You're comparing apples to oranges. The correct comparison is the total download bandwidth available per square mile of coverage.
The current Ricochet system has been tested at over 128 kbps over 80% of the time, over 200 kbps over 50% of the time, and tops out over 250 kbps (unless you're right at the wired site, and then the max download speed is theoretically close to 500 kbps = 1.4 b/s/hz x 320 khz, but then, Metricom doesn't quote vaporware burst specs). Using an average low-density deployment of 5-6 poletops per square mile, it is easy to see that Ricochet offers REALISTIC throughput of over 1 Mbps per square mile of coverage.
Now how do we convert that to 'sprint' units? Let's see, a normal cell site has a radius of 1.5 miles, so the coverage are is 7 square miles. Okay, the Ricochet system would offer 7 Mbps of throughput within that coverage region.
What does sprint offer? You can do the math.
BTW, in Manhattan, the poletop density was installed at upwards of 50 poletops per square mile.
Then we can add in the cost normalization: Ricochet has flat-rate pricing, Sprint charges are proportional to download.
Hey, the sprint system will have a purpose: downloading simple text messages or information to a cellphone. That's all I'd ever use it for. It is a niche. It is not competitive with the Ricochet offering, by any stretch of the imagination. |
