The single most sensible account of the state of Philadelphia's Wi-Fi system to date: The editorial board of the Philadelphia Inquirer popped this one out of the ballpark. I'm sure there are political wheels within wheels here--criticizing technically illiterate city councilman Frank Rizzo, praising Mayor Street's vision, cautioning the incoming mayor. But, holy smokes, this is a nice essay on why Philadelphia didn't wind up with egg on its face, or dollars out of its pockets.
The editorial notes the problems: the network's not done, it was late and over budget, it doesn't work well for everyone, and so on. But it reminds readers that 600 households have gotten computers and training, that EarthLink ate all the expense, and that the city's network forced lower broadband prices through competition.
Yup. As level headed as editorials are *supposed* to be (but often aren't -- I'm pretty lucky; both the St Pete Times and the Tampa Trib have good editorial boards; they're thoughtful even when I disagree with them).
So, why isn't anyone doing muni *WiMAX*?
[Editor's note: Because there's no such thing as WiMax yet...I mean, ok, there is, but there's no substantive deployment outside South Korea, and there's no deployment of the real stuff--the current generation technology that's rolling out. Further, WiMax requires licensed frequencies, but there will be some firms that have the right spectrum in the right cities.--gf]