September 8, 2007
Toronto Hydro WiFi Network An Unexpected Success
The funny-looking "keg" antennas have been appearing atop street lamps around the city since last year, and it looks like One Zone, Toronto Hydro's plan to blanket the city with wireless internet, is bearing fruit. According to the Globe, the City-owned utility says that the network is already a resounding success—a significant achievement since similar installations in major U.S. cities are failing.
The reason for this is based on how the network was implemented: rather than rolling out service across the entire city, the initial, current system is only available in the downtown core, where businesses and residential buildings are dense and clients are even more likely to have ultra-portable devices (like this week's new iPod touch) which come with built-in WiFi capabilities. Also, the service is only offered via monthly, hourly, or daily payment plans ($29, $5, and $10, respectively), whereas many U.S. companies offer free wireless access to disadvantaged neighbourhoods. Crucial elements, like repair trucks and 450 km of fibre optics, were also already in place as part of the electricity company's infrastructure.
Despite initial concerns about the health and legal ramifications behind the antenna installations, the 225 WiFi access points were rolled-out late last year after the $60 million sale of the City's lamp posts to Toronto Hydro. The transmitters have a 100-metre outdoor range (employing the 802.11b/g standard), and Toronto Hydro says that the highest-traffic areas were behind City Hall and within the financial district. Currently, the coverage spans 235 city blocks.
Ontario was a world leader in both the development of cable television in the 1950s and the adoption of direct payment (Interac) banking services in the mid-90s, and Toronto's wireless internet model could change how these type of services are traditionally employed in other cities. Strangely, it may have taken an electricity company to do it—and while there is still a lot to complain about when it comes to our limited broadband options, we can see the day when metropolitan WiFi is regarded the same way as electricity is: a "free-ish" (tax-funded), reliable public utility. Just don't tell that to the private sector.
Photo by Marc Lostracco.
|
Certainly "unexpected" to me. When it was free I tried it from many locations. Including the Second Cup at Spadina and Richmond where the keg is right outside. It always nearly worked. But it was always very hard to get to the login page -- software problems not signal strength. Then when logged in it seems to have the slowest Internet connection ever. This was from many places around town over several months. No way I would ever pay for this nonservice.
definitely it is the slowest network. I used it a bunch while it was free and was never impressed - much like the previous comment.
I recently signed my sister up for a month, and then once we logged in there was no SMPT - email - support. I am now struggling to get my money back!
Hmm...that brings up an interesting point: if the WiFi was free, would it be OK if it was almost as slow as dialup and didn't have SMTP support? Should cities provide free WiFi to everyone, but at a hobbled speed as not to piss off the Rogers and Sympaticos of the world?
Well, they certainly shouldn't charge for WiFi at a hobbled speed. I don't know why anyone would sign up for this, when there are already a plethora of cafes or fast food joints around the city that offer WiFi for free, or with the price of a coffee. $5/hour? I wonder how much surfing you can do in that time with this snail service.
I'm curious to hear from other people who are using the service now that the free pilot period is over. Has it improved?
Also, I don't know enough about the technical aspects of Wifi, but what happens if you're in an area with many transmitters or much more powerful transmitters? For example, if you live above a Starbucks and have a Toronto Hydro account, could the interference cause a significant slowdown? I've been using WiFi for years, and the signal for the same locations seem to vary wildly from day to day, even with a obstacle-free path to the wireless router.
I used to live at Queen/Spadina and tried to use the HydroONe network a couple times but it was impossible. I called them to find out what the issue was and they claimed that it was only for exterior use. Being right in the thick of their coverage area, I found that particularly ridiculous.
I moved shortly before they switched to fees and for a few days I was getting a good signal (though I don't use SMPT email)... OUTSIDE of their boundaries at the Bathurst and Queen West area. How this works completely baffles me. Out of not wanting to pay for a $90 modem, I opted for the HydroOne service ($32/month) and it worked fairly well for the first while with some areas of my concrete walled condo being dead zones. It got worse though and now I'm looking for other inexpensive options that does not require a landline. Plus, having to log-in constantly was becoming a nuisance.