4 ms·

I believe it would be a great source of revenue for them and enable them to run a better encyclopaedia with less hits on their website, especially for frequentl

I believe it would be a great source of revenue for them and enable them to run a better encyclopaedia with less hits on their website, especially for frequently accessed sites How many people are really likely to buy this, though? With wireless internet from your phone from damn near any populated point on the planet becoming more and more widespread, I can't imagine too many circumstances where this would be useful enough to pay money for.

electromagnetic 17y ago
3G phones only have ~14% market integration, cell phones aren't universally owned, actually some countries have ridiculously low adoption rates for their internet infrastructure. 3G infrastructure is severely lacking compared to 2G infrastructure. There's plenty of cities here in Canada without any 3G access and have over 100,000 people and no current plans for 3G. Even areas with 3G, rarely have usable 3G everywhere, especially around cottage country here in Ontario. The valleys seriously hamper even 2G access, especially anywhere near the water. The majority of people don't live in metropolitan areas, so I believe this would sell hugely. I also believe most people don't want to pay for internet twice. Edit: http://www.coveragemaps.com/gsmposter_world.htm http://www.coveragemaps.com/gsmposter_world.htm Yellow is 3G. It certainly isn't expansive access in NA and considering offline access would likely only be required outside of major populated areas, this generally means outside of 3G areas. Offline is kind of the point of an offline wikipedia.
dkasper 17y ago
I think the Kindle is a good counterexample to your argument. In fact now that I think about it, if you could get Wikipedia on the Kindle that might be a huge selling point.