Virgin Media wants to build a super Wifi network in Central London

[m419]

http://www.thedrum.co.uk/news/2011/0...ty-crunchrsquo

Stated here, Virgin Media wants to build a wifi network outdoors whilst BT and O2 will focus on indoor sites.

I wonder how it intends to cover the cost of building the network, surely people are not willing to pay for it, people want 'free' internet, they think why pay again if I have a mobile phone service and home broadband or dongle.

So it will cover streets like Strand,New Oxford Street,Tottenham Court Road,Theobalds Road,Kingsway,Cannon Street,Clerkenwell Road,Roseberry Avenue,Euston Road,Eversholt Street,Great Portland Street,Marylebone Road,Albany Street,Outer Circle?,Baker Street,Lisson Grove,Sussex Gardens,Praed Street,Edgware Road,Park Lane,Piccadilly,Shaftsbury Avenue,Charing Cross Road,Trafalgar Square,Covent Garden,Long Acre,High Holborn,Pentonville Road,Penton Rise,Caledonian Road,Upper Street,Old Street,Finsbury Square,Liverpool Street,Bishopsgate,Cheapside,Snow Hill,Ludgate Hill,Ludgate Circus,Queen Victoria Street,Victoria Street,Sloane Street and so on..........

Maybe they could give it to Virgin Broadband and Virgin Media Business customers for free just like BT Openzone and BT Fon

[Tim Deegan]

That's good news.

I would have thought that you will have to use your VM login to use it.

[m419]

probably will have to, for indoor access i'm sure they could work with T-Mobile who already operate wifi in many public places and on trains that way they could have a indoor and outdoor wifi network.

[Ignitionnet]

Not going to happen, O2 won the contract.

[Pierre]

Originally Posted by Ignitionnet

Not going to happen, O2 won the contract.

One shouldn't comment on things when one is not fully informed.

The metro wi-fi project for London (and other cities) is alive and kicking, and is fully funded.

Can't say any more than that due to confidentiality.

[Ignitionnet]

Originally Posted by Pierre

One shouldn't comment on things when one is not fully informed.

The metro wi-fi project for London (and other cities) is alive and kicking, and is fully funded.

Can't say any more than that due to confidentiality.

That's interesting, an employee working on the project commented that months of work were wasted when O2 were awarded the contract.

Still given that VM staff don't talk to each other within the company let alone keep employees informed on such things it is perfectly possible that he wasn't aware of other parallel plans.

[qasdfdsaq]

Haven't VM had plans for outdoor broadband for some time now - not just in London?

[Pierre]

Originally Posted by Ignitionnet

That's interesting, an employee working on the project commented that months of work were wasted when O2 were awarded the contract.

Still given that VM staff don't talk to each other within the company let alone keep employees informed on such things it is perfectly possible that he wasn't aware of other parallel plans.

True, the Westminster decision was a kick in the balls. But that is only Westminster (and Chelsea) London is a big place

However, far too much time, effort and money has been invested. There are several other opportunities still there, on which I can't comment.

---------- Post added at 16:58 ---------- Previous post was at 16:58 ----------

Originally Posted by qasdfdsaq

Haven't VM had plans for outdoor broadband for some time now - not just in London?

Other major cities are being looked at....yes

[m419]

People under estimate the size of Westminster and how many people actually live,work and pass through the borough, that is why there was a lot of people moaning about the cable system not being upgraded, it is a big area and to the north and round pimlico is heavily residential orientated.

When people think of Westminster they think its just Big ben,parliament,trafalgar square and oxford street.

BT and Virgin Media seriously under estimate the advantages of providing superfast broadband and TV services in this area. It will be the very last area of london to have Infinity let alone any Cable services if ever.

I don't 100% believe that Virgin Media had no choice but to pull out of providing cable services in the borough, I think it was a choice of either Westminster or Milton Keynes because I believe that BT is asking for a very hefty price to upgrade each and every part of it.

The barbican bit has been defunct for quite some time and would definately not be worth going back into, the lease of the network plus the cost of upgrading this small patch would never be worthwhile, the only alternative would be to extend the ex-Telewest/Cable London franchise into Barbican which is very nearby as it reaches Goswell Road.

Outdoor Wifi access would be worthwhile though and much needed across the following boroughs:

Westminster
City of Westminster
Camden
Islington
Tower Hamlets
Newham
Southwark
Lambeth
Kensington and Chelsea
Possibly Brent

Another advantage is to use Telephone boxes which can provide on-street wifi access, not the BT ones as they have been occupied by BT Openzone. Spectrum Interactive(New World) i'm sure are occupied by The Cloud and that leaves Infocus(Infolines) those new disabled friendly kiosks which don't seem to have a wifi partner. All those boroughs listed have Infocus public networks street kiosks.

Other resources that could be used as wifi sites are as mentioned, street lamps,council blocks from the roofs(low cost leases),bus stop shelters(the large ones) and I know it might sound crazy but from trees. They manage to hide mobile masts within trees, so it is an idea.

[Ignitionnet]

Originally Posted by m419

People under estimate the size of Westminster and how many people actually live,work and pass through the borough, that is why there was a lot of people moaning about the cable system not being upgraded, it is a big area and to the north and round pimlico is heavily residential orientated.

Not really, the population is about 1/4 million and not all of those are covered by the written off cable networks. Certainly parts of Pimlico, as you used that as a specific example, have full digital cable services.

---------- Post added at 14:30 ---------- Previous post was at 14:26 ----------

Originally Posted by m419

Westminster
City of Westminster
Camden
Islington
Tower Hamlets
Newham
Southwark
Lambeth
Kensington and Chelsea
Possibly Brent

You do know that City of Westminster is both a 'City' and a London Borough and that there is no 'Westminster' Borough right? I appreciate you want it upgrading but no need to list it twice

I would be very interested in your rationale for those other boroughs though. Why not Hammersmith and Fulham say?

I wouldn't touch Tower Hamlets with a barge pole, the corrupt council and mayor would probably be wanting kickbacks paid to the IFE.

[m419]

Originally Posted by Ignitionnet

Not really, the population is about 1/4 million and not all of those are covered by the written off cable networks. Certainly parts of Pimlico, as you used that as a specific example, have full digital cable services.

Just Dolphin Square right? and that was meant to be a trial? and from what I heard a few years ago, a survey was done on the Virgin/NTL service there and the residents wanted to get shut of it as it isn't providing what they want, now that the Sky channels are back i'm sure feedback would be more positive considering the fact that most of the TV service for Dolphin Square is free not relating to Premium channels and Broadband.

---------- Post added at 14:30 ---------- Previous post was at 14:26 ----------



You do know that City of Westminster is both a 'City' and a London Borough and that there is no 'Westminster' Borough right? I appreciate you want it upgrading but no need to list it twice

I would be very interested in your rationale for those other boroughs though. Why not Hammersmith and Fulham say?

I wouldn't touch Tower Hamlets with a barge pole, the corrupt council and mayor would probably be wanting kickbacks paid to the IFE.

City Of Westminster and City of London are just London boroughs like all the rest of them nowadays, they no longer classify as cities of there own, historically they are called cities because of there past and originally they were two seperate cities, all 32 boroughs including City of westminster and City of London(Corporation of London) form part of Greater London which is the city itself.

Hammersmith and Fulham has nothing to it.

Tower Hamlets does, part of the docklands forms part of it as well as the city centre, towns such as Whitechapel and like I said the path to the isle of Dogs. Tower Hamlets is still mostly Central London, What is in Hammersmith and fulham?

In addition, town centres, like Uxbridge,Kingston,Richmond,Hammersmith,Ealing Broadway,Southall,Walthamstow,Barnet,North Finchley,Finchley Central,Archway,Edgware,Waltham Cross,Enfield Town,Hackney Central,Greenwich,Plumstead and Bromley Town centre should also be included.

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.

[qasdfdsaq]

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.

[jay_g]

BT have just or very nearly completed rolling out 900 wifi points in and around London, which is free to BT broadband customers. All installed inside phoneboxes, so if you see a phonebox with a sticker saying that, I installed it!

[qasdfdsaq]

They've had those all over the country for years. Phone boxes are, indeed, excellent points to re-use for these kinds of things.

[jay_g]

Originally Posted by qasdfdsaq

They've had those all over the country for years. Phone boxes are, indeed, excellent points to re-use for these kinds of things.

Yeah they have, was just saying that BT are still I'm the game as they've done that many all over London. It does make them money but still unforumetlly getting rid of a lot of boxes