<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>

<rss version="2.0" xmlns:blogChannel="http://backend.userland.com/blogChannelModule">

<channel>
<title>Re: Nice in </title>
<link>http://www.dslreports.com/forum/r19663971</link>
<description></description>
<language>en</language>
<pubDate>Thu, 04 Dec 2008 20:28:00 EDT</pubDate>
<lastBuildDate>Thu, 04 Dec 2008 20:28:00 EDT</lastBuildDate>

<item>
<title>Re: Nice</title>
<link>http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,19663971</link>
<description><![CDATA[<A HREF="/useremail/u/297537"><b>en102</b></A> : Agreed... something up to at least a few kilometers will be needed.  Then again, this was in the 2.6GHz spectrum, I'd expect a bit better for range on 1900MHz, and even better on 850MHz.<br><small>--<br>Canada = Hollywood North</small>]]></description>
<guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,19663971</guid>
<pubDate>Fri, 21 Dec 2007 12:31:12 EDT</pubDate>
</item>

<item>
<title>Nice</title>
<link>http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,19663928</link>
<description><![CDATA[<A HREF="/useremail/u/1497683"><b>wruckman</b></A> : Not bad to get 100Mbps at a few hundred meters. But it will obviously appear to be slower once you put the load of a entire area on it of wireless users. Plus, most people will probably be further away than a few hundred meters from the tower. But a step forward it is.<br><small>--<br>William Ruckman<br>&raquo;<A HREF="http://ruckman.net" >ruckman.net</A></small>]]></description>
<guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,19663928</guid>
<pubDate>Fri, 21 Dec 2007 12:22:13 EDT</pubDate>
</item>

</channel>
</rss>
