I'm sorry... I meant to say, you were comparing a media aggregator like FireAnt to a standard web browser in terms of bandwidth usage, whereas the article pointed out was describing a regular text based News Aggregator to a web browser in terms of bandwidth usage.
I think its silly to compare a New Aggregator to a browser and claim the aggregator is the greater bandwidth hog... however a media aggregator will certainly consume bandiwdth as its primary purpose is to download large media objects. -Josh On 2/16/06, Markus Sandy <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > no, actually, i was comparing the two equally > > Joshua Kinberg wrote: > > >You're talking more about a media aggregator like FireAnt as opposed > >to a browser. > > > > > > -- > > My name is Markus Sandy and I am app.etitio.us > > http://apperceptions.org > http://digitaldojo.blogspot.com > http://node101.org > http://spinflow.org > http://wearethemedia.com > http://xpressionvlog.blogspot.com > > aim/ichat: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > msn: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > skype: msandy > spin: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > > > Yahoo! Groups Links > > > > > > > > Yahoo! Groups Links <*> To visit your group on the web, go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/videoblogging/ <*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] <*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to: http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
