<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Guest commentary: After the Rising, Whither Goes Philly Wireless?</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.muniwireless.com/2008/06/18/where-goes-philly-wireless-now/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.muniwireless.com/2008/06/18/where-goes-philly-wireless-now/?utm_source=rss&#038;utm_medium=rss&#038;utm_campaign=where-goes-philly-wireless-now</link>
	<description>Citywide WiFi, smart grid, enterprise wireless, public safety, mobile apps</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Sun, 12 Feb 2012 01:38:22 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3.1</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: Bob Kelly</title>
		<link>http://www.muniwireless.com/2008/06/18/where-goes-philly-wireless-now/#comment-34175</link>
		<dc:creator>Bob Kelly</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 23 Jun 2008 16:47:48 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.muniwireless.com/?p=7807#comment-34175</guid>
		<description>Craig, 
  I agree that this  sounds all good. I am glad the WP work will continue. 
  I am with the local incumbent wireless provider, &quot; Vector180 LLC&quot;.
We have been supplying wireless services to the area for over 5 years. When Earthlink came to town, we started to have frequency issues. Of which EL did not care about, despite the fact that both services did not function due to the interference with each other.
The problem basically came down to freq coordination with your neighbors. 
How do you propose working in an unlicensed band in an area that is over utilized?
The backbone that was built was done to cover an umbrella of signal coverage to the 2.4G transmitters on the poles. The backbone is significant, but the last mile can have issues. 
The model they pick, I am sure will be well thought out and highly watched by all the other cities that have crumbled muni plans.

regards
Bob Kelly 
Vp Operations/GM
Vector180 LLC
www.vector180.com</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Craig,<br />
  I agree that this  sounds all good. I am glad the WP work will continue.<br />
  I am with the local incumbent wireless provider, &#8221; Vector180 LLC&#8221;.<br />
We have been supplying wireless services to the area for over 5 years. When Earthlink came to town, we started to have frequency issues. Of which EL did not care about, despite the fact that both services did not function due to the interference with each other.<br />
The problem basically came down to freq coordination with your neighbors.<br />
How do you propose working in an unlicensed band in an area that is over utilized?<br />
The backbone that was built was done to cover an umbrella of signal coverage to the 2.4G transmitters on the poles. The backbone is significant, but the last mile can have issues.<br />
The model they pick, I am sure will be well thought out and highly watched by all the other cities that have crumbled muni plans.</p>
<p>regards<br />
Bob Kelly<br />
Vp Operations/GM<br />
Vector180 LLC<br />
<a href="http://www.vector180.com" rel="nofollow">http://www.vector180.com</a></p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>

