Not sure what it is, but in my case, the Machine did make a difference
in load time. Be interested in others feedback as well. Do you see
similar results? Are my results bad? Do older/slower machines take longer?
On 1/21/2015 8:52 AM, Josh Luthman wrote:
>But Seriously, it's a web page displaying TEXT AND NUMBERS, why
should it need an i7 on the client side for that?
No shit.
So you're saying it's clock speed? I've no idea what my phone does
but I would be kind of surprised if the Galaxy S3 and my phone vary
too much in CPU (I think they're both 2013 products).
Josh Luthman
Office: 937-552-2340
Direct: 937-552-2343
1100 Wayne St
Suite 1337
Troy, OH 45373
On Wed, Jan 21, 2015 at 9:50 AM, Nate Burke <[email protected]
<mailto:[email protected]>> wrote:
Just to sorta provide some more data from the original Thread, it
seems that CPU Makes a huge difference in how fast the pages
load.� I ran a test from the office to the same EPMP radio using
3 different machines.
On my 6 core I7 Desktop.� Initial web load takes 4-5 seconds.�
And login takes another 4-5 seconds.
On an old Dualcore Xeon, it's 10 seconds for initial load, and 10
seconds to login
On my atom netbook, it was 20 seconds for initial Load, 10 seconds
to login, and another 10 seconds for the graph to display and all
the red '!' marks to disappear (they were on all left menu items)
I know people just said 'well just get a faster laptop'.
But Seriously, it's a web page displaying TEXT AND NUMBERS, why
should it need an i7 on the client side for that?
On 1/21/2015 8:34 AM, Vlad Sedov wrote:
Yes they did, and it was definitely for the better. Most of the
improvements were based on some sort of real world feedback..
That's how you make a good UI :D
vlad
On 1/21/2015 1:29 AM, CBB - Jay Fuller wrote:
�
I do recall they did completely redesign the interface, due to
our request, after the initial complaints of v1....� : /
�
----- Original Message -----
*From:* Vlad Sedov <mailto:[email protected]>
*To:* [email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>
*Sent:* Tuesday, January 20, 2015 11:15 AM
*Subject:* Re: [AFMUG] EPMP Minimum System Specs <rant>
This has been one of our biggest complaints from day one.
The interface, while it has gotten slightly more usable, is
still
complete garbage. It's unpredictable, slow, and
inconsistent.. Let alone
the features that just don't work.
Why on earth did they not just stick with a field-tested,
fast, usable
interface from the Canopy line? Nobody buys a radio for it's
slide-out
menus and pretty HTML5 crap.
We need, fast, intuitive, consistent.. Forget the shiny.
grr
Vlad
On 1/20/2015 10:57 AM, Nate Burke 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
