<?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/"
	xmlns:go='http://ns.gigaom.com/'
xmlns:georss="http://www.georss.org/georss" xmlns:geo="http://www.w3.org/2003/01/geo/wgs84_pos#" xmlns:media="http://search.yahoo.com/mrss/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: CacheLogic Announces New Content Delivery Network</title>
	<atom:link href="http://gigaom.com/2007/03/07/cachelogic-announces-new-content-delivery-network/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://gigaom.com/2007/03/07/cachelogic-announces-new-content-delivery-network/</link>
	<description></description>
	<lastBuildDate>Sat, 11 Feb 2012 00:50:04 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.com/</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: Gary</title>
		<link>http://gigaom.com/2007/03/07/cachelogic-announces-new-content-delivery-network/#comment-136600</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Gary]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 08 Mar 2007 19:13:10 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://gigagamez.com/2007/03/07/cachelogic-announces-new-content-delivery-network/#comment-136600</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[a bit more about this here:
http://www.cachelogic.com/home/pages/cachelogic_ad/White_paper.pdf]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>a bit more about this here:<br />
<a href="http://www.cachelogic.com/home/pages/cachelogic_ad/White_paper.pdf" rel="nofollow">http://www.cachelogic.com/home/pages/cachelogic_ad/White_paper.pdf</a></p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: GigaOM &#187; What&#8217;s On GigaNet</title>
		<link>http://gigaom.com/2007/03/07/cachelogic-announces-new-content-delivery-network/#comment-136598</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[GigaOM &#187; What&#8217;s On GigaNet]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 08 Mar 2007 14:57:50 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://gigagamez.com/2007/03/07/cachelogic-announces-new-content-delivery-network/#comment-136598</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[[...] The Web WorkerNewTeeVee: Ping Pong at Next New NetworksNewTeeVee: Even MySpace wants to kill YouTubeGigaGamez: Cachelogic builds a p2p gamer CDN    Share/E-mail  &#124; Sphere &#124; Print &#124; Topic: Asides &#124; Tags: [...]]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[...] The Web WorkerNewTeeVee: Ping Pong at Next New NetworksNewTeeVee: Even MySpace wants to kill YouTubeGigaGamez: Cachelogic builds a p2p gamer CDN    Share/E-mail  | Sphere | Print | Topic: Asides | Tags: [...]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Jon R.</title>
		<link>http://gigaom.com/2007/03/07/cachelogic-announces-new-content-delivery-network/#comment-136599</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Jon R.]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 07 Mar 2007 20:49:04 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://gigagamez.com/2007/03/07/cachelogic-announces-new-content-delivery-network/#comment-136599</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[I&#039;m wondering if those same small developers really have the resources to make games that require massive patches in the first place. I have to wonder how that all factors in as to patch size vs. playerbase.

What we REALLY know is that some big developers apparently just don&#039;t care too much about funding for patches in general, which this isn&#039;t going to help. And you&#039;d have to wonder if a hypothetical bunch of patches would even be necessary if the development practices weren&#039;t so screwed.

Now, what i&#039;ve found is that archiving the patches is a huge problem. The one great thing STEAM does is completely remove the need to navigate FilePlanet or whatever. Reinstalling Quake, or some other old game, on the other hand, is a nightmare.]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I&#8217;m wondering if those same small developers really have the resources to make games that require massive patches in the first place. I have to wonder how that all factors in as to patch size vs. playerbase.</p>
<p>What we REALLY know is that some big developers apparently just don&#8217;t care too much about funding for patches in general, which this isn&#8217;t going to help. And you&#8217;d have to wonder if a hypothetical bunch of patches would even be necessary if the development practices weren&#8217;t so screwed.</p>
<p>Now, what i&#8217;ve found is that archiving the patches is a huge problem. The one great thing STEAM does is completely remove the need to navigate FilePlanet or whatever. Reinstalling Quake, or some other old game, on the other hand, is a nightmare.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Jon R.</title>
		<link>http://gigaom.com/2007/03/07/cachelogic-announces-new-content-delivery-network/#comment-168670</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Jon R.]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 07 Mar 2007 20:49:04 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://gigagamez.com/2007/03/07/cachelogic-announces-new-content-delivery-network/#comment-168670</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[I&#039;m wondering if those same small developers really have the resources to make games that require massive patches in the first place. I have to wonder how that all factors in as to patch size vs. playerbase.

What we REALLY know is that some big developers apparently just don&#039;t care too much about funding for patches in general, which this isn&#039;t going to help. And you&#039;d have to wonder if a hypothetical bunch of patches would even be necessary if the development practices weren&#039;t so screwed.

Now, what i&#039;ve found is that archiving the patches is a huge problem. The one great thing STEAM does is completely remove the need to navigate FilePlanet or whatever. Reinstalling Quake, or some other old game, on the other hand, is a nightmare.]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I&#8217;m wondering if those same small developers really have the resources to make games that require massive patches in the first place. I have to wonder how that all factors in as to patch size vs. playerbase.</p>
<p>What we REALLY know is that some big developers apparently just don&#8217;t care too much about funding for patches in general, which this isn&#8217;t going to help. And you&#8217;d have to wonder if a hypothetical bunch of patches would even be necessary if the development practices weren&#8217;t so screwed.</p>
<p>Now, what i&#8217;ve found is that archiving the patches is a huge problem. The one great thing STEAM does is completely remove the need to navigate FilePlanet or whatever. Reinstalling Quake, or some other old game, on the other hand, is a nightmare.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>

