Aerie Networks to Reactivate Ricochet Service? 75
JimDog writes: "Aerie Networks is apparently buying the assets and IP of Metricom's Ricochet service and plans to reactivate it in at least some of the former coverage areas. A more detailed press release in PDF format is available here." There might be some hope for Ricochet addicts after all.
Hooray! (Score:3, Interesting)
coverage maps (Score:5, Informative)
Re:coverage maps (Score:3, Informative)
You can find the location of every poletop Metricom ever put up as part of the bankruptcy sale asset list at the metricom sale site [metricom.com].
but Aerie has the rights to that equipment as well.
I'm afraid not. The poletop easements and the equipment on them were abandoned by the bankrupcy court, which is what caused Aerie to reduce their bid to $8.25M from $20M; see news coverage [cnet.com] for details: Aerie will have to rebuild the equipment.
Re:Hooray! (Score:2)
I've used CDPD to build a portable webcam [carlazone.com].
Re:Hooray! (Score:3, Interesting)
First, why are you driving (most do) and using an Internet connection?
Second, that's not my experience. I, a driver and a Ricochet user, drove 80 MPH down I-5 (between the 91 and the 405) often maintaining a constant AOL AIM chat session and an ssh telnet connection to my server(s). I also did this on PCH between the 55 and Long Beach (though only at 60 MPH). There was no trouble "hopping" -- AIM and TeraTermPro w/ SSH don't handle drop packets well at ALL.
Don't try that at home, kiddies.
Re:Hooray! (Score:3, Funny)
Never did it. No guts, not nuts.
Re:Hooray! (Score:1)
I never had any problems with Ricochet moving between microcells. Have you actually used Ricochet, or are you just trolling?
I think 80-240kbps stationary and 20-50kbps moving is far nicer than CDPD - a maximum of 14-19kbps. Have fun.
Old and slow. (Score:2, Interesting)
Re:Old and slow. (Score:2, Interesting)
Okay, when you've done that, let me know. Until then, I'd like to see Ricochet reactivated. Don't wish for something to die until the alternative is in place.
Re:Old and slow. (Score:2)
It ain't the speed... Re:Old and slow. (Score:2, Insightful)
I can't see how -that- is a system to replace a -business- like ricochet. Unless you personally can pay for the hardware and wireline bandwidth...? (What is the price point when you're buying 5,000 WAP access points? : ) bk425
Re:It ain't the speed... Re:Old and slow. (Score:2)
It is quite true that charity cannot replace business. But public works can replace business. That would be really cool.
Re:It ain't the speed... Re:Old and slow. (Score:2)
Re:Old and slow. (Score:1)
Other info on this (Score:4, Informative)
Re:Other info on this (Score:2)
With an investment overhead of $8.5million versus $1 Billion, this shouldn't be too difficult. Heck, at $80 per month, 51,000 subscribers recoup that outlay in 2 months!
I do hope they advertise. I had no idea that Richochet was in my area until stumbling upon Earthlink's site and seeing the option for wireless broadband. I bought in the same day. So did my employer (offered to pay for my service, and to get it himself), and my main client (for use in 50 to 100 sales reps travelling in the 14 markets Ricochet offered service. Before committing to the deal, the "dark" announcement was made. With a *little* attention to marketing this should be a cinch.
It went out for a reason... (Score:1, Interesting)
FearLinux.com [fearlinux.com]
Background on Ricochet (Score:4, Informative)
So what is so great about this service? Well it comes with a 10-ounce external modem that can be used on your laptop. Not only does this modem have its own rechargeable battery but it also connects via serial or USB. And even better is that the service is compatible with not only Win 9x and 2000 but also Macintosh, Linux, Windows CE, or any other OS with PPP software.
So if you were wondering why some people liked the service so much hopefully you know now. The reason I didn't go with it was some of the reviews said that it ran too slow in my area. So I got AT&T Roadrunner... the service could be better and I can't take it on the road with me but this is fast enough for me and that's good enough for now. Maybe now that some more life is getting pumped into the service and a new owner is running the show I'll look into it once again.
Re:Background on Ricochet (Score:3, Informative)
Toward the end, they started selling the service for $40 and below. That's probably where the new guys will price it. $75 was fine for the mobile power users, but prevented Ricochet from competing well with DSL and cable, and kept away the base of casual users that would have made them more sound financially without taking up a lot of resources.
Technically, Ricochet was terrific for me once they cleaned up one or two network switching problems.
I was one of the people who wrote Ricochet and told them I'd sign back up if they re-lit the network. I travel to work in multiple cities they serve, so it's a great way to keep my main computer on the same networking paradigm without using a ubiquitous 56k provider (one of which also went tits-up on me in the last year...).
For purely non-mobile applications, though, if you have a choice between this and a cable or LOS wireless service at the same or lower price, you are right to go with that. You will get higher throughput. (I've never liked any DSL offer, but YMMV). Until we see what kind of service organization the new company builds, and what the stability looks like, you can't expect them to be any better or worse for downtime and technical support than any other network provider.
--Blair
Re:Background on Ricochet (Score:1)
The nodes have about a 1/8 mile coverage area and are line of site. This isn't a problem if you are driving down the road and you pass under one of their antennas every 10 light poles, you'll go in and out of coverage and the modem will deal with it.
If you are sitting at a desk with your ricochet modem you are either in or out of coverage all of the time and considering how small the cells are unless your desk in on the sidewalk under a light pole you are probably out.
Re:Background on Ricochet (Score:1, Interesting)
Where I live there's only 24kbps dialup (phone lines suck because SBC is a big fat monopoly) Ricochet always worked for
me (except when I made mistake in my ppp setup),
and gave me 88kbps serial and 200 kbps USB.
I can't wait.
Re:Background on Ricochet (Score:1)
Ricochet service is a radio service, it doesn't require a line of sight (that would be something line Irda).
But I agree with you that it's not fixed wireless, but mobile wireless, based on industry definitions of those terms.
Re:Background on Ricochet (Score:1)
Re:Background on Ricochet (Score:3, Interesting)
I even used it in my house right on the edge of San Francisco, and used it coming over the Bay Bridge from Oakland, and it got a signal right as we came off the San Francisco side of the bridge, so San Francisco seems pretty well covered. There are like 17 big hills here, so you can put stuff like this on top of the hills and get everybody.
Even if you use it indoors most of the time, it's still a great deal. You don't have to hook your house or apartment up to the Internet, just hook yourself up with a PC Card in your computer. Taking it to the library was really great, or working at a coffee shop or whatever.
I just got a new PowerBook, and I keep looking at the PC Card slot and wishing there was a working Ricochet modem in there 24/7. I used to think I'd just use Ricochet forever myself, combined with 802.11 when I bump into a network. Between the two systems you can go to a lot of places and be connected without having to fall back on the phone modem or regular Ethernet.
I don't think there's anything wrong with having two different systems, either. Eventually, they'll fit 802.11 and Ricochet onto one chip/card and the computer could use whatever is available automatically. In the meantime, if one system doesn't scale well enough or has some other problem (like Ricochet is having now), then the other fills in the gap. Seems like some people think that they have to be against Ricochet because they like AirPort.
Re:Background on Ricochet (Score:1)
You were lucky. As I said the cells are small so you are either in or out. Contrary to what some other poster said the frequencies Ricochet uses (2.4Ghz and 900Mhz) are line of sight, but do have _some_ building pentration.
When I signed up, the guy said the biggest myth about Ricochet was that it was only good outdoors, or while you were moving.
That is exactly what it was designed for. If a sales dood told you diferently his was either misinformed or he lied.
It can do that, too, but if your house or apartment or office was in a coverage area, then it will likely work fine.
The important word there being _if_ since the cells require 5 radios for a 1 square mile coverage area they are mostly located along main streets and commercial areas. It wouldn't be cost effective to put radios all over residential neighbohoods since that isn't the target market.
I even used it in my house right on the edge of San Francisco, and used it coming over the Bay Bridge from Oakland, and it got a signal right as we came off the San Francisco side of the bridge, so San Francisco seems pretty well covered.
That's what they want you to think. Again, the coverage areas are very small so they put them where people will notice. If you live in one of these places it will make a good fixed wireless solution.
There are like 17 big hills here, so you can put stuff like this on top of the hills and get everybody.
Ricochet doesn't work that way, it uses little radios attached to utility poles. Hills and such aren't a big issue since the cells are so small.
http://www.metricom.com/ricochet_advantage/tech
Re:Background on Ricochet (Score:1)
While I'll agree that it might not be a good 'replacment' for DSL or Cable I used Ricochet 128K on my stationary home OpenBSD nat/firewall for about a year with great results.
Since the phone lines in my apartment complex failed the dsl qualification tests and the complex was locked into a contract with some small time cable provider that didn't offer cable internet, Ricochet was my only choice for somthing that even resembled broadband.
Hooking the modem up via USB I consitantly had 200K+ download, access was overall reliable and served as the internet connection for my home network of 5-7 computers and servers.
Occasionally I'd even take it to work with me and hook it up to my laptop there, again sitting stationary on my desk, with no problems.
Other than the occasional drop off during bad weather for short periods of time I seemed to have higher uptimes than most of my friends on cable and dsl services.
Re:Background on Ricochet (Score:1)
I am too far from pacbell to get DSL... (dialup is pretty bad on these lines... forget online games... even ones that are alright via dialup...)
Can't get cable modem due to the fact adelphia uses a shared satalite dish per building and is selling that to us as cable (minus half the channels we would get on normal cable)... So I do not even have a direct cable line to my apt.
No isp's close enough that sell microwave wireless... but it does not really matter considering EVERYTHING is in the way anyways.
Satalite is an option but cost to entry is too high... not to mention I live in an apt which makes it a little hard to install the dish.
Ricochet was awesome! I was getting speeds around 180kbps (22-23k a sec... not bad) with okay latency. (between 100 and 200ms)
beat the heck out of dialup anyways
The linux car can live again... (Score:1, Interesting)
Ricochet or 802.11?? (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:Ricochet or 802.11?? (Score:2, Informative)
Re:Ricochet or 802.11?? (Score:1)
I beg to differ:
http://www.odessaoffice.com/wireless/mobile.htm [odessaoffice.com]
Hardware? (Score:3, Informative)
Unfortunatley, much of the hardware that was developed for Ricochet has been discontinued. Hopefully the AirCard 400 can be brought up to speed again. [sierrawireless.com]
Although it may be tough, with GPRS, EDGE, 1xRTT gaining ground around the world. Word on the street is that Telus Mobility [telus.com] (Canadian) will have 1xRTT up for Q1 next year.
This bad boy [sierrawireless.com] can run up to 150kbps on only 1xRTT.
Just wait until 2x and 3xRTT hit the market.
What I'm still trying to figure out is if ONE standard has been chosen for REAL 3G/UMTS. The recent AT&T adoption of GSM/GPRS would suggest that WCDMA is not the way to go?? anybody?
Re:Hardware? (Score:3, Interesting)
The current dominant standard, GSM, is evolving toward WCDMA/UMTS. This is the upgrade path all GSM and most IS-136 networks will take. GSM/GPRS uses the same data infrastructure and protocols as WCDMA/UMTS. Oddly enough, GSM is more different from WCDMA/UMTS than IS-95 (CDMA) is from CDMA2000. CDMA also has some technology advantage over GSM. But it's kind of a Betamax thing: it is better to be widely used than it is to be better technologically.
Both 3G standards use CDMA technology, but they are not compatible. Maybe there will be dual mode radios that will be cheap enough to work on both kinds of networks.
Anybody know what iDen's upgrade path is?
How do I turn off the redundant things in the square brackets?
Re:Hardware? (Score:2)
-jhp
Re:Hardware? (Score:2, Interesting)
With voice revenues thinning, I doubt the cellcos will be able to subsidize all this data buildout with voice. They lost that critical mass months ago.
Ricochet may be back, and with only 8.5 million and paltry operational costs (as long as the circuits stay up, the Ricochet NOCs can be run by TWO people), it'll take nothing for them to begin making money and possibly deploying the
Then there's the National Semiconductor Ricochet chipset that was almost done....
Damnit! (Score:2)
Meanwhile in Europe.... (Score:1, Interesting)
We should just admit it. Europe sucks for wireless data services and the situation is unlikely to change for a long time.
Ah well never mind. I can always have GPRS which gives me 24kbps for £15ppm for a 1 megabyte allowance, then £5 per additional megabyte. Makes reading slashdot expensive
Ricochet as an alternative to OnStar (Score:3, Interesting)
I had one of the old Ricochet modems years ago before there was any security on the network. You could list out the names of all the other radio modems and poll top boxes that it could see. The pole top boxes had the names of the street intersections or buildings where they were mounted. Then you could dial into any of the pole top boxes, and remotely send them AT commands, to list out the other ones they could see, and walk around discovering the network that way.
But then my van was stolen, and my original Ricochet was in it, with a "Big Brother Inside" sticker on it. I immediately called Metricom and asked if my modem had been turned on and reported in. It had, and they checked the logs and gave me the address of the pole top box in a dangerous San Jose neighborhood. I rented a car and drove all around the neighborhood looking for my stolen van, but didn't find it. But a couple weeks later the van did show up right around that neighborhood, totally stripped.
-Don
The world is a small place... (Score:2, Interesting)
I was the TSE on the other end of the phone when you called to trace your van. I remember that call well.
Like you, I hope Aerie does something.... I got rather addicted to the notion of web access everywhere.
-Zandr
Re:The world is a small place... (Score:2)
-Don
More blah blah! (Score:3, Insightful)
Sounds like a good deal... (Score:2, Interesting)
Metricom winds up $1G in debt, with creditors expected to recoup about a quarter of that when you count cash in the bank and bond interest; so, about $750M loss for creditors.
Aerie acquires all the interesting assets of Metricom -- that is, everything unique that would cause investors to take the risk -- for $8.25M.
Chapter 7 protects Aerie from the ~$740M difference.
I know it's hardly a unique situation, but the numbers jumped out at me this time. It's such a great investment strategy: if you can just figure out how to get someone else to spend 100x what's profitable and then have them lose so badly that you can buy the interesting bits at a garage sale.
Re:Sounds like a good deal... (Score:1)
Mertricom had a business model that for whatever reason, failed.
Just because Aerie purchased the assets for $8.25 M doesn't necessarily imply they can immediately turn around and sell these assets for a profit of some $740 M as you've stated.
I'm not privvy to all the details, but in almost all bankrupcys the court requires that assets be put up for competitive bidding. This is intended to protect the creditors who have a claim on the bankrupt firms assets, and insure that they receive the maximum possible return on their claim.
This means other potential investors looked at the collection of assets and decided it wasn't worth what Aerie bid.
I doubt Aerie is planning to liquidate these assets; they are probably hoping that they can either execute Mericoms original business plan better, or markedly improve on it.
Re:Sounds like a good deal... (Score:1)
My point was just that Aerie stands a much better chance of having their business plan work, whatever it is, given that their cost of "building" a working infrastructure is $8.25M+reactivation costs and legal fees. That's not a business plan that Metricom could have followed.
Ricochet has already been relit around ground zero (Score:2, Interesting)
My ricochett lament (Score:1)
The data transfer rate was bursty, latency was around 300ms, there were only a few sweet spots around the neighborhood that it worked well in, and logging in was a slow pain in the ass.
But it was so unutterably cool to be tooling down the road with my brother in his car, have a question requiring web access to answer, and whipping out a Compaq iPAQ and getting the answer in a minutes time.
I can't believe cities wouldn't kill for the capacity to install wireless security cameras just about any place they choose, and have live police and fire video feeds available for each fire truck/police car in the fleet, as well as having internet access for disaster recovery personnel.
It just breaks my heart seeing those lonely little Ricochet boxes sitting up on light poles with no one to talk to. This is a case where I think the feds should have stepped up to the plate and bought the damned thing to keep it running, and expanded the system for all major urban areas.
What I really hope and pray for now is Teledesic. I have no idea how viable they are as a company at the moment, but a constellation of low Earth orbiting high speed Internet satellites is just too sweet to not lust for.
I bet there's a whole bunch of people overseas in the armed forces that wishes it were operational too.
Re: (Score:2)
What killed ricochet (Score:5, Informative)
You see my freinds, the ricochet development cycle really ended after the first modem was introduced. Sure it got smaller and faster, or so you think. The ricochet was allways capable of 128kbps speed. There was a s register that could change the modem speed to that maximum rate, but unless you were transferring from ricochet to ricochet at a distance of 100 feet or less, you would never see 128kbps from their network. This is because the poletops were set at 9600baud.
Now to understand how you can get 28.8 from poletops set at 9600 you have to understand how the ricochet network works. Basically you are surrounded by these poletops, all shooting out bits at 9600 baud, they are multiplexed together by your modem and combined to get the desired bandwidth. Thus 9600 from 3 poletops would give you 28.8. Internally people who knew about this and thought it was wrong were fired over the years. There was a lot of them trust me.
Whenever a new modem standard like 33.6 or 56k came out, metricom would release a new "Modem software upgrade" that "contained new code!" that would magically turn your 33.6 ricochet into a 28.8 one. All it did was change the default setting of that S Register, maybe some new stuff was added, but thats about it. Nothing really magical or fancy, they fired all the real engineers that created the modem in the first place long ago. All that was left was a skeletal crew that could never really improve the internal electronics design.
When they were "Upgrading the Ricochet Network!" this was nothing more than more smoke up the ass of ricochet users. The poletops speed was simply set from 9600 to anything higher. Just a stupid S register that was allways there.
I think Ricochet's real downfall wasn't the technology, when it was introduced allmost 5 years ago, it was capable of delivering 128kbps service. So the failure can only be found in the strategy used by the marketdroids. $20@month for 128kbps wireless internet service vs $20@month for a standard 28.8 isp would have sold a lot more modems than the $40@mo ricochet $20@mo standard ISP model that they took.
They did do an amazing job creating the network, just a shame that they never put that same effort into people that acually understood the internet market. People have allways gone with the cheaper ISP simply because they want to save money. Anyways I hope no heads roll from my comment.
______
/ \
I I
IRicochetI
I R.I.P I
I 2001 I
Um, that's not my understanding. (Score:1)
Are you sure you got fired for your self-righteousness?
-Isaac
Re:Um, that's not my understanding. (Score:1)
With the old ricochet, the poletops and client radios used the same frequencies, forcing the client radios to go quiet while the poletop was relaying packets
Uhh that is so utterly incorrect (insert your favorite weakest link comment) The radios do not go dead when the poletops are communicating...
Ricochet works on spread spectrum frequency hopping between 900-914mhz and 916-924mhz. Every 25ms the radio's switched frequencies so there wouldn't be any collisions.
I am quite certain that one connects only to one poletop at a time
Ok problem with posting your resume on the net is people can see where you've worked at. Nowhere in your resume do I see the words "Ricochet" or "Metricom" I'm not trying to knock your geekyness, but I don't see anying there to make you a professor on the subject. I worked there, i'll let you guess what I did, i'm not saying but it was high level geek stuff that anyone with an IQ under 130 could not do.
Now going back to that S register... I believe it was ATS304=115200 that would correctly set the ricochet to it's maximum speed. Go ahead, I see the older ricochets at flea markets all the time why don't YOU buy a couple and dispute my claim correctly without using assumptions and false accusations.
There was one technical reason the ricochet was never introduced at its highest speed come to think about it. At the time most computers still used 8250 UARTS for serial communications. 16550 were coming out but did not become standard fare until MMX came out.
Your comment sounds like marketdroid drivvel.
--toq
does anyone find it kind of interesting that... (Score:1)