The Journal Star ran two Associated Press articles on municipal wireless fidelity (Muni WiFi) networks, and neither article was very complimentary of the systems. It seems they’re not living up to their hype.

“They are the monorails of this decade: the wrong technology, totally overpromised and completely undelivered,” said Anthony Townsend, research director at the Institute for the Future, a think tank.

In other words, they have the appearance of being progressive and modern, but lack practicality when actually built out. Some of the problems identified in the main article:

• Lack of subscribers. There’s not as much interest in a Muni WiFi network as boosters thought;
• Threat of taxpayer bailout. “Cities might end up running the systems if companies abandon networks they built”;
• Number of antennas needed underestimated. Some cities have had to double or triple the number of access points to provide adequate coverage, “adding roughly $1 million” to estimated costs;
• Trouble penetrating buildings. For a variety of reasons, including stucco homes that “have a wire mesh that blocks signals” and just general poor penetration, subscribers have to buy a $150 signal booster to use the service in their homes or offices;
• Slow connection speeds. According to the article, the speed can be slower than cable and DSL;
• Limited features. A home-business user said her local WiFi service “lacks key features she gets through DSL.”
• Competition from private enterprise. “…[J]ust as Lompoc [Calif.] committed to the network, cable and telephone companies arrived with better equipment and service, undercutting the city’s offerings.”

Other than that, it’s a great system. Missing from the article was any mention of a large influx of “creative class” workers who moved into these communities because of their cutting-edge Muni WiFi systems. I doubt it was an oversight. Most likely the “creative class” values many of the same things as the “uncreative class”: safe neighborhoods, good schools, low taxes, business/employment opportunities, etc. I doubt anyone is going to move here just for the free wireless access, if it’s ever offered.

My favorite comment came from a Portland (Ore.) blogger in the companion article:

“For me ubiquitous access means I don’t have to base my life around wherever my office is,” DuVander said. “I tried it out as soon as I could and found that it wasn’t for me. The quality of the connection is not up to my standards.”

I’ll bet that if/when Peoria rolls out Muni WiFi, a certain local Peoria blogger will have a similar take on that system. Probably his big complaint will be that he gets poor reception in Pottstown. 🙂