i'm just stating that on all of our computers i've never seen the ePMP page load slowly.
maybe it's a computer problem and not a device problem, just trying to bring valid input to the discussion. On Tue, Jan 20, 2015 at 11:34 AM, Josh Luthman <j...@imaginenetworksllc.com> wrote: > Why are you/others arguing that the speed is just fine? This doesn't even > make sense. There are people with slower laptops that work with other > modern devices and epmp is the only interface that loads slow. There's no > point in arguing peoples valid complaints. Are you trying to direct the > engineers attention to something else? > > > Josh Luthman > Office: 937-552-2340 > Direct: 937-552-2343 > 1100 Wayne St > Suite 1337 > Troy, OH 45373 > > On Tue, Jan 20, 2015 at 1:30 PM, Mike Hammett <af...@ics-il.net> wrote: > >> Three, maybe four seconds to load the initial screen and then two maybe >> three seconds to login. As I doubt a screen capture will work when I'm >> RDPed in, I'll record the entire login process when I get home and post it >> up on YouTube. >> >> >> >> ----- >> Mike Hammett >> Intelligent Computing Solutions >> http://www.ics-il.com >> >> ------------------------------ >> *From: *"Josh Luthman" <j...@imaginenetworksllc.com> >> *To: *af@afmug.com >> *Sent: *Tuesday, January 20, 2015 12:26:09 PM >> *Subject: *Re: [AFMUG] EPMP Minimum System Specs <rant> >> >> Login takes forever. The first like 10-15 seconds just load and load and >> load. Once you're in, it's acceptable in terms of page rendering. >> >> >> Josh Luthman >> Office: 937-552-2340 >> Direct: 937-552-2343 >> 1100 Wayne St >> Suite 1337 >> Troy, OH 45373 >> >> On Tue, Jan 20, 2015 at 1:22 PM, Sean Heskett <af...@zirkel.us> wrote: >> >>> we use macbook pro's and the ePMP GUI has never been slow for us. It >>> was UGLY, but they fixed that with version 2.0 haha. >>> >>> not sure why everyone says it's slow tho because we've never seen it. >>> >>> 2 cents >>> >>> -sean >>> >>> >>> >>> On Tue, Jan 20, 2015 at 9:57 AM, Nate Burke <n...@blastcomm.com> wrote: >>> >>>> Ok, Cambium, this is a little sad. My Field Laptop, a Lenovo S10-3t, >>>> Atom Processor with Windows 8.1 cannot load the EPMP WEB Pages in a timely >>>> manner. We're talking 40-60 seconds for initial load, and 20-30 seconds >>>> per screen refresh/menu change. Since I'm going to have to go to the boss, >>>> and tell him that I need a new laptop to do any field troubleshooting for >>>> these new radios, what are the minimum system specs for a machine to view >>>> the EPMP Screens? Unless Cambium is going to get their Web interface under >>>> control as of Yesterday. >>>> >>>> They still swear that the GUI was all developed in house and not >>>> purchased (something I still can't believe). I'd like to know who the >>>> engineers/managers are who signed off on that design. I can only imaging >>>> that there was a group of guys sitting around the conference table, >>>> watching the presentation on the GUI on the projector up front, all nodding >>>> their heads in agreement, "I think this is a wonderful layout, the field >>>> tech's won't mind waiting a couple extra minutes for the pages to load so >>>> they can look this pretty!!" >>>> >>>> I think that Cambium should step up and get engineers from ALL aspects >>>> of product development out into the field. 40 seconds waiting for the page >>>> to load is fine when you're sitting in the office, but not when you have >>>> the laptop balanced on a stack of firewood in the freezing rain trying to >>>> get to the monitoring page to see why a radio isn't linking up. I think >>>> that every WISP on this list would be more than happy to host an engineer >>>> for a day. Heck, even if they go into the parking lot and assemble it on >>>> the tailgate of someone's Pickup, they'll get some idea of what we >>>> experience. >>>> >>>> I have a feeling that if all steps of the Dev process took a week in >>>> the field, We'd have a radio that had a GUI that responded instantly on any >>>> device, and radios that assembled and mounted (and unmounted) with 1 gloved >>>> hand. >>>> >>>> </rant> >>>> Nate >>>> >>> >>> >> >> >
