If Your Wireless Broadband Technology Is So Great, Why Do You Only Support Voice

from the yeah-and-monkeys-might-fly... dept

Tue, Jul 18th 2006 1:36pm — Carlo Longino

About a year ago, a previously unheard of company started touting their "xMax" wireless technology, saying it could deliver high data speeds over great distances at low power, in unlicensed frequency. We were pretty skeptical of the claims, largely because the only source that supported them in some media coverage was a university professor on the company's board of directors, whose obvious bias wasn't disclosed. Too many times have wireless technologies failed to live up to their hype, and a general rule of thumb is that the bigger the claims about a technology, the less of them it can actually live up to. The company ran a staged test for the media several months ago, "proving" the technology, but results from any real-world installations are hard to come by. Nevertheless, the company now says it is accepting applications from regional dealers and carriers to launch a nationwide VoIP network using its technology, which it claims reduces "the cost of deploying wireless broadband to the point where they can compete with traditional communications companies."

There's two sets of issues here. First are the technical ones, with the biggest being if the technology actually works in real-world deployments, which isn't clear. Also, the company is yet to deliver its consumer handset. The other issues are commercial -- why, if xMax is so wonderful at "wireless broadband", is the only application it's supporting voice? And why go to all the trouble to compete in a ridiculously crowded market with established players, and more importantly, rapidly falling prices? The company says that a regional carrier could build a voice network for far less than if they were using cellular equipment in licensed spectrum. That may be true, but it misses the point -- plenty of options for mobile voice coverage already exist, and if somebody wants to get into that game, why bother building infrastructure, with all the attendant backhaul and maintenance costs, instead of just setting up a virtual operator? Further clouding things is the statement that the company "hired the London office of Credit Suisse as a strategic adviser for the company's technology launch." Why hire an investment bank to advise on a technology launch? Never fear, though, the company plans to use "grassroots" marketing to roll things out on "a viral basis" (bonus points if you can explain what that means in the comments). Previously, the company said it would launch overseas because it was afraid of battling the US telecom lobby. It looks like it's had a change of heart, perhaps realizing that it's such a blip on these companies' radar that it's not worth worrying about.

Thank you for reading this Techdirt post. With so many things competing for everyone’s attention these days, we really appreciate you giving us your time. We work hard every day to put quality content out there for our community.

Techdirt is one of the few remaining truly independent media outlets. We do not have a giant corporation behind us, and we rely heavily on our community to support us, in an age when advertisers are increasingly uninterested in sponsoring small, independent sites — especially a site like ours that is unwilling to pull punches in its reporting and analysis.

While other websites have resorted to paywalls, registration requirements, and increasingly annoying/intrusive advertising, we have always kept Techdirt open and available to anyone. But in order to continue doing so, we need your support. We offer a variety of ways for our readers to support us, from direct donations to special subscriptions and cool merchandise — and every little bit helps. Thank you.

–The Techdirt Team

43 Comments

If you liked this post, you may also be interested in...

Reader Comments

Subscribe: RSS

View by: Time | Thread

Anonymous Coward, 18 Jul 2006 @ 1:55pm

Why?
Worthless!
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Joe Ohms, 18 Jul 2006 @ 1:56pm

RE: "grassroots" marketing to roll things out on "a viral basis"

prolly means they are gonna give the service free to their "friends and family" and "encourage" them to evangelize it for them....

lamers.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
WirelessGuy, 18 Jul 2006 @ 2:08pm

Its because it can only do voice
Data requires speed, speed requires quality. VoIP requires about 100 Kbps.

It has nothing to do with Lobby in the US, it has to do with the Business model cannot compete in the US with DSL, and cable modem prices.

I was in a company that tried a similar product only 5 years ago. Didn't work. Teligent, didn't work. Windstar, didn't work. Angel project, Didn't work. Sprint ION, didn't work.

The only problem with the viral basis of marketing is that it has to work first, then people will pass it along. A virus will die on a deserted island.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Jay Fude, 18 Jul 2006 @ 2:26pm

Funny
Interesting, I use a 'grassroots' voice over wireless communication system every day, on unlicenced airwaves, that are largely unregulated. using the 26-27MHZ range in AM, SSB, and FM, I get both great quality, and decent range of signal. On SSB, I've managed to talk to Jamica, England, Canada, and Australia... It's called CB (citizen band)
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Bob, 18 Jul 2006 @ 3:11pm

Over.
Hello? Over.
Hello! Over.
How are you today? Over.
I'm fine, and you? Over.
I'm good. What's missing in this dialog? Over.
Um, duplex transmission, dude. Over and out.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Petr�a Mitchell, 18 Jul 2006 @ 3:36pm

Translation
"[W]e plan to utilize a grassroots marketing campaign to roll xMax out on a viral basis" == "We can't afford actual marketing so we're hoping our customers will do that job for us."

It's the Web 2.0 business plan, just limited to the marketing department.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Mark Kitchen, 18 Jul 2006 @ 3:40pm

Omnisky
I used to work for Omnisky. Didn't work.

(On a related note)

Omnisky was bought by Earthlink Wireless in bankrupcy. Elink messed with it for a few years, and now the technology is in Helio. (There are still a few of the same folks from the Omnisky days)
[ link to this | view in thread ]
concerned local citizen, 18 Jul 2006 @ 3:47pm

"viral"
I think that this new offering is absolutely . My in really loves it as well. I'm no expert, but I would recommend to just about anyone who wants

-------------
This post powered by: Astroturf-R-Us
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 18 Jul 2006 @ 3:47pm

Grassroots marketing
That would indicate that they can't support a lot of users, they're hoping to be able to add one connection at a time.

There's no "business model" that would be able to support that sort of "growth", at least none since the blind investments of the 90's.

I was involved in an RBOC DSL rollout, they'd market to a city, find out they couldn't handle the demand, then disavow ever offering it there but keep the people they'd actually connected going. Pretty sad.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 18 Jul 2006 @ 3:58pm

The way of the future has already been implemented by the large telecoms. Lobbyist for the large telcos are already in place to ensure that no other competitor can trample on their investments. xMax is probably never going to take off. Why? Well because Ma Bell will make sure of that. Doesn't matter if it costs this "company" a penny to cover 1k people, it will never flow. xMax will slowly wither away as 3G, 4G, and even 5G technology paves the way for the wireless corporations. A lot of things happen behind closed doors with large telcos and the government. It doesn't matter how good the technology is, if it's not in the best interest of the major players, then we won't see it anytime soon.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
you are not worth putting my name down, 18 Jul 2006 @ 10:20pm

TechDirt, appropriately named
What a celebration of morons this site is. If it doesn´t work in the US, then why are they rolling it out in the US. Some of you morons worked for failed ventures, I wonder if you have an axe to grind, or are you just bitter redundant blue collar idiots.

Credit Suisse was hired to give them advice on er........FINANCIAL matters regarding the rollout, you all time peabrain.

All of you have no idea how xMax works and you are too lazy and stupid to find out. But keep muddling the internet with your useless banter. That´s worth something, at least. LOL

As I said, this site is the worst anonymous site on the net. I´m saving this crap so when xG changes the world of communications, I´m going to print out a copy of this absolute garbage, wipe my ass with it and send it to you.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 18 Jul 2006 @ 10:37pm

Jay,

I think you are American. Only an American uses a sliver of their brains as compared to any other adult male. Can you carry a CB with you 20 square miles in your pocket, or would you have to be in a car or truck that would support such a thing. Is your CB wireless? You people have the need to let it be known how little you know. I find it fascinating.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
I would never put my name on this trash site, 18 Jul 2006 @ 10:50pm

if your site is so good, why don�t the writers add
I will be picking apart this abomination of "reporting", as soon as I am done with my breakfast.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 18 Jul 2006 @ 11:45pm

Carlo, you lying shill, here is what you wrote in your "reporting".

"largely because the only source that supported them in some media coverage was a university professor on the company's board of directors, whose obvious bias wasn't disclosed."

Where do you see "the source"?

Board of Directors

Richard L. Mooers, Chairman & CEO
Roger G. Branton, COO & CFO
Palmi Sigmarsson, PS Consulting, ehf.
Victor Sunö, ACH Securities S.A.
Mats Wennberg, Lead Independent Director

Secondly, If your "source" came out in favor of the company, how is that not disclosing his biased opinion, you moron.

"Also, the company is yet to deliver its consumer handset". How is that a concern of yours, you simple minded hack? That is a concern for everyone, and it is too obvious that until a company has a product that is being sold, there should be a healthy amount of doubt, but is that news, hack?

"if xMax is so wonderful at "wireless broadband", is the only application it's supporting voice? And why go to all the trouble to compete in a ridiculously crowded market with established players"

To your first idiotic question asked to stir the pot of flat earthers It makes complete sense to prove the basic communication aspect of the product and then have other companies pay xG a fortune for embedding their "aftermarket" products along with xMax.

Your answer to the passivity, which is common behavior in the general public saturated with hopes and dreams of mediocrity suggested in your second question, "carlo", is that the technology is the best available, and to not compete because you are scared of the "big boys" shows gutless character and fear that I love to see in the general public. Grow up.

Moving on in this calamity of news dissemination, "carlo", you go on to query, "The company says that a regional carrier could build a voice network for far less than if they were using cellular equipment in licensed spectrum. That may be true, but it misses the point -- plenty of options for mobile voice coverage already exist, and if somebody wants to get into that game, why bother building infrastructure, with all the attendant backhaul and maintenance costs, instead of just setting up a virtual operator? "

Plenty of options IF SOMEONE WANTS TO GET IN THAT GAME? This shows complete ignorance in the face of what is saturating the Communications and Technology markets today. How you can call yourself anything Tech is utterly impossible to imagine? This statement shows a disgusting lack of knowledge of what is in your supposed industry on a daily basis.

You know what, I think I made my point. Time will tell, and the time is growing near for that printing of this particular "reporting" so I can save on toilet paper.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Graham, 19 Jul 2006 @ 3:03am

Hey, if you're from the company, be honest and leave your name instead of hiding behind the Anonymous Coward tag. Or is this the grassroots viral marketing that your company is planning to use?
[ link to this | view in thread ]
JJ, 19 Jul 2006 @ 3:51am

Re:
Hmm, an anonymous coward who insults Carlo an awful lot, but doesn't actually answer most of the questions... Gee...

By the way, Mr. Anonymous, there are things called "links." They're what's in blue and underlined. You can follow the ones in the story above to see who Carlo was referring to as the supporter who was on the company's board of advisors.

Anyway, since Mr. Anonymous claims to know that this technology, which still hasn't been explained, is "the best available" certainly suggests we have someone from the company posting here.

A hint: if this is how your viral marketing strategy is going to work, it's not going to get very far. Insulting the folks who ask very valid questions about your technology and business model doesn't suggest you have a plan. It suggests you're trying to pull the wool over someone's eyes. So far, it's not working.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Don´t worry about me, worry about yourselves, 19 Jul 2006 @ 4:13am

Re: Re:
Show me a valid questions. I have answered all questions that I care to give my time to. The rest of the article is based on "carlo�s" uninformed opinion and agenda. What I have read deserves the answers I have given. One of the mainstays in proper journalism is to answer as many questions as you can ON YOUR OWN, such as by calling the company or reading the patents.

I´m sorry, did "carlo" mean advisers when he wrote board of directors. Gee, how silly am I. Maybe "carlo" should write what he means or not write at all. I am no "part" of the company. What I am is none of your business. Who are you?

Amateurs.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 19 Jul 2006 @ 4:55am

Re: Re: Re:
Don´t bother coming back with any of your typical rhetoric that you haven´t seen it work or that you´re too important or busy to justify your statements. I´ve heard it all before in these settings and the time always comes where you people disappear off the map. Enjoy the free internet while it tolerates you.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
WirelessGuy, 19 Jul 2006 @ 8:49am

Love it when people take this stuff so personal
Insulting people you don't know is always a key indicator for me that the person really has no class and tries to use personal attacks to cover a weak argument.

You are spitting in the face of many people who work in the industry, know more than you realize, and try to have a bit of fun during the day by commenting on what is happening about technology. All of our industries are the same, they have their goods and their bads. But not being able to take some heat about yours shows me how fearful you really are about what it does and doesn't do.

If you want to argue the technology then fine, speak up and show what it actually has to offer in real world trial data and not horse and pony demos. Step up and show that this new marvel of technology is better than everything else. Don't try to attack people, attack facts. Show off your superior knowledge instead of your quick satire. Then you might get the purpose of sites like this.

You are reminding me of the guy who took the Onion article seriously.

Lighten up Francis.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Sonix, 19 Jul 2006 @ 11:16am

xMAX
I don't get it. What is wrong with a WIfi(xMAX) like network. The handsets will also do WiFi VoIP. One number at several locations(both WiFi and xMAX)home office and on the road(limited)with data to boot! And I'm thinking less than Cingular's data plan alone witch can cost 70-80 a month for a laptop. Speed,cost, and coverage being an unknown at this point. Why would anyone lay into it this early, if you're wrong it makes you look like an idiot!

[quote]Utilizing xG Technology’s patented single-cycle waveform solution, the xMAX VoIP system will let an operator cover 1000 square miles and about 30,000 subscribers—based on existing mobile-phone usage patterns—with a single $50,000 base station,[/quote]
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Joe Bobier, 19 Jul 2006 @ 11:31am

Perhaps I can be of some assistance
I just now became aware of this page and was sorry to see so much confusion about xMax. I am one of the inventors of this technology as well as Preisdent and CTO. I would be happy to answer questions about the technology so as to clear up some obvious misconceptions a few people seem to have.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Sonix, 19 Jul 2006 @ 12:50pm

xMAX
OK, how does voice quality compare to say Vonage? What data speeds can we expect? Any comments on handsets or projected end user cost v VoIP or cellular. Any ideas on the mobile v fixed implementation.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 19 Jul 2006 @ 11:22pm

I have no doubt that here posts the finest minds in communication the US has to offer. That is why the US is ranked at the very bottom of the list as far as technology breakthroughs in communication.

Mr. Bobier is the man. Where are the questions?
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 20 Jul 2006 @ 1:23am

Re:
Joe,

We are all anxiously awaiting your input, please spellcheck before you post.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Mike (profile), 20 Jul 2006 @ 1:43am

Re: Perhaps I can be of some assistance
I would be happy to answer questions about the technology so as to clear up some obvious misconceptions a few people seem to have.

Joe, it's nice you came to the site -- but I think the questions and concerns are laid out pretty clearly in the original post. Plenty of others have made the same accusations, noting that the company has failed to explain how the technology works -- and only shows black box demonstrations of the technology. We've seen enough black box demos to know that they're not demos at all.

Carlo's post above asks plenty of questions, which you could just have answered outright, but I'll help you:

- What independent analysis do you have that your system works as advertised? In early reports, the support all came from the professor who was on your board of advisors (which was not disclosed in the press reports). So far, I have not heard of any outside party being able to test the technology. Can you share what independent organizations have tested it and are willing to talk about it?

- What handsets will you be using for the service? Who makes them?

- Why launch only a VoIP offering? If the technology is so great, why not just launch a data offering with VoIP as a service?

- Why launch VoIP when the market is so crowded with cellular providers, and many new entrants (even with big brand names and huge war chests of money) are having tremendous difficulty signing up users?

- Why did you hire a bank to help you with the launch? Most companies hire banks to look at financial issues, not technology launches.

- What does the company mean by a grassroots or "viral" launch plan?

All of these questions are clearly expressed in the original post, so you could have just answered them directly.

Thanks for stopping by and promising to answer these questions. We look forward to your responses.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 20 Jul 2006 @ 3:23am

Re: Re: Perhaps I can be of some assistance
Why do you need to know why they hired a bank, Mike?

Why do you think the company would answer questions like yours on this type of forum? As in, what handset maker are you using. Don´t you think you are overestimating your value to the company? I´m sure Joe will answer tech related questions, which is what this site is about, not marketing related questions, which you have no right to the answers to before anyone else.

Who holds the brain on these sites?
[ link to this | view in thread ]
CHC, 20 Jul 2006 @ 9:14am

Re: Re: Perhaps I can be of some assistance
Hi Joe,

You say that a single sinusoidal wave is the particle of RF that equates to a bit (your property), that means 1 cycle = 1 bit at least. Is it obtained after the comabination of different modulation techniques at the same time?

I would like to get a couple of your radios...
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Mike (profile), 20 Jul 2006 @ 10:12am

Re: Re: Re: Perhaps I can be of some assistance
Why do you need to know why they hired a bank, Mike?

I don't need to know. But it seemed like a worthwhile question to ask. It's an odd move -- not usually seen, so an explanation would be nice. You normally hire a bank for some sort of financial transaction, not to help you with a "technology launch." If the whole point of their press release was about the technology launch, it seems like a reasonable question to ask why they hired a bank -- since that has nothing to do with a tech launch.

Why do you think the company would answer questions like yours on this type of forum?

He volunteered to answer questions. He doesn't need to, but he volunteered. So we asked.

Don´t you think you are overestimating your value to the company?

I'm sure I have no value to the company at all. However, these are the questions that have been raised by the company's actions. If they claim we're misinformed, then why not correctly inform us?

I´m sure Joe will answer tech related questions, which is what this site is about, not marketing related questions, which you have no right to the answers to before anyone else.

It's funny that you claim what this site is about. I'm the one who founded the site -- and it has always been about the business side of technology. So, thanks for telling me what my site is about, but you're wrong.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 20 Jul 2006 @ 10:00pm

Re: Re: Re: Re: Perhaps I can be of some assistanc
Oh, I see, this site is for bullshit tech gossip. Very useful. If Joe comes on here again, I would be very surprised.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 20 Jul 2006 @ 11:40pm

Re: Re: Re: Re: Perhaps I can be of some assistanc
If they claim we're misinformed, then why not correctly inform us?

You´re misinformed. Why should anyone correct you when it´s obvious you went through absolutely no trouble at all to become misinformed? Can I ask you a few questions? Who do you think you are? What purpose do you serve? Why do you waste your time with this rag of a site? Do you not have anything better to do? What good have you done?

Thanks in advance for the answers.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
JJ, 21 Jul 2006 @ 2:35pm

Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Perhaps I can be of some assis
Let's see, we have Mike and Carlo, who are both well known and well respected in the industry, asking legitimate business and technology questions about this offering.

Then we have someone who won't even leave his name, who is responding with childish insults.

Yeah, guess who has more credibility?
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 21 Jul 2006 @ 11:12pm

Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Perhaps I can be of some a
I´m sorry, Mike and Carlo are not exactly Cher and Bono, you flamer. Name one person who knows Mike and Carlo, and why can´t they speak for themselves.

Insults? I just asked 4 or 5 questions about Mike and Carlo and have gotten no response.

Your agenda is obvious. You have not asked ONE good question worth answering. Well known in an industry that has the US ranking near the bottom in the world. Please, you are embarassing yourself. I don´t answer questions on a rag forum. Maybe Joe will come back. My guess is he won´t, as this site is worthless.

Credibility??? Who gives a shit?? It´s success we are after.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Joe Bobier, 24 Jul 2006 @ 1:41pm

Re: Re: Perhaps I can be of some assistance
Thank you for the opportunity to address your concerns.

First let me start by assuring you that Dr Schwartz is a third party to xG and is beyond reproach. His CV speaks for itself. In fact, he did his original analysis of xG with a skeptical position. He visited our lab, conducted his own tests and after he convinced himself that we had something unique, he offered to help us by advising us as we continued to develop the technology. We at xG are grateful for his valuable advice.

Other testing has been done by a Florida university to assure FCC compliance for both conducted and emitted energy. A certificate is on file. Further comparison testing against off-the-shelf equipment is about to be conducted by a California testing lab. Those results will also be available and a certificate will be on file for that too.

In addition, several private and some public companies have visited our lab and verified test results and claims for their own purposes. None were disappointed, but they are all under NDA for obvious business reasons of their own. Additionally, last November, we conducted a demonstration for the public. During that demonstration, technical reporters touched the equipment, disconnected antennas and generally satisfied themselves that the signal really did make the trip. A week later, a repeat demonstration was tested further by a journalist who went up the tower to verify the transmitter strength while another independent volunteer who was in contact by cell-phone reported changes in the signal caused by the guy up the tower. Perhaps the best evidence that the technology works is the fact that an impressive staff of a dozen engineers is working hard to prepare the FPGA's and RF circuits for use in a handset and that our company has invested heavily in the program to design and build the handsets and base stations.

A press release regarding the company building the handsets is forthcoming. We are paying them to design and manufacture the handsets. The base stations are designed by our engineers and are being built by a contract manufacturer.

Having designed the physical layer, we were in search of an application that would create an obvious business case. We were primarily an R&D company, which had a need to place chipsets which are the result of our R&D effort. A company has to eventually sell product. VoIP is just one application -- the first of many to come. A strong business case for potential buyers of the technology would involve sales to as many subscribers as possible. VoIP provides a valuable service to users and maximizes the number of potential subscribers per base station. This creates monetary incentive for resellers to invest in equipment and infrastructure. Later we will add other services to the base stations which are more broadband centric. Be assured however that this is a broadband application. Hundreds of simultaneous VoIP calls constitute a broadband data stream. Our retail program, which is being finalized, encompasses a retail offer that we think is more than exciting to the retail user.

What we mean by "grass roots" and "viral" is that our customer will not be one huge telecom. It will be many smaller providers. An army of independent resellers provides less risk and a more loyal customer base than one giant account.

In closing, I would like to point out that we now offer a mathematical blockset for use in MatLab. The blockset allows the engineer to build his own virtual xG communication channel and understand how the technology works. See our website for details. This is your opportunity to test and understand the technology for yourself.

Thanks again for the opportunity to answer these questions.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 28 Jul 2006 @ 12:34am

Hello? It´s awfully quiet in this mostly chopshop of a blog.

I guess you can´t handle the answers.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Mike (profile), 28 Jul 2006 @ 1:19am

Re:
I guess you can´t handle the answers.

We can handle the answers just fine. The problem is that they're non-answers. All we get is this or that is under NDA and telling us we can trust people who are on their advisory board to give unbiased opinions.

The answer about why they're starting with VoIP simply doesn't make sense.

We'd prefer to see a bit more openness from the company.

We also wouldn't mind seeing a bit more openness from you, who refuses to say who you are, and who only can resort to insults.

We stand by our original assessment. If the company proves us wrong, wonderful. But, without any real evidence that the company has a real product, we remain skeptical.

As for you, our anonymous troll, there's no reason to respond any further, since you have only shown an ability to insult us, rather than add to the discussion.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 28 Jul 2006 @ 4:41am

Re: Re:
You insult yourselves with your flat earth thinking and your homegrown agenda. Mike, who are you, for the second time? What have you done in your life to this point?

Don´t trust anyone on their advisory board. After all, they asked you for investment dollars. What´s that, they didn´t? Oh. Who cares what you would prefer?
I´ve added plenty to where it matters, "Mike" ,and this amateur forum is not on the list of where it matters. Keep up the crappy work.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 28 Jul 2006 @ 6:37am

Re: Re:
"We also wouldn't mind seeing a bit more openness from you, who refuses to say who you are, and who only can resort to insults. "

And then you go on to brilliantly contradict yourself by saying:

"As for you, our anonymous troll, there's no reason to respond any further, since you have only shown an ability to insult us, rather than add to the discussion"

So, although you want me to reveal who I am for some unknown reason, there is no reason for me to respond. Let me ask you if you are a trustworthy source Mike for even Yesterday´s Weather report.

Please, turn your computer off and go back to school.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Granny, 10 Aug 2006 @ 7:39am

Re: Re: Re: Perhaps I can be of some assistance
I'm an old lady living in a very rural area without any high-speed internet access other than expensive, unreliable satellite. I know little about technical stuff. I just wanna know when this wonder of wonders is going to become availabe to us on the user end! I'm really tired of struggling though an internet geared toward high-speed users and if xMax is so great, where is it? I have a ton of internet friends who would also be interested.

I don't need to know all the details about conception and birth - just show me the baby!

Granny
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 12 Aug 2006 @ 1:43am

Re: Re:
Mike, Carlo??? Cricket, Cricket!!!

What happened, boys? Lack of ability to report send you scattering to blogsville? Why the lack of comments on the most profound breakthrough in the history of RF Communications? You dolts wouldn´t know a newsworthy story if it came up and bit you. Too funny, I expose you as hacks and you don´t have the gonads to respond, what a joke. You stand by your ASS essment!!! lol. The world is passing you by, amateur bloggers.

Here is a question for you mental midgets, Carlo and Mike, have you contacted xG directly? My guess is no, because that would immediately prove your ridiculous assessment as garbage.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 5 Feb 2007 @ 10:54pm

Ahahahahahah, The first comment is worthless, huh?
Tell that to my broker who has had my portfolio triple since IPO day.

What a bunch of morons you guys are.
Ahahahahahahahaha
Ahahahahahahahaha
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 1 May 2007 @ 4:58am

If your technology is so great, why would Telefonica and National Grid want a piece, why would your company be valued at 1.8 Billion USD...

From the Bloggers are Morons department
[ link to this | view in thread ]
KA9Q, 14 Jun 2007 @ 8:18pm

Technical analyses of xG's claims
I know this blog has been inactive for quite some time, but in case anybody is still following it, I've written a few comments on xG's claims. The main one is at

http://www.ka9q.net/xmax.html

and the bottom of that page has links to several others. Comments and corrections are invited.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
John Newkirk, 1 Jul 2007 @ 11:09am

The incredible claims of xMax
For an intelligent analysis of the xMax story see marconig.wordpress.com
[ link to this | view in thread ]