<?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 for DC Rainmaker</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.dcrainmaker.com/comments/feed" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.dcrainmaker.com</link>
	<description></description>
	<lastBuildDate>Tue, 21 May 2013 22:46:19 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	
	<item>
		<title>Comment on My 2012 Sports Gadget Recommendations by Rainmaker</title>
		<link>http://www.dcrainmaker.com/2012/11/my-2012-sports-gadget-recommendations.html#comment-130491</link>
		<dc:creator>Rainmaker</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 21 May 2013 22:46:19 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://localhost/2012/11/my-2012-sports-gadget-recommendations.html#comment-130491</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[For running they do. Unless you&#039;re running underwater for 30 minutes - you&#039;ll be fine.  Also, I&#039;m not exactly sure why I wouldn&#039;t review a unit just because of less than ideal waterproofing.  As that would mean that up until last summer - no-one would have reviewed any sub-$400 GPS watches on the market.

Now, don&#039;t get me wrong - I&#039;m the most aggressive person out there on hammering companies on the waterproofing issue.  And I think it&#039;s been solved going forward - since I started really ringing the bell on it, all new products I&#039;ve seen have true waterproofing - for example, the TRT2 has it, FR10 has it, and others.]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[ <p>For running they do. Unless you&#8217;re running underwater for 30 minutes &#8211; you&#8217;ll be fine.  Also, I&#8217;m not exactly sure why I wouldn&#8217;t review a unit just because of less than ideal waterproofing.  As that would mean that up until last summer &#8211; no-one would have reviewed any sub-$400 GPS watches on the market.</p>
<p>Now, don&#8217;t get me wrong &#8211; I&#8217;m the most aggressive person out there on hammering companies on the waterproofing issue.  And I think it&#8217;s been solved going forward &#8211; since I started really ringing the bell on it, all new products I&#8217;ve seen have true waterproofing &#8211; for example, the TRT2 has it, FR10 has it, and others.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>Comment on My 2012 Sports Gadget Recommendations by Rob</title>
		<link>http://www.dcrainmaker.com/2012/11/my-2012-sports-gadget-recommendations.html#comment-130490</link>
		<dc:creator>Rob</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 21 May 2013 22:40:54 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://localhost/2012/11/my-2012-sports-gadget-recommendations.html#comment-130490</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Neither of the watches you recomend as mid-range running have any (useful) water proofing! So why do you even review, them let alone recomend them!?
I am not spending over £100 on a watch if it is not at least 30m!
err, sorry for the rant, but it just had to be said;~)]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[ <p>Neither of the watches you recomend as mid-range running have any (useful) water proofing! So why do you even review, them let alone recomend them!?<br />
I am not spending over £100 on a watch if it is not at least 30m!<br />
err, sorry for the rant, but it just had to be said;~)</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>Comment on Garmin ANT+ Foot Pods: Everything you ever wanted to know by woody</title>
		<link>http://www.dcrainmaker.com/2011/01/garmin-ant-foot-pods-everything-you.html#comment-130485</link>
		<dc:creator>woody</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 21 May 2013 21:38:29 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://localhost/dcrm/?p=583#comment-130485</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Love this site!
I have a garmin 405.  Just got the footpod to use for treadmill running.  I&#039;m always around 3/4 off on the mileage.???  Any tips to resolve this?  thanks...woody]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[ <p>Love this site!<br />
I have a garmin 405.  Just got the footpod to use for treadmill running.  I&#8217;m always around 3/4 off on the mileage.???  Any tips to resolve this?  thanks&#8230;woody</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>Comment on How to download free maps to your Garmin Edge 705/800/810 by Openfietsmap</title>
		<link>http://www.dcrainmaker.com/2013/05/download-garmin-705800810.html#comment-130484</link>
		<dc:creator>Openfietsmap</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 21 May 2013 21:34:59 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.dcrainmaker.com/?p=13516#comment-130484</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[The full version does not contain DEM data, only contour lines. It&#039;s possible to calculate an altitude profile on your pc but not on the GPS (for this you need a Garmin topo map with DEM data, like the recreational map Europe that is included in the T versions of the Garmin units)]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[ <p>The full version does not contain DEM data, only contour lines. It&#8217;s possible to calculate an altitude profile on your pc but not on the GPS (for this you need a Garmin topo map with DEM data, like the recreational map Europe that is included in the T versions of the Garmin units)</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>Comment on Garmin Forerunner 310XT In Depth Review by Rainmaker</title>
		<link>http://www.dcrainmaker.com/2009/09/garmin-forerunner-310xt-in-depth-review.html#comment-130483</link>
		<dc:creator>Rainmaker</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 21 May 2013 21:34:55 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://localhost/dcrm/?p=916#comment-130483</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Hi Wendell-

For cross-country skiing the 310XT is definitely your better bet.  For example, the Edge 500 doesn&#039;t do pace, only speed (MPH/KPH).

No interference issues with the Polar and ANT+, I&#039;ve always done testing (even with two straps on), and no problems.

As for time...not sure. Wish I had more of it. :)]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[ <p>Hi Wendell-</p>
<p>For cross-country skiing the 310XT is definitely your better bet.  For example, the Edge 500 doesn&#8217;t do pace, only speed (MPH/KPH).</p>
<p>No interference issues with the Polar and ANT+, I&#8217;ve always done testing (even with two straps on), and no problems.</p>
<p>As for time&#8230;not sure. Wish I had more of it. <img src='http://www.dcrainmaker.com/site/wp-includes/images/smilies/icon_smile.gif' alt=':)' class='wp-smiley' /> </p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>Comment on How to download free maps to your Garmin Edge 705/800/810 by Craig</title>
		<link>http://www.dcrainmaker.com/2013/05/download-garmin-705800810.html#comment-130482</link>
		<dc:creator>Craig</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 21 May 2013 21:27:54 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.dcrainmaker.com/?p=13516#comment-130482</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Yes, it will work fine for the Oregon 450 (or the Etrex 20/30 or Dakota or Montana etc). 
The Oregon has 850MB of internal memory, so you can just copy the maps to that. You don&#039;t need a memory card unless you want maps for a large area. Just so long as you copy the img file to a directory named &#039;Garmin&#039; in the internal memory.]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[ <p>Yes, it will work fine for the Oregon 450 (or the Etrex 20/30 or Dakota or Montana etc).<br />
The Oregon has 850MB of internal memory, so you can just copy the maps to that. You don&#8217;t need a memory card unless you want maps for a large area. Just so long as you copy the img file to a directory named &#8216;Garmin&#8217; in the internal memory.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
