Mail Archive Search: <+subject:/^(?:^\s*(re|sv|fwd|fw)[\[\]\d]*[:>-]+\s*)*\[TowerTalk\]\s+Possible\s+bad\s+news\s+for\s+BPL\s*$/>

Results:

References: [ +subject:/^(?:^\s*(re|sv|fwd|fw)[\[\]\d]*[:>-]+\s*)*\[TowerTalk\]\s+Possible\s+bad\s+news\s+for\s+BPL\s*$/: 4 ]

Total 4 documents matching your query.

1. [TowerTalk] Possible bad news for BPL (score: 1): Author: "superberthaguy" <superberthaguy@verizon.net>; Date: Fri, 19 Oct 2007 17:27:04 -0400; "WiMax received an endorsement from a United Nations agency, raising the odds the wireless Internet technology will be widely deployed." 73, Scott W3TX ______________________________________________; /archives//html/Towertalk/2007-10/msg00443.html (7,248 bytes)
2. Re: [TowerTalk] Possible bad news for BPL (score: 1): Author: <tom.mcdermott4@sbcglobal.net>; Date: Sat, 20 Oct 2007 11:38:14 -0500; Hmmm, there may be some terminology confusion here. WiMAX is a high speed RF service, standardized by IEEE 802.16. In the USA it's being operated near 2.5 GHz (within a commerical licensed band, outs; /archives//html/Towertalk/2007-10/msg00480.html (7,626 bytes)
3. Re: [TowerTalk] Possible bad news for BPL (score: 1): Author: "Roger (K8RI)" <K8RI-on-TowerTalk@tm.net>; Date: Sun, 21 Oct 2007 02:19:24 -0400; It's a more echonomical and reliable alternative to BPL that doesn't polute the ham bands. Unfortunately, Michigan, which is where I live, is in deep financial doggie do. They are going for the big; /archives//html/Towertalk/2007-10/msg00483.html (9,546 bytes)
4. Re: [TowerTalk] Possible bad news for BPL (score: 1): Author: Jim Jarvis <jimjarvis@themorsegroup.net>; Date: Sun, 21 Oct 2007 14:39:15 -0400; TT: Given the propagation characteristics of 2.4GHz, and safety issues surrounding flux density, (signal strength) I expect we will see a mixed bag with WiMax, rather than a clean home run. Intel's c; /archives//html/Towertalk/2007-10/msg00510.html (8,685 bytes)

Current List: 1 - 4
Page: [1]