<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:wfw="http://wellformedweb.org/CommentAPI/"
	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/"
	xmlns:slash="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/slash/"
	>

<channel>
	<title>Internet Statistics by Alex Goldman &#187; texas</title>
	<atom:link href="http://net-statistics.net/wordpress/tag/texas/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://net-statistics.net/wordpress</link>
	<description>of AG Internet Knowledge, LLC</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Sun, 06 Nov 2011 14:33:29 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<language>en</language>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.0.5</generator>
		<item>
		<title>Texas Recommends Most Applications</title>
		<link>http://net-statistics.net/wordpress/2009/12/texas-broadband-stimulus-one/</link>
		<comments>http://net-statistics.net/wordpress/2009/12/texas-broadband-stimulus-one/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Wed, 16 Dec 2009 14:42:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Alex</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Law]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Stimulus]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[texas]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[wisp]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://net-statistics.net/wordpress/?p=220</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[There are clearly numerous good applications in the state of Texas. Still, I think that the state of Texas could have done something to grade or rank the applications, instead of providing a long list of those that met some very low expectations.]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Like many large states, Texas had to examine a very large number of applications. It seems, however, that the state did as little ranking as possible, merely providing a list of applications that &#8220;were deemed to have a potentially positive impact on the state of Texas&#8221; according to the state&#8217;s letter, here (<a href="http://www.baller.com/pdfs/Texas.pdf">.pdf</a>) taken from the Baller Herbst website.
<p>No surprise that one of the state&#8217;s largest WISPs, ERF Wireless, has an <a href="http://www.ntia.doc.gov/broadbandgrants/applications/summaries/1286.pdf">approved application</a> on the list, even though it covers several states, but I was surprised to see Hughes&#8217; (heavily redacted) <a href="http://www.ntia.doc.gov/broadbandgrants/applications/summaries/2790.pdf">application</a> on the list as I think that satellite can do little for anyone.
<p>There are clearly numerous good applications in the state of Texas. Many towns filed public computer center applications, and some of the state&#8217;s universities also applied for funds.
<p>One of the state&#8217;s other large WISPs, Internet America, submitted an <a href="http://www.ntia.doc.gov/broadbandgrants/applications/summaries/2097.pdf">application</a> covering 35 counties that is on the state&#8217;s list.
<p>Still, I think that the state of Texas could have done something to grade or rank the applications, instead of providing a long list of those that met some very low expectations.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://net-statistics.net/wordpress/2009/12/texas-broadband-stimulus-one/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
	</channel>
</rss>

