Free WiFi at Airports: Why LAX & DFW Don't Offer It

[noblerare]

I don't know how many of you travel but I am wondering if any of you know the story behind free Wifi at airports?

More specifically, why is it that Seattle, Pittsburgh, Phoenix, Tucson, San Francisco, Denver, San Antonio, Boston, Chicago, Detroit, Washington and other major cities offer free Wifi at their airports but two of the major airports, Los Angeles (LAX) and Dallas (DFW) don't? Is it a city/county decision?

In fact, even airports in foreign countries offer free Wifi. (Hong Kong, Tel Aviv, Athens, Oslo, Auckland, Sao Paulo, Manila, Karachi, Vancouver, Cancun, Santiago, Beijing, Sarajevo, Moscow, Istanbul, Tehran, Taiwan, Dubai, Warsaw and Vienna). Seriously, it's a must-have these days! How can these cities offer free Wifi but the U.S. can't even take care of two of its largest airports?

I find it very, very annoying when I'm on the road and I have layovers in LAX and DFW and have to pay $9.99 for T-Mobile's Internet access. People are traveling more and more and they need to be connected constantly. These are just two airports that I have in mind, but why don't all airports offer this service?

Is there something that I can do (i.e. write a letter, petition) to get these airports to join the modern world?

 

[NobodySpecial]

You could open a nicer airport nearby so that there is competition between the airports and one will offer free wifi to encourage travellers.

However if in the case of LAX or DFW there was an alternate airport where they hit you with baseball bats - people would still use them in preference to either LAX or DFW, so there isn't really much commercial driver

 

[JaredJames]

Does the airport offer it or does a private company do it (starbucks or the like)?

I know that unless it is a specific airline in the UK (in some 'gold lounge'), you don't get it unless you use a private location such as a starbucks / bar. T-mobile also offer wifi services at various public locations, but you have to pay for it (unless you're me with free access).

I suggest you stop complaining as it costs money to host free internet services, from installation to maintenance and support. If it is provided free, that's lovely, but you aren't entitled to it.

If you're so dependent on it or really want it, why not get a smart phone with unlimited data plan and use that to connect to the net. I can do that through my phone and the speeds aren't all that bad. Or, get a wireless dongle via a phone company. At least this way you've always got the internet.

 

[NobodySpecial]

Does the airport offer it or does a private company do it

Generally the airport. For the relatively small cost it might make sense to keep passengers happier during the pointless 3hours checkin.

at various public locations, but you have to pay for it (unless you're me with free access).

Some airports use the verizon or similar pay $10 for 24hours rate but a lot are free.

I suggest you stop complaining as it costs money to host free internet services, from installation to maintenance and support. If it is provided free, that's lovely, but you aren't entitled to it.

True, but you aren't entitled to air conditioning, heating - or in the case of Heathrow, roofs that keep the rain out - but you would like to have them!

 

[Pengwuino]

E-mail the airport... or something. ***** and complain. Then realize it's not worth it. If you MUST be connected, there are plenty of services that allow you to get internet from wherever (as stated before, smartphones with unlimited data planes, satellite internet, or what have you). The airport KNOWS you have to go to them... or at the least, don't want to bother with the alternatives which I don't even really know about.

 

[JaredJames]

Generally the airport. For the relatively small cost it might make sense to keep passengers happier during the pointless 3hours checkin.

Pointless only from your point of view. And it's only a small cost if you know what that cost actually is. How much will it cost to run the required networking systems around an entire airport? (Here's a clue, it's not cheap.)

Some airports use the verizon or similar pay $10 for 24hours rate but a lot are free.

Nothing wrong with that. Saves them money.

True, but you aren't entitled to air conditioning, heating - or in the case of Heathrow, roofs that keep the rain out - but you would like to have them!

Actually, by law they have to maintain a minimum standard, at the very least for the staff to work in. So yes, you are entitled to it. Even if it's not directly for you.

 

[Pengwuino]

Pointless only from your point of view. And it's only a small cost if you know what that cost actually is. How much will it cost to run the required networking systems around an entire airport? (Here's a clue, it's not cheap.)

I'm interested in figuring that out. Wiki says LAX has 60 million visitors a year. That's on average 166k passengers per day. I suspect you're looking at peak travel days getting 250k a day? Wow, that number boggles my mind... they're bringing through a mid-sized city every day?

Anyhow, 250k people per day, if you're sitting around 3 hours wanting to use the internet and estimating a sizeable % of the passengers want to use the internet from their laptop, smartphone, whatever, you're probably still talking 5,000+ simultaneous internet users at any given time, and they have to be conservative and probably have bandwith for 3x as many people. That's a lot of internets!

Then again, it's freaken LAX...

 

[NobodySpecial]

- I meant the 3hour checkin was pointless. As in your taking a 40minute London-Paris flight and they make you checkin 3hours early because it's international 'for security'

I don't think LAX reserves that much bandwidth - the connections are't usually that great and only a small proportion of customers will use them.

As for LAX - the only good thing you can say about it is that it makes Heathrow look like a model of efficency and excellent customer service!

 

[JaredJames]

I don't think LAX reserves that much bandwidth - the connections are't usually that great and only a small proportion of customers will use them.

A perfect example of an assumption. And more importantly, given the number of people with wifi enabled devices not particularly a good one either.

 

[NobodySpecial]

Only a small proportion will use them if you make the connection bad enough !

 

[JaredJames]

So your going to supply a deliberately poor service to stop people using it? Seems like it's not worth supplying it in the first place...

 

[Vanadium 50]

I'm not so sure this is even true. ORD, IAD, ATL are all for pay. PHL is free only on weekends.

Someone somewhere has to pay for this. It's not clear why that should be the airport.

 

[Bob Engineer]

airport without wifi?? are you serius? if you not fine it, just straight away go to fastfood restaurant or book shop near by.

 

[Bob Engineer]

Does the airport offer it or does a private company do it (starbucks or the like)?

I know that unless it is a specific airline in the UK (in some 'gold lounge'), you don't get it unless you use a private location such as a starbucks / bar. T-mobile also offer wifi services at various public locations, but you have to pay for it (unless you're me with free access).

I suggest you stop complaining as it costs money to host free internet services, from installation to maintenance and support. If it is provided free, that's lovely, but you aren't entitled to it.

If you're so dependent on it or really want it, why not get a smart phone with unlimited data plan and use that to connect to the net. I can do that through my phone and the speeds aren't all that bad. Or, get a wireless dongle via a phone company. At least this way you've always got the internet.

that right... just go and find private company like startbuck... just pay a small penny for drink and you can get your free wifi all the time.