Quote:
Originally Posted by m419
Eventually from there over time, they could complete the areas that aren't covered and eventually have a 95% Wifi coverage across the UK just like mobile network coverage.
|
Why on earth would you even want wifi coverage to be comparable to mobile. It's not designed for it, there's no point to it, it's a rubbish idea and it'll never happen.
The only reason outdoor wifi is so popular right now is to offload data from 3G. Networks are pushing for it to ease congestion at minimal cost as well as avoid traffic gridlock due to our retarded frequency allocation and utilization at the moment (and delayed 4G auction).
Nevertheless 3G (and 4G once it arrives) remains a far better option for covering wide areas and mobile use, or anything that requires dedicated bandwidth and latency (say, voice calls - when I was a kid, mobile phones were actually used for phone calls...). I'd much rather see network providers deploy newer and more advanced mobile networks than dump it all on a bunch of local wifi providers. Problem is their hands are tied right now with a lack of decent spectrum, even small amounts of which can make a huge difference (just look at what O2 achieved with a single 900Mhz 3G carrier).
This whole outdoor wifi business is just a temporary fad while mobile networks are putting off/unable to invest to keep up with demand. 4G will largely alleviate the problem and by the time 5G comes about wifi will be as good as dead, even in the home.