Glenn Fleischman and I disagree so seldom, we both get confused when it happens.

It happened this week when I wrote predicting the failure of Philly's WiFi plan. Glenn says the taxpayers are protected and it all looks good to him. I, on the other hand, have seen Eagles fans.

Long story short I thought it would help if I described what might be a better plan for citywide WiFi. Apologies to those of you who have read this before.

The short answer is WiMax. The long version follows the break.

The goal should be to overcome market bottleneck and spur competition. That bottleneck for broadband is not in the last mile, but in the transmission of data to that last mile.

So the right solution for citywide WiFi is WiMax.

A network of WiMax radios, running from competitive fiber into the city's neighborhoods, would end Verizon's monopoly on backhaul and provide competition for last-mile services. WISPs could create networks for neighborhoods. Coffee shops could connect their free hotspots for less than the cost of business DSL. Hobbyists could get in on the act, too.

If Verizon wanted in on the act, well re-sell to them. But more likely you would provide WISPs, community groups, hotspot operators and individuals with three choices for broadband -- DSL, cable and wireless. The success of a WiMax re-sale model might also encourage cable and phone people to re-sell their capacity. Competition does more to unstick poltiical monopolies than anything else.

WiMax delivers up to 268 Mbps service to each node, and supports a variety of standards which could then compete in the market. A WiMax system would require far fewer hardware installations than a WiFi system, thus reducing the risk from vandals, in part because fewer vulnerable points means you can afford more security at each point.

It seems to me that WiMax is also better politically. WiMax would not replace anything. It would not compete directly with Verizon DSL. It's also possible to have multiple WiMax systems in a community without the frequencies getting cluttered. The city would be acting more as a Venture Capitalist than an operator, stimulating economic activity, activating the multiplier effect.

The argument would be the same as that for building the new Eagles stadium You're stimulating the private sector. (Buy your Eagles pajama bear, pictured above, here.)