Wi-Fi Service in Mountain View brought to you by Google

The Palo Alto Daily News reported today that the city of Mountain View approved a plan to allow Google to provide free city wide Wi Fi access throughout their city. Under the plan, Google will install Wi-Fi antennas on 350 telephone poles throughout Mountain View. There wasn't any mention on timeframe of when this would happen.

A bunch of American cities are on the record with their intentions of going wireless. That list includes Philadelphia and San Francisco. Already there are a lot of smaller neighborhood based efforts, but none of those are purely funded through private means and I don't believe any of those services have materialized yet. Philadelphia was first to announce their plans, but quickly ended up in court when the local Internet ISP sued them to protect their business line.

Personally, I think going completely wireless in a small suburban city is a much more interesting experiment than doing it in a more metropolitan area. There's enough going on and enough channels for word to get around in a major city, but in the smaller cities that have equivalent amenities to a larger counterpart, they can do everything they can to recreate the big city on a more personal scale, but they don't have (and don't want) the population density that's so important in the "vibe" of most cities.

Can widespread wireless access enable a small city to copy not only the structure, but also the "vibe" that creates life in the communities of that city?

Can't wait to take comcast out of the loop. From $60/ for what used to be basic cable, to another $60 for internet access, we are getting ripped off big time for granting them a monopoly to use OUR cable lines. San Jose City should be ashamed of itself for allowing this rip off in the name of a .60/bill franchise fee.

Palo Alto put in a fiber optic network, Mt View is installing a city wide Wifi network.

San Jose is the heart of silicon valley and we should have our own cable, network system. We would not have to charge $120 to every household because we won't be trying to convince everyone that it is COMCASTIC!

I'm paying $30/month for Yahoo DSL Pro. The actual speed varies and sometimes it's a lot slower than advertised, but on the whole it's pretty reliable. Aren't there territorial issues between companies on top of any technology issue that's keeping broadband services from being available as an open market item? I can't remember how the whole confusing mess comes together.

I used to pay $60/month for Sprint Broadband Direct which was always erratic and going out.

The supreme court told cable operators they don't have to share their lines and equipment with anyone. They, for some reason, are not the same a the phone companies where you can get service from alternative souces and thus putting SBC out of business.