Read this if you're in need of a little laugh: Not to be totally harsh, but this is a really weird opinion article about Wi-Fi in Atlanta's Hartsfield airport clearly written by someone who has pretty much no understanding of Wi-Fi. It's just weird.
OK, this one isn't nearly as weird: The article is about the city of Cincinnati's efforts to build a Wi-Fi cloud around town. These plans that include city governments are pretty exciting, but I'm getting a bit tired of hearing that every city will have the largest Wi-Fi network in the country. It's pretty funny at this point.
One guy in this article says that Wi-Fi is "becoming a high-class way of doing business." I didn't realize that anyone was that concerned with doing business the high-class way.
This is looking like my day to vent, but sometimes this group supporting CDMA astounds me. Here's a press release about a paper the CDMA Development Group put out supposedly about interoperability of CDMA and Wi-Fi. Really it seems to be an opportunity for the group to assert that CDMA is much better and will be more successful than Wi-Fi.
The group tries to say that data throughput of some CDMA data networks, like the one just launched in Washington, D.C. by Verizon, is the same as a hotspot backed by a T-1. Verizon, the operator offering the service, is touting it as an average throughput of 300-500 Kbps. Alan Reiter ran a number of tests and found he usually got around 200 Kbps. A T-1 line is 1.544 Mbps.
The problem with these guys is when they make specious assertions like this it makes it really hard to take anything they say seriously. There are some valid points about benefits the cellular networks have over Wi-Fi like coverage and security. But it's hard to even pay attention to those points when they're wrapped up in these other bogus conclusions.