<?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: Simple Web Hosting Performance Test: 1and1 versus HostICan</title>
	<atom:link href="http://tipsfor.us/2007/07/22/simple-web-hosting-performance-test-1and1-versus-hostican/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://tipsfor.us/2007/07/22/simple-web-hosting-performance-test-1and1-versus-hostican/</link>
	<description>Tech Tips, Reviews, Tutorials, Occasional Rants</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Mon, 30 Jan 2012 16:42:15 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3.1</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: alex</title>
		<link>http://tipsfor.us/2007/07/22/simple-web-hosting-performance-test-1and1-versus-hostican/comment-page-1/#comment-1113</link>
		<dc:creator>alex</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 27 Sep 2007 21:49:13 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://tipsfor.us/?p=147#comment-1113</guid>
		<description>How about 1x webhosting? I&#039;m hearing good things about it but they tell me the average transfer rate is around 70-100kbps which sounds very slow.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>How about 1x webhosting? I&#8217;m hearing good things about it but they tell me the average transfer rate is around 70-100kbps which sounds very slow.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Hosting admin</title>
		<link>http://tipsfor.us/2007/07/22/simple-web-hosting-performance-test-1and1-versus-hostican/comment-page-1/#comment-1112</link>
		<dc:creator>Hosting admin</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 24 Sep 2007 12:13:39 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://tipsfor.us/?p=147#comment-1112</guid>
		<description>1ana1 is not very good to work with. Of course, where is different opinions but this is mine.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>1ana1 is not very good to work with. Of course, where is different opinions but this is mine.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Third Party Independant Review Found - 1&#38;1 Vs HostICan - HostICan Hosting Reviews</title>
		<link>http://tipsfor.us/2007/07/22/simple-web-hosting-performance-test-1and1-versus-hostican/comment-page-1/#comment-1111</link>
		<dc:creator>Third Party Independant Review Found - 1&#38;1 Vs HostICan - HostICan Hosting Reviews</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 16 Sep 2007 16:59:43 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://tipsfor.us/?p=147#comment-1111</guid>
		<description>[...] sure to read the entire habibbijan HostICan Review review. It&#8217;s a great [...]</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[...] sure to read the entire habibbijan HostICan Review review. It&#8217;s a great [...]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Sungho</title>
		<link>http://tipsfor.us/2007/07/22/simple-web-hosting-performance-test-1and1-versus-hostican/comment-page-1/#comment-1110</link>
		<dc:creator>Sungho</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 17 Aug 2007 04:15:43 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://tipsfor.us/?p=147#comment-1110</guid>
		<description>So, based on my very unscientific conclusion, yes, 1and1â€™s servers are slow, at least in comparison to HostICan.  -----  It&#039;s true, very slow..</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>So, based on my very unscientific conclusion, yes, 1and1â€™s servers are slow, at least in comparison to HostICan.  &#8212;&#8211;  It&#8217;s true, very slow..</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>

