I know Ben as an "official" ubnt person is too diplomatic to say this, but the problem with alignment, separation and other site engineering problems is because anyone with a credit card can buy a ubiquiti link... The super user friendly documentation and GUI on the http interface make it easy for people who barely know any networking tech or RF to attempting setting up a PTP link.
If you sold a connectorized AF5 and treated it like a part 101 product, for sales only to real companies through a different channel, it would be easier to guarantee success. On Thu, Dec 11, 2014 at 9:02 AM, Ben Moore via Af <[email protected]> wrote: > We have looked at this, but alignment would be a real issue (and ensuring > proper separation, etc...)...We are still kicking around some different > options. Though we are getting a lot of good feedback already on long > links with AF5. > > On Thu, Dec 11, 2014 at 9:56 AM, Eric Kuhnke via Af <[email protected]> wrote: > >> I would like a pro grade AF5 connectorized, for use with a pair of the 3' >> Jirous high performance antennas. Each link would need 4 dishes but you'd >> be able to go a lot further than the current af5 antenna size. >> On Dec 10, 2014 10:05 PM, "Mathew Howard via Af" <[email protected]> wrote: >> >>> PtMP based on the airfiber in 3.65ghz would seem like a good fit, with >>> the new rules that are (hopefully) coming... >>> >>> licensed also seems like an obvious place to go with airfiber. >>> >>> ------------------------------ >>> *From:* Af [[email protected]] on behalf of Josh Reynolds via Af [ >>> [email protected]] >>> *Sent:* Wednesday, December 10, 2014 11:42 PM >>> *To:* [email protected] >>> *Subject:* Re: [AFMUG] RM5AC-PMP Embargo lifted.. >>> >>> I'd be incredibly surprised if they didn't do a ptmp. >>> >>> Not sure a revamped 24GHz is in consideration when there's so many >>> other bands they could release equipment for. >>> >>> Maybe licensed? Hrmmmm... >>> >>> One can hope, right? >>> >>> josh reynolds :: chief information officer >>> spitwspots :: www.spitwspots.com >>> >>> On 12/10/2014 08:19 PM, Colin Stanners via Af wrote: >>> >>> I'm sure they'll do a 24ghz AF 2/Duo/Super/Ultra with 1024QAM. In the >>> 100mhz channels both ways that'll allow around 1280mbit FD - so a 2.5gbit >>> backhaul... I'm assuming 3.65 will come as well. >>> >>> On Wed, Dec 10, 2014 at 11:10 PM, Josh Reynolds via Af <[email protected]> >>> wrote: >>> >>>> I'd guess there's going to be... a least 3 AirFiber products released >>>> in the next 12-18 months. >>>> >>>> If not sooner. >>>> >>>> Now... what would those be? >>>> >>>> Hrmmmmmmmmm..... >>>> >>>> josh reynolds :: chief information officer >>>> spitwspots :: www.spitwspots.com >>>> >>>> On 12/10/2014 08:07 PM, Rory Conaway via Af wrote: >>>> >>>> I don’t know what you are talking about. >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> Rory >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> *From:* Af [mailto:[email protected] <[email protected]>] *On >>>> Behalf Of *Josh Reynolds via Af >>>> *Sent:* Wednesday, December 10, 2014 10:05 PM >>>> *To:* [email protected] >>>> *Subject:* Re: [AFMUG] RM5AC-PMP Embargo lifted.. >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> I'm sure that AirFiber team (which they seem to keep expanding) is >>>> silently sitting in their own little corner in Chicago doing nothing. >>>> >>>> :P >>>> >>>> josh reynolds :: chief information officer >>>> >>>> spitwspots :: www.spitwspots.com >>>> >>>> On 12/10/2014 07:48 PM, Rory Conaway via Af wrote: >>>> >>>> I think the ePMP is going to run into the same problem all the 802.11ac >>>> vendors are seeing with the new OOBE rules. The 450 is able to provide a >>>> better performance within the new environment so there will still be a >>>> differentiator. The only question if it’s worth the difference. >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> Rory >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> *From:* Af [mailto:[email protected] <[email protected]>] *On >>>> Behalf Of *Stefan Englhardt via Af >>>> *Sent:* Wednesday, December 10, 2014 9:45 PM >>>> *To:* Josh Luthman via Af >>>> *Subject:* Re: [AFMUG] RM5AC-PMP Embargo lifted.. >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> .AC is an upgrade to .N. Cambium has the choice to use it or not. >>>> Others do. epmp competes with 450 right now but helps to keep customers and >>>> applications where 450 does not meet the price point. >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> *Von:* Josh Luthman via Af <[email protected]> >>>> *Gesendet:* Donnerstag, 11. Dezember 2014 04:00 >>>> *An:* Josh Luthman via Af <[email protected]> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> An .AC ePMP would be incredible - but the issue is whether Cambium >>>> would be >>>> fearful of it competing too much with the 450. What does a company do >>>> when >>>> it has 2 products that are too good, and the cheaper one starts to >>>> outshine >>>> the more expensive one in the most often used benchmark? (mbps - even >>>> .AC >>>> ePMP is unlikely to beat 450 in scalability / latency / etc). >>>> >>>> On Wed, Dec 10, 2014 at 8:46 PM, Stefan Englhardt via Af <[email protected]> >>>> wrote: >>>> >>>> > The answer is to release an epmp1000-ac. >>>> > >>>> > >>>> > *Von:* Josh Luthman via Af <[email protected]> >>>> > *Gesendet:* Donnerstag, 11. Dezember 2014 01:39 >>>> > *An:* Josh Luthman via Af <[email protected]> >>>> > >>>> > I hope Cambium is listing on this point. >>>> > >>>> > Get rid of speed license and make it as unlimited radios at 10 meg >>>> price >>>> > point. >>>> > >>>> > They are about to have more competition from lot of other vendors too. >>>> > >>>> > Tushar >>>> > >>>> > -----Original Message----- >>>> > From: Af [mailto:[email protected] <[email protected]>] On >>>> Behalf Of Peter Kranz via Af >>>> > Sent: Wednesday, December 10, 2014 3:10 PM >>>> > To: [email protected] >>>> > Subject: Re: [AFMUG] RM5AC-PMP Embargo lifted.. >>>> > >>>> > > Yes no maybe. >>>> > >>>> > I think this is good news actually, as it is sure to light the >>>> competitive >>>> > fire under Cambium to get to feature parity and get rid of speed >>>> licenses. >>>> > >>>> > >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>> >>> >
