Butting in here. We sell a ton of Exalt with zero comebacks. What issues are you having?
Sent from my iPhone > On Jan 19, 2015, at 11:46 AM, Steve Utick <[email protected]> wrote: > > My problem is at this point, I've had so many problems with Exalt that I'm > not sure I'd buy another one of their radios period.... > > > >> On Mon, Jan 19, 2015 at 11:31 AM, SmarterBroadband >> <[email protected]> wrote: >> You could also look at the Exalt ExtremeAir. >> >> 2 x 80 Mhz channels with X-Pic all in one all-outdoor unit. >> >> Does a Gig. >> >> Adam >> >> >> >> From: Af [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of TJ Trout >> Sent: Friday, January 16, 2015 1:48 PM >> To: [email protected] >> Subject: Re: [AFMUG] 6 or 11ghz best option for higher capacity ? >> >> >> >> What is my least expensive option for getting more bandwidth in 6ghz or >> 11ghz ? Right now I have 366mbps (56mhz 256qam) would like double or better? >> >> >> >> On Fri, Jan 16, 2015 at 1:03 PM, Jon Langeler <[email protected]> >> wrote: >> >> compression yields a lot at 64byte packet, but yields much less at 256byte >> and larger...it's a curve. >> >> >> >> Also if your upgrading a long 5GHz link with 6Ghz, you'll probably be >> slightly better off even if the calcs say 'low uptime'. 11GHz will 'swing' >> during rains more than 6GHz obviously so the higher gain from the same size >> dishes helps there. Licensing a wide single polarity is always cheapest... >> >> >> >> -Jon >> >> >> >> Sent from my iPhone >> >> >> >> On Jan 16, 2015, at 3:13 PM, Josh Luthman <[email protected]> >> wrote: >> That sounds backwards. Why would smaller packets net you greater throughput? >> >> >> >> >> >> Josh Luthman >> Office: 937-552-2340 >> Direct: 937-552-2343 >> 1100 Wayne St >> Suite 1337 >> Troy, OH 45373 >> >> >> >> On Fri, Jan 16, 2015 at 3:10 PM, Jeremy <[email protected]> wrote: >> >> It's really 60. Ours does 1.4Gbps, 700Mbps full duplex (if every packet was >> a VoIP packet)...500Mbps FDX is a more realistic real-world TCP throughput >> that you can expect. >> >> >> >> On Fri, Jan 16, 2015 at 1:07 PM, Hardy, Tim <[email protected]> wrote: >> >> It’s really 60! >> >> >> >> 60 MHz >> >> CH >> >> N( >> >> G( >> >> 1 >> >> 5960.0250 >> >> 6212.0650 >> >> 2 >> >> 6019.3250 >> >> 6271.3650 >> >> 3 >> >> 6078.6250 >> >> 6330.6650 >> >> 4 >> >> 6137.9250 >> >> 6389.9650 >> >> >> >> As far as XPIC on 30 MHz vs. 60 MHz it all depends on the environment. If >> x-pol is needed to clear a channel, it isn’t going to be available on the >> orthogonal polarization. >> >> >> >> From: Af [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Ken Hohhof >> Sent: Friday, January 16, 2015 2:59 PM >> >> >> To: [email protected] >> Subject: Re: [AFMUG] 6 or 11ghz best option for higher capacity ? >> >> >> >> In 6 GHz, is 60 really 60, or is it 30+30 contiguous? >> >> >> >> I’m thinking it might be easier to do XPIC on the same 30 MHz channel than >> to find 60 MHz of available spectrum, but I haven’t done anything in 6 GHz, >> mainly because of antenna size. Yes the FCC did relax the antenna rules to >> allow down to a 3 ft dish, but realistically that won’t give you enough gain >> unless it’s a short link, especially given that 6 GHz is subject to >> multipath fades. So bottom line I haven’t kept up with what you can do in 6 >> GHz, so I could easily be wrong or behind the times. >> >> >> >> From: Mike Hammett >> >> Sent: Friday, January 16, 2015 1:24 PM >> >> To: [email protected] >> >> Subject: Re: [AFMUG] 6 or 11ghz best option for higher capacity ? >> >> >> >> 30 MHz in the 7 GHz band, 30 MHz in some 6 GHz, 60 MHz in the rest of 6 >> GHz... IIRC. >> >> >> >> ----- >> Mike Hammett >> Intelligent Computing Solutions >> http://www.ics-il.com >> >> >> >> From: "Ken Hohhof" <[email protected]> >> To: [email protected] >> Sent: Friday, January 16, 2015 1:18:19 PM >> Subject: Re: [AFMUG] 6 or 11ghz best option for higher capacity ? >> >> I would first talk to your frequency coordinator about what FCC channel >> widths can be licensed in what bands. I’m not sure 40 MHz channels exist in >> 6 GHz, and I believe you’ll find an 80 MHz channel width means you need to >> license 2 adjacent channels. There is no benefit to having a radio that >> does 80 MHz channels if that’s not what you license, other than maybe having >> consistent equipment across your network to simplify sparing. >> >> >> >> >> >> From: TJ Trout >> >> Sent: Friday, January 16, 2015 1:05 PM >> >> To: [email protected] >> >> Subject: Re: [AFMUG] 6 or 11ghz best option for higher capacity ? >> >> >> >> 11ghz integra doesn't exist, and when it does in april it's just 60mhz! >> Should I even be considering a 60mhz radio? Seems like 80 is the way to go? >> >> >> >> On Fri, Jan 16, 2015 at 11:02 AM, Gino Villarini <[email protected]> wrote: >> >> 11 ghz integra >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> Gino A. Villarini >> >> President >> >> Aeronet Wireless Broadband Corp. >> >> www.aeronetpr.com >> >> @aeronetpr >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> From: TJ Trout <[email protected]> >> Reply-To: "[email protected]" <[email protected]> >> Date: Friday, January 16, 2015 at 2:57 PM >> To: "[email protected]" <[email protected]> >> Subject: Re: [AFMUG] 6 or 11ghz best option for higher capacity ? >> >> >> >> I guess what I'm interested in is what is the cheapest 6 or 11ghz 80mhz >> radio in terms of bits/hz or should I just use the lumina in 2+0? >> >> On Jan 16, 2015 10:54 AM, "TJ Trout" <[email protected]> wrote: >> >> So I have a lumina on 11ghz 56mhz that I need to upgrade, what is the most >> economical option for more capacity ? Saf doesn't really have much besides >> 2+0 right now (maybe that's my best option?) So I was thinking about trying >> another brand something with maybe 80mhz channels ? What are my options that >> won't cost an arm and a leg ? >> >
