Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Steve Jobs Interested in Wi-Fi Sharing
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
If you have to pay for service to share with others in order to share from others, its not free
Maybe I am reading it wrong.
Maybe I am reading it wrong.
I don't know that this is true exactly and I am sure that you don't either despite how adamant you seem about it.
Certainly with cable companies in North America, one generally signs something to the effect of "this cable is only good for x number of people, otherwise you pay more," but not everyone gets Internet from the cable company.
In the UK, it's far worse given that they have that ridiculous "law" (of recent notoriety), that makes it illegal to "dishonestly (share) access the internet."
I wouldn't think it's a given that this is explicitly disallowed by ISP contracts in any North American location though and there are probably ways around that agreement anyway. You could just say that you are splitting your internet connection into "inside the house" and "outside the house" streams for instance.
hmmm
the way i see it though, is that there actually isn't any real "free internet" since everyone who has a login to the FON network has their own FON at home/business/whatever and therefore is a paying user to an ISP. so . . . does this actually violate ISP rules since they aren't losing out on any revenue?
i guess that's just for regular land line ISP. i can see the cell phone companies being up in arms since they might lose revenue from cell phones connecting to wifi instead of their data streams . . . wonder how at&t would feel about people buying iphones and unlocking them and using them in this utopic world of "free" internet.
the way i see it though, is that there actually isn't any real "free internet" since everyone who has a login to the FON network has their own FON at home/business/whatever and therefore is a paying user to an ISP. so . . . does this actually violate ISP rules since they aren't losing out on any revenue?
i guess that's just for regular land line ISP. i can see the cell phone companies being up in arms since they might lose revenue from cell phones connecting to wifi instead of their data streams . . . wonder how at&t would feel about people buying iphones and unlocking them and using them in this utopic world of "free" internet.
And who is providing all this wonderful wifi?
The cable and phone companies.
And as 0racle mentioned, it goes against the user agreement, so it will be rough going here in the states.
This strikes me as something that could take off in Europe but will be held down here.
Time will tell.
Interesting, however your ISP may not think it is a good idea and probably violates the ISP rules.
It's a zero sum game, you loose exactly what you gain.
In theory if you shared your conection with one other person you'd "give away" half your ISP connection. But the other person also gives you half his connection. But actually you gain more because now you have a redundant conection if either person's ISP goes down you both are still on-line
This scales. With 10 people you give away 90% of your connection but get 10% of 9 other connections. What you gain now in addition to 10X redundancy is a huge amount of "peak" bandwidth because you can send and receive traffic over one wired and 9 wifi conections all at once. This does require 10 people all within range.
Not only WiFi..
but iPod touch and iPhone should incorporate Bonjour. With a simple software update people can be chatting over WiFi. Ever wanted to talk to that girl across the class? Send her a chat request... let's just hope she doesn't deny it.
(just an idea)
but iPod touch and iPhone should incorporate Bonjour. With a simple software update people can be chatting over WiFi. Ever wanted to talk to that girl across the class? Send her a chat request... let's just hope she doesn't deny it.
(just an idea)
Fon is huge here in Madrid; there are over 200 wifi spots available just in my neighborhood.
I remember seeing a commercial for it and it seemed to me that they were the ISP -they provided the access, router, installation for free as long as you agree to keep the wireless connection open for other Fon users, who do have passwords etc. to get onto your network. They in return make money from people not hosting a WAP and therefore have to buy an account to access the Fon WAPs around them.
The commercial wasn't super clear, and neither is the webpage, but that's how it seemed it worked. So if your willing to share the bandwidth they provide you, you get free internet and free access to all other Fon WAPs.
Even worse...... The RIAA may come after you and hit you with a 260,000 bill.
No way the ISP(s) are going to go along.
I'm up for free wi-fi access. What keeps anyone from using iPhone or iPod access though?
me too. sounds pretty interesting.
People in the UK, BT already do this, if you have a Home Hub and BT broadband you can allow others to securely use your internet in return for totally unlimited Openzone minutes anywhere.
http://btfon.com/
So on iPhone launch day I'll be getting unlimited Cloud & Openzone :-D
http://btfon.com/
So on iPhone launch day I'll be getting unlimited Cloud & Openzone :-D
here's where AppleInsider got their info on FON
http://counternotions.com/2007/10/26/sj-meeting-video/
this is where appleinsider got their info - it's a 5 minute video clip describing the meeting with jobs. =)
http://counternotions.com/2007/10/26/sj-meeting-video/
this is where appleinsider got their info - it's a 5 minute video clip describing the meeting with jobs. =)
Comcast Users: Forget About Sharing on FON
PROHIBITED USES AND ACTIVITIES
Prohibited uses include, but are not limited to, using the Service, Customer Equipment, or the Comcast Equipment to:
...
ix. resell the Service or otherwise make available to anyone outside the Premises] the ability to use the Service (i.e. wi-fi, or other methods of networking), in whole or in part, directly or indirectly, or on a bundled or unbundled basis. The Service is for personal and non-commercial use only and you agree not to use the Service for operation as an Internet service provider or for any business enterprise or purpose, or as an end-point on a non-Comcast local area network or wide area network
Read your Terms of Service before you get wet over Socialism in Action.
PROHIBITED USES AND ACTIVITIES
Prohibited uses include, but are not limited to, using the Service, Customer Equipment, or the Comcast Equipment to:
...
ix. resell the Service or otherwise make available to anyone outside the Premises] the ability to use the Service (i.e. wi-fi, or other methods of networking), in whole or in part, directly or indirectly, or on a bundled or unbundled basis. The Service is for personal and non-commercial use only and you agree not to use the Service for operation as an Internet service provider or for any business enterprise or purpose, or as an end-point on a non-Comcast local area network or wide area network
Read your Terms of Service before you get wet over Socialism in Action.
this is communistic at heart....and wimax or some long-distance wireless access will be mainstream way before this. I know that the maximum bandwidth I get is almost all consumed by my own network, I'm not sharing.
I'm not familiar with FON, but I've seen similar proposals in the US. Typically, there's some kind of QoS going on in the router, so your traffic will have priority over everybody else. Your usage should not be impacted by others - if there isn't enough bandwidth to go around, they'll see a shortage, not you.
The main reason for something like this is roaming. If the system is widespread, then you should be able to find an access point when traveling. You don't have to pay money for this access if you're sharing your excess bandwidth with other customers.
It's definitely a possibility. They could set up proper auditing and monitoring in their routers, and their back-end, so connections can be traced to the actual customer account, but this assumes they actually have this set up. And it may be up to you and your lawyer to pull the records for whatever law enforcement agency decides to investigate.
In the US, it will depend on your contract. If it prohibits bandwidth sharing or reselling then you're SOL.Certainly with cable companies in North America, one generally signs something to the effect of "this cable is only good for x number of people, otherwise you pay more," but not everyone gets Internet from the cable company.
In the UK, it's far worse given that they have that ridiculous "law" (of recent notoriety), that makes it illegal to "dishonestly (share) access the internet."
My gut feeling is that cable systems will definitely prohibit this, since bandwidth is shared between all customers on a segment of cable. It may or may not be prohibited for a point-to-point technology like DSL or FiOS, where your bandwidth is capped to an amount you're explicitly paying for.
As for the UK, I don't know the law but if it prohibits "dishonestly accessing the internet", that sounds more like a prohibition against piggybacking. It doesn't sound like a prohibition against connecting to a third-party access point if you have permission, nor does it sound like a prohibition against giving access permission to the world at large. The key word here is "dishonestly".
(I'm assuming you inserted the word "share" as a form of commentary. If the law explicitly prohibits sharing access, that's something else, but I would be surprised if that is true.)
This is just one of many reasons (wimax, etc.) that wifi will eclipse 3g and we may (hopefully) never see 3g on the iPhone.
It seems like it wouldn't be free, right? At least not exactly. I think you're still paying for whatever YOUR service is, so the cable comps aren't really losing revenue, right? You're just opening up your own network to others, and then others are opening it up to you - kind of like gift exchanging, you have to send to receive.
And of course Jobs would be up for it - wifi everywhere is so much easier and faster than 3G!
And of course Jobs would be up for it - wifi everywhere is so much easier and faster than 3G!
Woah.
Sounds fantastic. Imagine if Apple and Google joined up and used the bandwidth option to position themselves as ISP's in this way. Free Wi-Fi all over.