Current Conditions
53°F - SUNNY
Sturla wants Lancaster to be a wireless city
Legislation would give Internet access to all
Intelligencer Journal
Feb 23, 2007 02:50 EST
LANCASTER
By Nathan Lee Gadsden, Staff

The complete text of this article is no longer available online.

Recent Posts
Showing 5 most recent comments out of 29 total TalkBack comments about this article
View full comments | Comment on this article
QUOTE(Artie See @ Feb 25 2007, 08:41 PM)
That issue should be invisible to the consumer. As you know far better than I do, the Internet (ideally) is platform-neutral; whether I'm running Netscape on an RS-6000, or Safari on a Mac, my Internet experience should be comparable.

Deciding between Windows or Linux on the server side - your end - comes down to which is most cost-effective and reliable. For a computer genius like you who doesn't need to have their hands held, Linux is cost-effective and far more reliable. But for a company that tries to save money by staffing itself with low-cost MCSEs just out of training, the GUI and available tech support could very well make Windows the better choice.


Thank you for the compliment but a computer genius I am not. Just been very fortunate to have very good 'geniuses' working with me.

The cost of a Windows based would be significantly higher in cost and support. You are correct that MCSE's are today, low-cost. Reliability would also be a major concern with Windows. From a user standpoint, their computer/platform choice would not be an issue.
palmer
QUOTE(goundpounder @ Feb 24 2007, 12:01 AM)
Free? Yea, right. Who is Sturla trying to kid. The gov. does nothing for free. Our tax dollars will be paying for the disaster. Sturla resign and find another line of work. You are an idiot.


this is just another liberal democrat making promises to the "have nots" We will give you everything that you need and make you life better and all that you have to do is keep voting for us. Unfortunitally these promises never seem to solve the have not`s problems.

peddler
QUOTE(Artie See @ Feb 25 2007, 09:36 PM)

I agree to a certain extent. But (with a few exceptions, like Ephrata) electricity is generated and delivered by private industry, and has been partially deregulated. Telephone service is provided by private industry, and has been mostly deregulated. Cable television is provided by private industry, and has few remaining regulations. Water is still provided by government agencies in most places, but some municipalities (like Columbia) have sold their water systems to private industry; in much of the county, you must drill and maintain your own well to get water.

Where do you draw the line? Should the electric, telephone, and cable TV companies be taken over by our government? Of course not. Internet access is no more a fundamental utility than telephone service; why should it be treated any differently?

P.S.: I'm a Democrat.

wireless internet should be treated differently because the service does not currently exist, government can provide it at low cost and great benefit. it is a service which would not be replicated by the private sector - because it is free to the user and the benefits are not cash revenue but rather a general enhancement of convenient access to connectivity for the citizens of and visitors to the city. private industry has not offered this service and is - previous poster notwithstanding - unlikely to do so. bottom line, this is new territory, nobody is doing it, the cost is not great and the utility, and the notoriety/buzz, would be great for the city.
MOSS
QUOTE(MOSS @ Feb 25 2007, 11:18 PM)
wireless internet should be treated differently because the service does not currently exist, government can provide it at low cost and great benefit.
INTERNET ACCESS does exist. Lancaster City doesn't provide free cell phone service, nor can I use a conventional cordless phone anywhere I go in the city. And paid wireless Internet access IS available in Lancaster City from several different providers (I know, I have it).
Artie See
QUOTE(palmer @ Feb 25 2007, 09:35 PM)
I do not see how the city government could provide this without an expense passed on to the community of users. While the cost would be minimal relative to scale, the prospect of offsetting with 'sponsorship' (see: advertising) is a dream. Advertising based services are not as easy as many would like to believe. It also takes expertise and experience, two things government entities do not have in these types of consumer services.

Sorry IT nerd reading this, I know you think you know the answers to this but you do not. Stick to what you do best, fixing PC's and pulling cable.

With the government handling this it will be at best a municipal service to its own agencies, not a replacement for ISP services in the service area.

Myself and a few partners have a business plan developed for launching municipality based WiFi services, Lancaster included. That being said, the government should not get into the arena of private enterprise services but I would welcome the competition and this decision will not alter our own plan.

One question the public should ask which will shed a lot of light on taxpayer expense and service reliability; Windows or Linux?

Windows or Linux? Who cares?? Sounds like you know just enough to get you in trouble and not enough to get you out.

It doesn't really matter since they are pc based operating systems. Whichever one the service uses is compatable with the other as far as internet service goes. Maybe you better listen to some of those guys pulling cables and fixing pc's instead of causing them to laugh at you behind your back.
It's fairly inexpensive for any business or organization that has a server to offer dial up service to their employees outside of work or for schools to have dial up that goes to the school servers. The same thing can be done with wireless but you're going to have the big companies fighting it. THAT's what will cost money, not the implementation. It is very easy to have a system that requires log-on, even wirelessly, just ask the coffee shops, Issacs or the airport that offers it. The signal can be free, but you won't go further than a home page if you can't log in. You can't log in without an account and that is where they make their money.
Whoever controls the wireless routers controls the login page, the proxy server and the security level. Otherwise, everyone would be buying broadband cards and using them at-will instead of having to get accounts through verizon. They'd be using free-cellphone service, they'd be hijacking radio stations and using a reciever to pick up satellite radio without an account. Just because it's wireless doesn't mean it's free. Take a class in cryptology.
Sounds like you should do more homework before you "set out on your own".
btw, is there ANYTHING you aren't nasty and hateful about?
Chiten
Top Ads