If you want Wi-Fi internet access, you should pay for it and not the tax payers.

People who would not use a system like that either no Wireless NIC, computer or desire, how are they being served? Also, it's a luxury and shouldn't be paid for by the tax payers. There are better things to fund.

A city wide Wi-Fi blanket enables city wide e-comerce, infromations for public works departments such as up to date bus or train schedueling. I think it's a good idea and I hope it happens in San Francisco soon.

The people that seem to be against it are you guys in the telecom business. F@#$ you guys. Eventualy VOIP services are going to eat your fruit baskets.

And with Sprint implementing their WiMax or whatever it is being called now in Chicago, it really doesn't make sense to have the city implement it.

I also wonder, though, if Sprint pressured the city to scrap this plan, since it would severely inhibit the adoption of WiMax.

just like the 140foot screen being funded by the city in Phoenix, money should be better spent elsewhere. Cities are always wasting money and if not on WIFI then it will get shuffled to someplace or something that wont do a damn bit of good for the people. So no matter what you cannot say it's wasteful, I did with the 140foot screen, and after deeper thought I realized that if not there then where and would we know where.

I agree with Sean, taxpayers should not have to pay for free internet access. People who can't pay for internet access are not going to Be able to contribute to e-commerce or whatever anyway.

Philly has wifi coverage all over the city, however you have to pay for it hourly if you want to use it. This is a better idea than just providing it to everyone for free, although it is still not a good idea to be honest with you. Noone uses it around here.

When in my post, or any other have I mentioned that I am in the telecomm bussiness? I am not, I assume this Wi-Fi network was for the internet and I might look like a fool for doing so, but you also assumed that I worked for the telecomm industry when I don't.

Even if I did, wouldn't I want to sell more telecomm stuff to this waste of money project?

I might be way off the mark. I don't know the train or bus schedule, what is wrong with posting it at the train/bus stops in paper for everyone to see? How often do they change the bus schedule? When they do, is the local paper is good for announcing it? I don't need a Wi-Fi network for city information.

Nothing against your opion if over 50% of the people want it then ok, the majority wins. I just see no need for a city wide, publicly funded Wi-Fi network.

cities like Paris, london, and Amsterdam will all have city wide wifi, American toruist will flock to these cities and pay 1.5-2 dollars a euro or pound to enjoy life. The amount a business that a free wifi would offer far outways the cost.

It's probably a matter of time before city-wide internet becomes a norm. Tons of things can benefit from city-wide internet, businesses, individuals, tourist. Vending machine sending msg back to company telling them which machine ran out of stock; easier setup of remote cameras utilizing internet to stream video; street map kiosks; alot of things that builds and based on citywide networks. I'm sure we can do alot more when we have citywide-internet.

Those who disagree with this idea may think that it's common sense for whoever using internet should pay for their own service...

First, there are lots of service out there benefit other people but not ourselves, yet taxpayers pay for them as well. Cities do not only focus on common interest.

Secondly, if you can take a moment to think of the possibilities that city-wide Internet can bring, the services, commercial-wise, mobility... Everything starts from a solid city-wide infrastructure of communication capabilities.

Wifi Max was big news for a long time.
Was it ever used to cover a whole city?
Was it ever used?

Why should tax payers pay for wifi anyway. If you want free internet go to a library. If you don't have the money for internet access than how did you buy a computer. It's like buying a car and being unable to pay for the up keep.

I agree with not implementing it. There are a lot of much more important things that money isn't being spent on...I'd rather my money was spent on fixing roads, improving schools, and cleaning things up...not Internet. I don't intend to carry a laptop everywhere I go and surf the net all day. People spend too much time on the computer already...like me on mine now. If you want the Wi-Fi system...find one of the many liberal social programs that only hurt society get the money from cancelling it...haha.

With the full coverage of WiFi in a city, people can locate themselves without the need of GPS devices.

This can serve as another option to GPS and also, when in emergency, this is the way to go for the one who needs help.

With fixed line networks and the need for modems and so on, new functionalities is difficult to implement into current technologies. But for WiFi, just a simple SoC can provide the access and without the wires, you can relocate them easily.

Who's to say what a waste of money is anyhow. In brisbane we have a 8metre screen with a projector which sits in front of a public man made beach/lagoon so that families can swim or sit and watch new to dvd releases for free on weekends. I think things like that are very useful especially to young families who struggle to pay bills and if given money instead would probably not be able to up their standard of living and rather would just go to more bills. this allows the community to raise the minimum standard of living as a whole.

Wireless cards in australia are roughly 10 dollars and if we are willing to implement a nation wide porn filter (worth several million or maybe even billions), we can afford to place wireless in everyones homes to give them a minimum standard of living there too.

Or at least if we were given the option to we could.

Most people who will post here will not worry about these kinds of decisions because they themselves will never have to worry about falling to the minimum standard of living, whereby all you do is work rest and pay bills with no chance of elevating yourself to the chance to have luxuries. Necessities are more important then a fancy car or a backyard pool.