<?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: Before and After: LUS v Cox Speed Test</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.informationarchitech.com/2009/07/before-and-after/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.informationarchitech.com/2009/07/before-and-after/</link>
	<description>Just another WordPress weblog</description>
	<pubDate>Fri, 30 Jul 2010 14:53:34 +0000</pubDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.7.1</generator>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
		<item>
		<title>By: LafayetteGrapevine</title>
		<link>http://www.informationarchitech.com/2009/07/before-and-after/comment-page-1/#comment-27</link>
		<dc:creator>LafayetteGrapevine</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 29 Jul 2009 23:33:39 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.informationarchitech.com/?p=181#comment-27</guid>
		<description>Well, the proof is in the pudding, err, bandwidth. Wonder if test for Cox was done with it's "PowerSurge" bandwith thingy or whatever they are calling it.
No doubt though, LUS is the way to go with 100 megs.
Nice comparison.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Well, the proof is in the pudding, err, bandwidth. Wonder if test for Cox was done with it&#8217;s &#8220;PowerSurge&#8221; bandwith thingy or whatever they are calling it.<br />
No doubt though, LUS is the way to go with 100 megs.<br />
Nice comparison.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
