Comment Re:Yeah - WiFi is just like broadcast TV.... (Score 0) 107
This is going to work really well... not
Think about it. Compare this mythical 50-mi radius super WiFi to an existing hotspot. Or cell tower, for that matter...
1 - Contention. how many clients will be in that coverage footprint, competing for the bandwidth. Radio is a shared medium - only one source can be using it at a time (disregarding exotic and expensive tricks). So you split it up into channels - there goes your bandwidth. And you MIMO the area into sectors - bummer if you live on a sector boundary and bounce between them. No matter what you do, you have to divide a limited resource among a whole lot of users. Suddenly, small local cells look a lot better.
2 - Power. Sure, your local TV station gets great coverage (or since digital, not so much). They've got a 50-Gazillion-Watt transmitter, and it's one-way. How much power will your laptop/tablet/phone/etc. need to talk reliably to a base station 50 *miles* away? At a decent data rate, with the interference of everybody *else* trying to get the attention of that base? It's hard enough to do on analog *voice* systems. If you thought hidden-node problems were bad with WiFi, you ain't seen nothing yet! Oh, and how big are the antennas going to have to be for these lower frequencies (compared to 2.4Ghz)? The next iPad will have a band around *it* for the antenna....
3 - Infrastructure. How many of these mega-APs will get to be in a given area? Does everybody get one (hey - no license)? It's not going to be easy or cheap to backhaul all of those clients from your huge central site. It's simple to serve a small area at a time, and the cell companies certainly have the hand-off issues worked out (well, mostly). But the only long-range two-way systems out there are fairly low-bandwidth and server relatively few nodes.
You can have bandwidth, coverage, or population - pick 2.
Sure it will work, we're already doing it....
1.) Quit thinking WiFi and realize there are GPS time synced solutions out there for existing 900, 2.4, 3.65, 4.8, 5.2 bands etc... also read about OFDM (orthogonal radio's). Currently there are several of us using the same bands competing with each other already and successfully, but a little more spectrum wouldn't hurt
2.) Currently with 1watt TX power I'm able w/high gain antennas shoot 800Mb links 50+ miles, LOS, NLOS or nLOS. Again quit thinking of this as WiFi, it's Point To Point/Multi-Point technology with an AP and a SM (subscriber module). The size of the antenna on the customer side will (according to Motorola and the likes) still be a yagi (3ft) or reflector based (size of modern small satellite dish). Our backhaul radios use anywhere from a 3ft-10ft microwave raydome antennas, which *gasp* is what the cell companies use for their backhauls
3.) We cover 5000sq miles with about ~$10m invested in infrastructure. I can push 12Mb to my customers, 20 miles from the AP with up to 50 ppl on said AP and no service degradation with the current bands. Again, quit thinking WiFi...
It pains me to see this modded Informative when looking at it from a hobbyist sure, but we WISP's are capable of a lot more commercially and this is what our industry is petitioning for. This could be a great thing for people wanting to severe ties with their current telco/cableco internet, using wireless for the last mile which is by far much cheaper than copper/fiber. Lets just hope that the major telco/cableco's don't lobby it to death, or FUD it to the consumer which seems to be already the case.