLINK isn't involved, so thats one certain link to failure avoided.

Earthlink completely fucked up SF's plans for muni wifi-aggressively horning in on the planning process, making promises they couldn't keep, and then running away after the deal was made. Philadelphia too.

[kjb434 @ Jul 1st 2008 4:52PM]

Another stupid free wifi by a city government.

Yes, it will fail.

Free is never free you idiots. All it means is that you pay with it through your taxes. It means that sales tax they charge you is now being funneled to some group to set this network up versus re-paving streets, upgrading water/sewer services, building parks, hiring cops, hiring firefighters.

I hope people that think this is free love it when other aspects of your town crumble because the money was taken away. When that robber steals you iPod and no cop was around, you can rest assure that wifi is still free instead of paying the salary of someone who could have helped you.

Sheesh, just pay for your services. Be a productive member of society and earn a living so you can pay for a quality service. And if you think cable and phone companies have horrible customer service. Then be ready for worse customer service when you have issues with free wifi.

[Doug Stroh @ Jul 1st 2008 5:07PM]

I live in Akron. There are lots of cops and lots of junkies. Why pay more cops to sit on their A&SES and do nothing. I think free wifi is a great idea. Pay for my service? HA...ARGG...All ABORD THE PIRATE SHIP!

[Dave @ Jul 1st 2008 6:58PM]

Thank you, I second this comment.

No one seems to get it. Sure the grant helps, but in the end guess who really ends up paying for it? Taxpayers. Everyone loves to hear the word free until they realize that its not really free unless they aren't paying any taxes. Why do you think people with little or no income love big government? Because they are the only ones truly getting shit for free.

This is the same with our healthcare system. "Affordable" healthcare sounds great until you find out that although your healthcare premiums go down, your taxes go through the roof. Yes medical insurance providers are evil, but just wait to see what happens when the US government takes it over.

[GhettoBanjo @ Jul 1st 2008 4:57PM]

Akron has the internet now?!?!?!?

[Steven @ Jul 2nd 2008 7:20AM]

They have the Internet on computers now?

[kevin @ Jul 1st 2008 4:59PM]

Santa Monica has been able to successfully do Muni WiFi without losing money. In fact the city claims that they have paid for the cost of installing the network already.

Santa Monica choose to roll out WiFi in small increments. First connecting all the major City buildings. Then, slowly adding WiFi and even ground based internet to the main commercial district.

Based on their success it seems like it is more economically feasible to add the network in phases, carefully selecting areas with the highest potential usage and avoiding areas where there would be minimal usage.

The end result isn't "City-Wide" but it is sustainable.

[l. jordan @ Jul 1st 2008 5:01PM]

i dont know if the read link is dead for anyone else, but ohio.com is telling me it cant find the page...

[PureBlue @ Jul 1st 2008 5:21PM]

http://www.ohio.com/news/top_stories/22749554.html

[Jonathan Keim @ Jul 1st 2008 5:05PM]

We Ohioans will show the rest how it's done :-)

[Phineas @ Jul 1st 2008 5:19PM]

Here is the link. Not sure how long it will be active though.

http://www.ohio.com/news/top_stories/22749554.html

[Ed B. @ Jul 1st 2008 5:26PM]

I remember a project in St. Louis Park near where I live was supposed to work great, but then the company screwed over the city and left $3 million in useless equipment that they said the city had to pay for, and in the end, no wifi for anybody. Minneapolis has an OK citywide wifi (not free) but they need to upgrade the range on the routers

[Ben Murphy @ Jul 1st 2008 5:30PM]

I live in downtown Akron, which will be one of the first areas to get this. I know these projects tend to disappoint, but I'd like to point out that this move fits with Akron's attempt to revitalize the downtown area.

For decades there have been virtually no 'nice' housing in the downtown area, but over the past few years a number of options have popped up, including my neighborhood, which is an example of 'new urbanism' style planning. What used to literally be the projects is now a mixed-income, multicultural community that is quiet, family-friendly and quite livable/walkable.

Unfortunately, this development signed a great 'deal' with Time Warner to pre-wire the houses for cable TV/internet. Maybe this is only a local phenomenon, but TWC has taken a drastic turn for the worse over the past year around here. Incredibly unreliable services, clogged support queues and lousy technicians have become the norm. It's too bad, since Akron was a testbed for TW's Roadrunner service - my family was one of the first to get broadband in the early 90s, and it was amazing, but they have not kept pace.

I'm fully aware this isn't going to be a blazing fast service, and there will certainly be hiccups, but I will appreciate the fact that I now have a backup provider available 24/7, and that thousands of my neighbors, many of whom do not have a lot of disposable income, will be able to get online easily and inexpensively.

I'm quite aware TINSTAAFL and the money spent on this project could be spent elsewhere - but I think the benefits of this move still outweigh the costs. Like much of the country, our infrastructure is in bad shape, but there has been a ton of construction lately, roads and schools are gradually improving, and our police force is actually quite good. This is a relatively cheap expenditure that will provide a lot of bang-for-the-buck. The fact that some cities have mismanaged their rollouts doesn't mean this one will fail.

[dave lehman @ Jul 1st 2008 5:38PM]

what about Columbus, Ohio? any word?

[Mrmean @ Jul 4th 2008 3:42PM]

Powell has it :)

[Zane @ Jul 1st 2008 5:38PM]

Umm, don't all Caribou Coffee & CrapDonalds locations have free wifi already? I've used Caribou's wifi while sitting in my car a couple of times when lost or searching for the nearest restaurant.

[Zane @ Jul 1st 2008 5:39PM]

Damn this friggin comment system. Anyhow, my point is that CrapDonalds outlets are pretty much on every street corner, so it's no as if Akron (or any other major city for that matter) does not have free wifi at all.

[Andrew @ Jul 1st 2008 5:43PM]

I like when I see signs that Akron is trying to modernize and be a good place to be.

I'd rather see Akron invest in more police officers to clean the place up. Either way, Akron is a beautiful city and theres a lot of potential. Good news.

[Miike @ Jul 1st 2008 5:46PM]

Maybe this will convince LeBron James to stay.

[Mike @ Jul 1st 2008 6:01PM]

Springfield, OH also has free city WiFi, saw signs all over town recently, but did not try it out.

[Cory Pedroza @ Jul 1st 2008 6:05PM]

Want Free City wide WiFi. Come Visit the Home City of Google... Mountain View, CA. Google has Installed and Maintains the WiFi here. Free for use, As long as you have Google account. I use this when I'm out and about, and i still have DSL at home.

http://wifi.google.com/

[MMFB @ Jul 1st 2008 6:07PM]

What is a rapper doing giving WiFi to a whole city? That will be one lame rap video.

[Josh @ Jul 1st 2008 6:49PM]

Most municipal networks, as you mention, have failed in offering a wifi service to entire community. A couple of problems have been that they normally install the service before asking - the feedback comes only after it's installed. Another problem is that it can't be run by the government only - the internet providers should participate (try to work something out - create a new business model)

You can check an article about Municipal WiFi's Problems at http://www.internetevolution.com/author.asp?section_id=526&doc_id=149441&f_src=flffour

[Jon Doe. @ Jul 1st 2008 7:03PM]

Nilay,

Once again Engadget is all talk, ZERO substance. Munic WiFi is going smoothly here in Minneapolis, MN. But hey. Who ever said you needed to get your facts straight when you talk shit.