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

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

<channel>
<title>Topic &#x27;Re: 95% can be real if... it determines what 95% coverage is.&#x27; in forum &#x27;&#x27; - dslreports.com</title>
<link>http://www.dslreports.com/forum/Re-95-can-be-real-if-it-determines-what-95-coverage-is-22488728</link>
<description></description>
<language>en</language>
<pubDate>Wed, 22 May 2013 07:26:58 EDT</pubDate>
<lastBuildDate>Wed, 22 May 2013 07:26:58 EDT</lastBuildDate>

<item>
<title>Re: 95% can be real if... it determines what 95% coverage is.</title>
<link>http://www.dslreports.com/forum/Re-95-can-be-real-if-it-determines-what-95-coverage-is-22491185</link>
<description><![CDATA[marigolds posted : <div class="bquote"><small>said by <a href="/profile/1048555" onClick="this.blur(); return popup(event,'/uidpop?ajh=1&uid=1048555');">BF69</a>:</small><br><br>Is this detailed enough for you?<br><br>&raquo;<small>ftp</small>://<A HREF="ftp://ftp.connectedtn.org/CTPublic/Connected_Tennessee_Mapping/Statewide_Maps/TN_Statewide_Density.jpg">ftp.connectedtn.org/CTPublic/Con&middot;&middot;&middot;sity.jpg</A><br> </div>According to their metadata, that's just 2000 census info. Very out of date.<br>Here's something interesting though...<br>This is from their map server. Looks like ConnectTn is a lot more than ConnectTn.<div class="borderless"><TABLE WIDTH=95% align=center border=0 CELLPADDING=4"><TR><TD ALIGN=CENTER VALIGN=CENTER BGCOLOR=#FFFFFF nwrap COLSPAN=2 WIDTH=66%><A HREF="/speak/slideshow/22491185?c=1435782&ret=L2ZvcnVtL3IyMjQ5MDYyNi54bWw%3D"><IMG TITLE="25090 bytes" BORDER=0 WIDTH=300 HEIGHT=321 SRC="/r0/download/1435782~9ed3e260fe678c6754d18cc9e8b85750/connectTn.JPG"></A></TD></TABLE></div>]]></description>
<guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.dslreports.com/forum/Re-95-can-be-real-if-it-determines-what-95-coverage-is-22491185</guid>
<pubDate>Wed, 03 Jun 2009 17:30:56 EDT</pubDate>
</item>

<item>
<title>Re: 95% can be real if... it determines what 95% coverage is.</title>
<link>http://www.dslreports.com/forum/Re-95-can-be-real-if-it-determines-what-95-coverage-is-22491090</link>
<description><![CDATA[me1212 posted : Cool. A 6/1 wireless would be better IMHO than a 5/less than 1 DSL.]]></description>
<guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.dslreports.com/forum/Re-95-can-be-real-if-it-determines-what-95-coverage-is-22491090</guid>
<pubDate>Wed, 03 Jun 2009 17:12:48 EDT</pubDate>
</item>

<item>
<title>Re: 95% can be real if... it determines what 95% coverage is.</title>
<link>http://www.dslreports.com/forum/Re-95-can-be-real-if-it-determines-what-95-coverage-is-22490626</link>
<description><![CDATA[iansltx posted : 38 Mbps down, 10 up, per node. Though WiMAX, at its top modulation on 10MHz channels (doable but not in all circumstances) is 35 and 4 if memory serves. 5MHz channels, which may be more common, are half that of course but as you can see with ClearWire 6 Mbps down and 1 Mbps up is very doable.]]></description>
<guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.dslreports.com/forum/Re-95-can-be-real-if-it-determines-what-95-coverage-is-22490626</guid>
<pubDate>Wed, 03 Jun 2009 16:01:49 EDT</pubDate>
</item>

<item>
<title>Re: 95% can be real if... it determines what 95% coverage is.</title>
<link>http://www.dslreports.com/forum/Re-95-can-be-real-if-it-determines-what-95-coverage-is-22490294</link>
<description><![CDATA[me1212 posted : It was directv.<br><br>What kinda speeds can 1.1 do?]]></description>
<guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.dslreports.com/forum/Re-95-can-be-real-if-it-determines-what-95-coverage-is-22490294</guid>
<pubDate>Wed, 03 Jun 2009 15:22:54 EDT</pubDate>
</item>

<item>
<title>Re: 95% can be real if... it determines what 95% coverage is.</title>
<link>http://www.dslreports.com/forum/Re-95-can-be-real-if-it-determines-what-95-coverage-is-22489567</link>
<description><![CDATA[iansltx posted : WiMAX is not as inexpensive as, say, Motorola Canopy on the tower end ($12k for a second order diversity system plus antennas versus several thousand for Canopy versus less for other systems). However the subscriber units aren't all that bad; $350 or so for something that, with an antenna, can do well in rural areas, if you know where to look.]]></description>
<guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.dslreports.com/forum/Re-95-can-be-real-if-it-determines-what-95-coverage-is-22489567</guid>
<pubDate>Wed, 03 Jun 2009 13:28:54 EDT</pubDate>
</item>

<item>
<title>Re: 95% can be real if... it determines what 95% coverage is.</title>
<link>http://www.dslreports.com/forum/Re-95-can-be-real-if-it-determines-what-95-coverage-is-22489555</link>
<description><![CDATA[iansltx posted : Key difference: BPL causes lots of interference. WiMAX has its own spectrum.<br><br>Also, BPL *does* work, provided you can get cheap bandwidh to the substation etc. Which probably isn't doable out in the sticks anyway. Though if you look through the DSLR forums you'll see a few successful BPL customers through DirecTV...or was it Dish...speeds were 1.5 Mbps both ways.<br><br>Though WiMAX can deliver more, comparable to a DOCSIS 1.1 cable system. Doesn't sound like much to in-town people but great for out-of-towners.]]></description>
<guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.dslreports.com/forum/Re-95-can-be-real-if-it-determines-what-95-coverage-is-22489555</guid>
<pubDate>Wed, 03 Jun 2009 13:27:14 EDT</pubDate>
</item>

<item>
<title>Re: 95% can be real if... it determines what 95% coverage is.</title>
<link>http://www.dslreports.com/forum/Re-95-can-be-real-if-it-determines-what-95-coverage-is-22489527</link>
<description><![CDATA[iansltx posted : What tehcnology are they using? How big of an area are they covering? Most rural wireless has to have antennas pointed at subscribers and vice versa, to the nondirectional nature of a mesh doesnt make as much sense.]]></description>
<guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.dslreports.com/forum/Re-95-can-be-real-if-it-determines-what-95-coverage-is-22489527</guid>
<pubDate>Wed, 03 Jun 2009 13:24:35 EDT</pubDate>
</item>

<item>
<title>Re: 95% can be real if... it determines what 95% coverage is.</title>
<link>http://www.dslreports.com/forum/Re-95-can-be-real-if-it-determines-what-95-coverage-is-22489415</link>
<description><![CDATA[anon posted : Or you could put up another radio. This would create a self-healing mesh, with overlapping coverage. No overload..<br>It would just roll over to the next available, less busy radio. They have built a system like this in Palm Desert, California. Works VERY well.!]]></description>
<guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.dslreports.com/forum/Re-95-can-be-real-if-it-determines-what-95-coverage-is-22489415</guid>
<pubDate>Wed, 03 Jun 2009 13:09:35 EDT</pubDate>
</item>

<item>
<title>Re: 95% can be real if... it determines what 95% coverage is.</title>
<link>http://www.dslreports.com/forum/Re-95-can-be-real-if-it-determines-what-95-coverage-is-22489411</link>
<description><![CDATA[Sammer posted : <div class="bquote"><small>said by <a href="/profile/1440579" onClick="this.blur(); return popup(event,'/uidpop?ajh=1&uid=1440579');">iansltx</a>:</small><br><br>Easy solution: WiMAX. <br> </div>It's a solution but it's not necessarily easy. There seems to be the mistaken belief that WiMAX was developed for rural areas. It was originally developed (just like LTE) for metro areas. It has been found that it (Revision E) works reasonably well in some rural areas but those towers, equipment and radio spectrum are not inexpensive. Once those towers are both in place and paid for it becomes a relatively inexpensive "last mile" solution.]]></description>
<guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.dslreports.com/forum/Re-95-can-be-real-if-it-determines-what-95-coverage-is-22489411</guid>
<pubDate>Wed, 03 Jun 2009 13:09:05 EDT</pubDate>
</item>

<item>
<title>Re: 95% can be real if... it determines what 95% coverage is.</title>
<link>http://www.dslreports.com/forum/Re-95-can-be-real-if-it-determines-what-95-coverage-is-22489225</link>
<description><![CDATA[BF69 posted : <div class="bquote"><small>said by <a href="/profile/1440579" onClick="this.blur(); return popup(event,'/uidpop?ajh=1&uid=1440579');">iansltx</a>:</small><br><br>Easy solution: WiMAX. Before you tune me out, it'll cover long distances with the right antennas, and it'll fill all those peksy coverage holes. If a WiMAX tower gets overloaded due to lots of subscribers, you've found a place that might be economical to wire. Simple as that :)<br> </div>I'm not against WiMax it's just like BPL all I heard for year is how it's the next big thing then nothing ever happens. I remember reading in 2000 how by 2010 BPL was going to be a major player in broadband and how you were going to be able to get super cheap and fast interent from your electric company even if you lived in the boonies]]></description>
<guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.dslreports.com/forum/Re-95-can-be-real-if-it-determines-what-95-coverage-is-22489225</guid>
<pubDate>Wed, 03 Jun 2009 12:41:03 EDT</pubDate>
</item>

<item>
<title>Re: 95% can be real if... it determines what 95% coverage is.</title>
<link>http://www.dslreports.com/forum/Re-95-can-be-real-if-it-determines-what-95-coverage-is-22489066</link>
<description><![CDATA[iansltx posted : Easy solution: WiMAX. Before you tune me out, it'll cover long distances with the right antennas, and it'll fill all those peksy coverage holes. If a WiMAX tower gets overloaded due to lots of subscribers, you've found a place that might be economical to wire. Simple as that :)]]></description>
<guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.dslreports.com/forum/Re-95-can-be-real-if-it-determines-what-95-coverage-is-22489066</guid>
<pubDate>Wed, 03 Jun 2009 12:17:45 EDT</pubDate>
</item>

<item>
<title>Re: 95% can be real if... it determines what 95% coverage is.</title>
<link>http://www.dslreports.com/forum/Re-95-can-be-real-if-it-determines-what-95-coverage-is-22489049</link>
<description><![CDATA[BF69 posted : <div class="bquote"><small>said by <a href="/profile/1304890" onClick="this.blur(); return popup(event,'/uidpop?ajh=1&uid=1304890');">Sammer</a>:</small><br><br><div class="bquote"><small>said by <a href="/profile/1048555" onClick="this.blur(); return popup(event,'/uidpop?ajh=1&uid=1048555');">BF69</a>:</small><br><br>  Well if an area is totally unihhabited is it REALLY necessary to have broadband there? Kentucky is very rual outside the "big" cities.  In areas where there aren't any people I don't think ISPs should have to put in broadband to make a map look fuller.</div>Any broadband mapping would have to include a reasonable definition of minimum population density such as XX/square mile.<br> </div>Is this detailed enough for you?<br><br>&raquo;<small>ftp</small>://<A HREF="ftp://ftp.connectedtn.org/CTPublic/Connected_Tennessee_Mapping/Statewide_Maps/TN_Statewide_Density.jpg">ftp.connectedtn.org/CTPublic/Con&middot;&middot;&middot;sity.jpg</A>]]></description>
<guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.dslreports.com/forum/Re-95-can-be-real-if-it-determines-what-95-coverage-is-22489049</guid>
<pubDate>Wed, 03 Jun 2009 12:14:53 EDT</pubDate>
</item>

<item>
<title>Re: 95% can be real if... it determines what 95% coverage is.</title>
<link>http://www.dslreports.com/forum/Re-95-can-be-real-if-it-determines-what-95-coverage-is-22489015</link>
<description><![CDATA[Sammer posted : <div class="bquote"><small>said by <a href="/profile/1048555" onClick="this.blur(); return popup(event,'/uidpop?ajh=1&uid=1048555');">BF69</a>:</small><br><br>  Well if an area is totally unihhabited is it REALLY necessary to have broadband there? Kentucky is very rual outside the "big" cities.  In areas where there aren't any people I don't think ISPs should have to put in broadband to make a map look fuller.</div>Any broadband mapping would have to include a reasonable definition of minimum population density such as XX/square mile.]]></description>
<guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.dslreports.com/forum/Re-95-can-be-real-if-it-determines-what-95-coverage-is-22489015</guid>
<pubDate>Wed, 03 Jun 2009 12:10:05 EDT</pubDate>
</item>

<item>
<title>Re: 95% can be real if... it determines what 95% coverage is.</title>
<link>http://www.dslreports.com/forum/Re-95-can-be-real-if-it-determines-what-95-coverage-is-22488848</link>
<description><![CDATA[BF69 posted : <div class="bquote"><small>said by <a href="/profile/297537" onClick="this.blur(); return popup(event,'/uidpop?ajh=1&uid=297537');">en102</a>:</small><br><br>  <blockquote><small>quote:</small><hr>Kentucky residents and local ISPs generally laugh hysterically at the 95% coverage claim, and insist that Connected Nation is simply putting on a very well-produced dog and pony show.<hr></blockquote><br><br>I suspect that they are doing the 'following':<br>95% (of those in cities of +100k residents),<br>not 95% of the land<br><br>Lies, lies, and .... statistics!<br> </div>Well if an area is totally unihhabited is it REALLY necessary to have broadband there? Kentucky is very rual outside the "big" cities.  In areas where there aren't any people I don't think ISPs should have to put in broadband to make a map look fuller.]]></description>
<guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.dslreports.com/forum/Re-95-can-be-real-if-it-determines-what-95-coverage-is-22488848</guid>
<pubDate>Wed, 03 Jun 2009 11:45:39 EDT</pubDate>
</item>

<item>
<title>95% can be real if... it determines what 95% coverage is.</title>
<link>http://www.dslreports.com/forum/95-can-be-real-if-it-determines-what-95-coverage-is-22488728</link>
<description><![CDATA[en102 posted :  <blockquote><small>quote:</small><hr>Kentucky residents and local ISPs generally laugh hysterically at the 95% coverage claim, and insist that Connected Nation is simply putting on a very well-produced dog and pony show.<hr></blockquote><br>I suspect that they are doing the 'following':<br>95% (of those in cities of +100k residents),<br>not 95% of the land<br><br>Lies, lies, and .... statistics!<br><small>--<br>Canada = Hollywood North</small>]]></description>
<guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.dslreports.com/forum/95-can-be-real-if-it-determines-what-95-coverage-is-22488728</guid>
<pubDate>Wed, 03 Jun 2009 11:30:40 EDT</pubDate>
</item>

</channel>
</rss>
