成人论坛

I think Steve Andrews has got it a little wrong.

If I'm in Heathrow Airport where I can be guaranteed *reasonably priced* fast wi-fi, I will use it.

I refuse to pay the rip-off price demanded by BT Openzone, particularly when airports like Budapest can offer completely free Wifi. Free as in it costs nothing, does not require you to register and you do not get bombarded with adverts.

Public wi-fi in the UK is an absolute rip-off. Is it any wonder people are turning to 3G broadband?

"The municipal wi-fi movement appears to have stalled, and getting online ...can still be a frustrating affair"

You're telling me! Outside of really big cities the only WiFi tends to be 'illegal' unsecured private access (especially in suburban areas!)

Whereas the 3G networks are covering a larger percentage of the country, meaning that I am able to get my coverage at a decent speed, for a price I'm happy to pay, practically wherever I happen to be living at the time.

my iPhone already does all this, why would I want to lug around a laptop with an embedded 3g connection that I have to pay for?

The technology to seamlessly switch between connectivity methods, using user-defined criteria including cost, has existed for at least 5 years. A company called Birdstep, based in Oslo, produces it - I have worked for them.

I've had a 3g enabled Netbook for 2 years (Dialogue Flybook) but have still to find a reasonable tarrif to enable the function.

Prices are falling now that there is more competition, but there are still punitive charges ( 拢1/Mb) if you go over your 1,3 or 5 Gb monthly allowance. This could mean a 拢1000 bill if you were to exceed your allowance by a gigabyte (a movie or two).

Also the roaming charges are just ridiculous.

I don't need the suppliers/manufacturers to collaborate on stickers, I want them to sort out the price and get the range of 3g to cover most of the UK.

For sure. Nevermind WiFi (range too small, too expensive), nevermind WiMax (consider the roll-out costs) - the telcos shall inherit the connectivity earth. No infrastructure necessary - they already have a largely ubiquitous network that's been getting quicker and quicker, with only technology updates required. They hold all the cards. SIMs with everything.

I used both technologies.

I like wi-fi for its speed and bandwidth - it works fine - when a free or decently priced hotspot can be found...and therein lies the problem. I have found charges for an hour's use to be extortionate (more than my monthly 3G data subscription) and open wi-fi networks pose a security risk.

3G is fine except:

In rural areas it's very patchy
It suffers from contention
Data rates are nowhere near what is claimed
There's almost always a significant limit on the data allowance.

The strengths and weaknesses of the two technologies can complement one another with both existing quite happily.

I've said this before, but while the 3g services on offer have ludicrous restrictions of 1, 3 and 5gb with the latter costing more per-month than my 20mbs (soon to be 50mbs) virgin connection, I can't see these services really being that big of a thing.

3G isn't particularly fast and in much the same way as mobile phones is entirely dependant on mobile phone coverage which in the UK is still incredibly poor in about 60% of the country, and also heavily dependant on good weather. That is never likely to change and that puts as much a restriction on the 3g service as cooper lines puts on the standard broadband.

So in effet, 3g compared to WiFi seems quite clearly to be the same as cooper line vs fibre optic.

And I am sure I don't need to point out that the fibre optic craze, which started strong much like the WiFi craze, only to seemingly stall and not get taken up by other companies is also clearly the overal winner.

Fact is, WiFi is a more stable medium and has that whole longevity thing that 3g surely can't compete with.

In other words, wait until WiMax is officialy released and watch those dongles drop into the bin.

Horses for courses?

3G like GPRS and GSM enjoy fast and pretty seamless handover when a user moves between mobile cells. So it's a good technology when folk are on the move ... coverage permitting. But 3G coverage is slowly creeping out from the most urban areas and across the country. Good for the back of the car, on a bus, walking through a city centre.

Wifi is great when you're in a fixed location, locked into a decent wifi signal that's backed by a fast bandwidth connection back into the internet. Good for airports and stations - if it's not flooded by too many users (Stansted, cough) - and for places where you sit in a seat or at a table/desk. But has anyone cracked wifi handover? Tilt your laptop and it picks up a different wifi router, freezes while it gets locked on, then decides the old signal was stronger after all and shifts back. Cue no work for 10 minutes!

You either need to decide which type of usage you need, or get both.

"If you're in Heathrow Airport, where you can be guaranteed fast wi-fi"

Excuse me?

"you'll use that - if you're out in the country you may use 3G."

Excuse me?

Since when has either been possible?

As with post #3 I have mobile access via my HTC Touch Diamond. When I want a bigger screen and easier keyboard I connect it to my laptop via USB. The alliance doesn't offer anything new in fact I can connect my mobile to any windows based laptop rather than have it limit to one with the technology built in. Mobile broadband access has to be a better way to go rather than upgrading all the old BT network if only there was decent coverage throughout the UK.

"If you're in Heathrow Airport, where you can be guaranteed fast wi-fi, you'll use that"

Utter rubbish. Last week, Terminal 1, at a T-Mobile spot, I got...

2kb/s. No joke.

The problem is theres little or no incentive for the telcos to offer fast efficient cost-effective services, whether it be voice, sms or data. Their interest is solely in making as much money as possible whilst out-laying as little capital as possible.

I say bring back public telecoms companies with efficient leadership.

BUT what is really needed is scalable technology. There's too much cost installing the latest and greatest, look at 3G - what is REALLY needed is technology with the capacity, flexibility and forward thinking that will permit super-high bandwidth enabled mobile phones and devices, where-ever they are on the network, the mobile telcos should then market this to residential, as a competitive solution to cable - I can't understand the move to 3G when what SHOULD have been developed is a high-bandwidth low-latency version of WIFI (801.XX) that would be suitable for their base-stations and power conservative needs of a mobile device, so rather than having several technologies as with my iphone, 3G, GPRS, BlueTooth, Wifi ... everything should just connect with WIFI - standardization makes things easier!