A Sea Of Red

Thought this is rather interesting. Anybody know how it would work as far as charges, limits, access etc?

Lynchburg, VA - The city of Lynchburg may soon join the wireless community. Clearwire- a wireless high-speed Internet business- has bought a license to offer services here.

If the company goes through with its plans, it would provide a way for anyone in the city to access the internet in any part of the city, both indoors and out. That sort of service already exists in most major metropolitan areas.

http://www.wset.com/news/stories/0709/637293.html

It'll probably end up being barely usable.

flamesbball84 wrote:It'll probably end up being barely usable.

Based on what?

El Scorcho wrote:

flamesbball84 wrote:It'll probably end up being barely usable.

Based on what?

Based on what I have read from other citywide internet projects elsewhere.

HenryGale wrote:Thought this is rather interesting. Anybody know how it would work as far as charges, limits, access etc?

Lynchburg, VA - The city of Lynchburg may soon join the wireless community. Clearwire- a wireless high-speed Internet business- has bought a license to offer services here.

If the company goes through with its plans, it would provide a way for anyone in the city to access the internet in any part of the city, both indoors and out. That sort of service already exists in most major metropolitan areas.

http://www.wset.com/news/stories/0709/637293.html

By the way, some places its entirely free. Others its free but at much slower speeds. Others have a slower option for free, but you have to pay an arm and a leg to get the faster option.

I have a friend that lives in CA and they just recently added citywide internet - the free version had a max download speed of 512 kbps, to get just up to 1 mbps you have to pay $8 a week. Since that is slow DSL speeds - I'll compare it to what Verizon DSL offers here. Without bundling with phone service, a person can get 1 mbps for 19.99 for the first year (they don't post what the price is after 1 year, I'm guessing higher). For $30, you can get 3 mbps, which is two dollars cheaper than that citywide version over in CA and for three times as much speed. The 7.1 mbps option is $43/month. To compare it to Comast cable internet here in Lynchburg: 1 mbps = $25, 12 mbps = $43, and 16 mbps = $53

The point is that it's going to be different wherever you go, so there's no way to really determine how its going to be.

And Mrs. Cider just signed a 2-year contract last weekend for one of those fancy air cards for $40 a month.

Cider Jim wrote:And Mrs. Cider just signed a 2-year contract last weekend for one of those fancy air cards for $40 a month.

You'll end up getting better speed from the wireless card than she would from the citywide option, and considering it's Lynchburg, you'll probably end up having to pay a lot more money than what the service is worth. The chances of Lynchburg offering a good service at a cheap price is pretty slim in my opinion.

Doubtful...the best speeds right now through aircards are Alltel and they barely make DSL speeds


With that said, who knows what type of towers we will have here in a year...maybe 3G....maybe 4G! nahh

DSL is not so good either. I have been with Verizon two weeks and I am already back to Comcast paying $43 a month

Oh I know, that's what I'm saying it's really slow and annoying for 40 bucks a month.

Well, I can can get 1mbps consistently for $20 a month, sign me up.

flamerbob wrote:Well, I can can get 1mbps consistently for $20 a month, sign me up.

Well, if what they offer is just 1 mbps, you likely aren't going to get 1 mbps very often because that is considered the max, and you arne't going to get the max capability very often. I know here on Comcast, even when plugged in via ethernet, I very, very seldom ever get the max speed.

I am very curious to see how this turns out. I have Verizon, it is OK...but I hope that something better comes along (credit to Ralf the Dog...anybody else know the song?)

flamesbball84 wrote:Based on what I have read from other citywide internet projects elsewhere.

Yeah, except you're talking about project sponsored by cities. Government Internet initiatives.

This is nothing like that. It's a commercial wireless operator that intends to cover the entire city with their services. No different than Verizon, Sprint or AT&T, just a new company (that happens to be a division of Sprint).

I didnt know that...so essentially the likely hood of it being free is 1% which I'm fine with, b/c I live on the city line and cant get internet because the cable stops about 100 yards away from my house...this could be an option and I'm willing to pay b/c I'm sick and tired of Hughes Net

Since it's company and not city they have to have a good product to sell, which makes me even happier

Hold My Own wrote:Doubtful...the best speeds right now through aircards are Alltel and they barely make DSL speeds


With that said, who knows what type of towers we will have here in a year...maybe 3G....maybe 4G! nahh

Verizon has 3G towers in the most remote places I've been this year. And we still are at 1X. I wish they would at least tell us if they were thinking about upgrading us or if they are just gonna wait. It'd just be nice to know.

El Scorcho wrote:

flamesbball84 wrote:Based on what I have read from other citywide internet projects elsewhere.

Yeah, except you're talking about project sponsored by cities. Government Internet initiatives.

This is nothing like that. It's a commercial wireless operator that intends to cover the entire city with their services. No different than Verizon, Sprint or AT&T, just a new company (that happens to be a division of Sprint).

Oh okay. That makes it different then. So with this if you paid, you'd be able to use it all over the city, not just at your house? I'm not going to be paying for it since I doubt the speeds will be as good as what I can get from Comcast and I don't relaly need the flexibility of being able to be on the internet when i'm at wal-mart for example, but I'm curious.

LUconn wrote:Verizon has 3G towers in the most remote places I've been this year. And we still are at 1X. I wish they would at least tell us if they were thinking about upgrading us or if they are just gonna wait. It'd just be nice to know.

I think we've been over his. Verizon has 3G here because Alltel was the first to bring 3G to this area, via EVDO Rev. A. That's a looot faster than 1x speed, even if it's only half of EVDO Rev. B.

WiMax is considered a 4G technology.

AT&T is the only carrier in Lynchburg without any 3G coverage deployed. Yet, in some cities they're already rolling out the second revision of the 3G GSM signal.

I'm honestly not sure why this is even a big deal aside from the fact that it's based on a 4G signal tech. What they're calling "city-wide" Internet is really no different than buying something like <a href="http://www.verizonwireless.com:80/b2c/s ... 7">this</a>, <a href="http://www.verizonwireless.com:80/b2c/s ... 0">this</a> or <a href="http://www.verizonwireless.com:80/b2c/s ... 6">this</a> from Verizon and using it with a laptop anywhere in town. It will just (in theory) be a little faster.

El Scorcho wrote:

LUconn wrote:Verizon has 3G towers in the most remote places I've been this year. And we still are at 1X. I wish they would at least tell us if they were thinking about upgrading us or if they are just gonna wait. It'd just be nice to know.

I think we've been over his. Verizon has 3G here because Alltel was the first to bring 3G to this area, via EVDO Rev. A. That's a looot faster than 1x speed, even if it's only half of EVDO Rev. B.

WiMax is considered a 4G technology.

AT&T is the only carrier in Lynchburg without any 3G coverage deployed. Yet, in some cities they're already rolling out the second revision of the 3G GSM signal.

Does 1X refer to something other than what kind of signal my phone is telling me I'm getting. Perhaps I'm just ignorant on the true definitions of what these things mean. I thought 1X was Rev A, and is simply a CMDA data signal. And Rev B is 1XEV which is what I would consider 3G. Is that not correct? Because my phone says 1X from here to Charlottesville and then 1XEV pretty much anywhere beyond that. And that is considerably faster.

LUconn wrote:

El Scorcho wrote:

LUconn wrote:Verizon has 3G towers in the most remote places I've been this year. And we still are at 1X. I wish they would at least tell us if they were thinking about upgrading us or if they are just gonna wait. It'd just be nice to know.

I think we've been over his. Verizon has 3G here because Alltel was the first to bring 3G to this area, via EVDO Rev. A. That's a looot faster than 1x speed, even if it's only half of EVDO Rev. B.

WiMax is considered a 4G technology.

AT&T is the only carrier in Lynchburg without any 3G coverage deployed. Yet, in some cities they're already rolling out the second revision of the 3G GSM signal.

Does 1X refer to something other than what kind of signal my phone is telling me I'm getting. Perhaps I'm just ignorant on the true definitions of what these things mean. I thought 1X was Rev A, and is simply a CMDA data signal. And Rev B is 1XEV which is what I would consider 3G. Is that not correct? Because my phone says 1X from here to Charlottesville and then 1XEV pretty much anywhere beyond that. And that is considerably faster.

I'm 2 miles away from you right now, and my phone says 1xEV on it. Maybe you have a setting wrong?

I don't see how I could since it's certainly capable of getting it elsewhere. If that is the case I will probably punch myself in the face for dealing with slower speeds for no reason. Maybe my phone just interprets Rev A as 1X and displays that for some reason.

LUconn wrote:I don't see how I could since it's certainly capable of getting it elsewhere. If that is the case I will probably punch myself in the face for dealing with slower speeds for no reason. Maybe my phone just interprets Rev A as 1X and displays that for some reason.

id stop by verizon and ask if I were you. Its worth the time if it makes your phone much faster. I'm not that impressed with the speed of mine on the 1xev network, but I think its because I have a curve and it is kinda slow anyway

JDUB wrote:

LUconn wrote:I don't see how I could since it's certainly capable of getting it elsewhere. If that is the case I will probably punch myself in the face for dealing with slower speeds for no reason. Maybe my phone just interprets Rev A as 1X and displays that for some reason.

id stop by verizon and ask if I were you. Its worth the time if it makes your phone much faster. I'm not that impressed with the speed of mine on the 1xev network, but I think its because I have a curve and it is kinda slow anyway

Yeah, I'd listen to JDUB on this one and ask Verizon what the dealio is. Alltel has had Rev A. EVDO in Lynchburg since December of '07. At the time LU had an account with them and we were pushing them pretty hard to get it going. I remember the day the Ev icon showed up on my crappy WinMo phone. Glorious.

As someone who still has to use true 1x technology for data, I'm envious of you Verizon folks.

If you are going to go to a Verizon store, go to the one on Timberlake. The one on Wards RD is always a 30 minute wait to talk to anybody. I have just walked in to the store on Timberlake.