Ah - that makes more sense. So you were probably accessing the "with-FON" from your nearby neighbours, who presumably had working routers.
I have done that in some more remote parts of the UK, though the problems there are that the "with-FON" service tends to be worse in remote areas than in dense urban areas. However, it may do better than mobile WiFi - it all depends .... Sometime mobile WiFi devices do the business, but not always. Also mobile WiFi tends to be expensive, unless you only have a relatively small number of modest sized files to transfer.
I don't know enough about the "with-FON" mode, but I assume that each active domestic router in an area (typically urban) functions as a hot spot. This would work if one assumes that external users may be close by - neighbours, or pedestrians, or drivers in cars in the nearby road(s). I don't think (but I could be wrong) that the routers work co-operatively in the wireless domain, or do anything clever like beam shaping and adjusting power levels to assist a casual user who "logs in" to a hotspot. If you imagine an iPhone user walking down a road using WiFi rather than cellular networks, it is plausible that the phone could pick up WiFi signals from each nearby house, which would then mean that some form of handover would have to take place as each router came into range, and then went out of range again.
In dense areas, such as blocks of flats, there may be many possible router "hotspots" to choose from, and the hardware/software will simply select those which it considers best at the time. Note that there's no gurantee of service level - a router in a house might be switched off if the user there so decides, and there's nothing the external users can do about that, but on average in an urban or dense area there will be sufficient router "hotspots" to make the connections feasible.
This approach isn't necessarily going to give really high performance uploads/downloads, but may be sufficiently good for some less demanding applicaitons.
I have done that in some more remote parts of the UK, though the problems there are that the "with-FON" service tends to be worse in remote areas than in dense urban areas. However, it may do better than mobile WiFi - it all depends .... Sometime mobile WiFi devices do the business, but not always. Also mobile WiFi tends to be expensive, unless you only have a relatively small number of modest sized files to transfer.
I don't know enough about the "with-FON" mode, but I assume that each active domestic router in an area (typically urban) functions as a hot spot. This would work if one assumes that external users may be close by - neighbours, or pedestrians, or drivers in cars in the nearby road(s). I don't think (but I could be wrong) that the routers work co-operatively in the wireless domain, or do anything clever like beam shaping and adjusting power levels to assist a casual user who "logs in" to a hotspot. If you imagine an iPhone user walking down a road using WiFi rather than cellular networks, it is plausible that the phone could pick up WiFi signals from each nearby house, which would then mean that some form of handover would have to take place as each router came into range, and then went out of range again.
In dense areas, such as blocks of flats, there may be many possible router "hotspots" to choose from, and the hardware/software will simply select those which it considers best at the time. Note that there's no gurantee of service level - a router in a house might be switched off if the user there so decides, and there's nothing the external users can do about that, but on average in an urban or dense area there will be sufficient router "hotspots" to make the connections feasible.
This approach isn't necessarily going to give really high performance uploads/downloads, but may be sufficiently good for some less demanding applicaitons.
Comment