February 06, 2006

The FONey war

OK, I can’t resist posting. I’ve been a good boy, done my day’s alloted work (OK, I should have phoned the VAT man, maybe tomorrow). The kids are asleep for their afternoon naps.

The News Du Jour is that a company called FON are starting a “user-sponsored” public WiFi network. I saw their pitch at the ETel conference, and you have to be impressed by their passion, if nothing else.

There’s plenty of places to go read the PR blurb and the blogospheric commentary.

First, the good news. This aligns with what I’ve been saying for a long time, namely that the locus of innovation in telecom will move to how networks are priced and financed. When the user and owner interests align (because in some respect they’re the same folk), nobody cares any more about capturing the consumer surplus of the stupid network.

Now the bad news. I think they’ve started with the hardest case first, which is consumers. The highest possible cost per added node, the lowest revenue per user. A more promising start might be enabling public-service workers to roam among localities, or companies to have reciprocal rights in business parks.

Sadly, it also highlights a screw-up in how almost all corporates set up their networks. Somehow, physical connectivity within the building is seen as a great way to ensure secure access to networks. (Hey, all the contract cleaners are trustworthy, aren’t they?) The sensible alternative would be Internet access everywhere in the building, and get people to VPN in. If you find that VPNs are too expensive, you’re buying your networking gear from the wrong vendor. This also avoid the frequent and ridiculous situation of visitors being unable to get Net access. Some of those folk are $’000s per day consultants you’re working hard to prevent from being productive. Anyhow, FON isn’t easy to do for corporated because they’ve embedded security policy in the access network, the exact opposite of what the end-to-end principle tells you.

So FON is a very risky venture, where unless they find some seed markets onto which to condense a critical mass of connectivity, you’re just left with isolated islands too disparate to justify the effort of membership. After all, our friendly open networks “Linksys” and “default” are pretty ubiquitous, too. I want them to succeed, but it looks like the kind of venture that you need to bung $1bn at to get it started. But as a way of Google kicking sand in the face of some telcos, maybe that’s an affordable budget.

PS - it’s cold enough here in Vilnius that the snow is just precipitating out of the air near the freezing ground — blue sky above! Was -19C when I arrived last night, and felt it too.

Posted by Martin Geddes at 02:19 PM
Trackback Pings

TrackBack URL for this entry:
http://www.telepocalypse.net/cgi-sys/cgiwrap/mgeddes/MT/mt-tb.cgi/652.

Listed below are links to weblogs that reference The FONey war:

» The FONey war from Skype Journal
OK, I can’t resist posting. I’ve been a good boy, done my day’s alloted work (OK, I should have phoned the VAT man, maybe tomorrow). The kids are asleep for their afternoon naps. The News Du Jour is that a... [Read more]

Tracked on February 7, 2006 10:35 PM
Comments

Very insightful posting. I'd also like to point out that despite the hype, FON is not the first to come up with the idea of sharing WiFi in this way. Radiuz.net has been operational for two years already with a similar service (which we call a "cooperative" WiFi network). One advantage of Radiuz: no need to download and install new router firmware - it uses the WPA-Enterprise functionality already built into most recent vintage consumer WiFi routers. If users want VPN, they're free to add that on top, as you suggest.

Posted by: at February 6, 2006 10:36 PM

I'm not sure why everyone keeps going on about getting revenue from customers. I think the Bill approach is Foney, a red-herring to appeal to the more conservative elements in the consumer space.

I completely agree that getting critical mass is very important, but I think that the 'tipping point' may not be quite as high as people believe. 70% of mobile users access only 3 cells in a month. With mobile phones and other devices (PSP etc) getting WiFi built in, and the (somewhat self-enforced) transitory behaviours of 'the kids', I expect that Fon will have something highly valuable, IF the tipping point is reached.

I've posted several items on FON, where, I hope, I say this in more detail.

Posted by: at February 7, 2006 09:37 AM

about fon: i don't think that Varsavsky nice idea need to involve the word money (at least, when you are obtaining profit from resources other person is paying for). that's the reason why i am collaborating in a project named WiFree

WiFree is open source and is based on a fully non-centralized P2P authentication and reputation model so you can share your bandwitdh limiting freeriders. by using WiFree in your router you can be sure when you open your wireless hotspot!

there's a version for linux and the linksys wrt54g family too.

we propose a simple model: you get internet access from any WiFree hotspot if you also provide WiFree access to other users in a fair way

you can have a look and get the WiFree from http://www.wifree-project.net

have a nice wifree!!
jooe

Posted by: at February 7, 2006 06:11 PM
Please enter your comment below. Your comment will not appear immediately -- they all go for pre-approval by me because of the volume of spam I receive.







Remember personal info?