said by Semaphore 
:Storm is a large Star topology WISP. They use a 'custom built' radio loaded with a "Carl Net" type polling client. In a simple form the AP polls all of the subscribers. So latency is consistent but can be higher than other Wisp's that use 802.11b type collision based radios - which of course can also provide much less consistent latency than a polling system does.
Their network is almost entirely Line Of Site, however they've recently started small deployments of Non Line of Site, using (I believe) Trango equipment. Which is a reasonable NLOS manufacturer. Another benefit of a polling AP is that packet loss is typically very low, but if you're expecting DSL level latency then you won't find it in wireless.
The reviews on this site are dated and limited. I feel the reviewers were expecting DSL type latency (Lag) and were not prepared to accept the reality of Wireless - you will see outages, and you are susceptible to interference. They may also have had substandard installs. Most of the work I've seen by this company are quite well done.
If you have no other choice but Satellite, then WISP is the way to go... if you have a multitude of options then you may want to consider them first.
BTW: I do not work for them in any way.
While that may be true of storm, not all wireless isps suck or have inherent lag. I constantly have better ping times to nearly every site then most DSL or Cable users. It really depends if your isp deploys the technology properly and also what technology they use.Pinging dslreports.com [209.123.109.175] with 32 bytes of data:
Reply from 209.123.109.175: bytes=32 time=28ms TTL=50
Reply from 209.123.109.175: bytes=32 time=27ms TTL=50
Reply from 209.123.109.175: bytes=32 time=26ms TTL=50
Reply from 209.123.109.175: bytes=32 time=26ms TTL=50
Ping statistics for 209.123.109.175:
Packets: Sent = 4, Received = 4, Lost = 0 (0% loss),
Approximate round trip times in milli-seconds:
Minimum = 26ms, Maximum = 28ms, Average = 26ms
