I'm assuming LTE does not address the interference sensitivity of wimax, since it was also designed for use in licensed bands? I was amazed at how easily the 320 I had deployed fell flat on its face due to light interference - not very helpful for my confidence in the technology.
On Tuesday, February 17, 2015, Adam Moffett <[email protected]> wrote: > LTE is the light at the end of my tunnel right now, bro....don't ruin > the magic. > > I don't know about "hasn't yet been tested". The LTE firmware is > basically beta, but it's said to be functional. Functional enough that > they offered to let me run it anyway. I might still take them up on the > offer, but for their sake and mine I hope it blows my mind with how awesome > it is. > > The only smoke and mirrors I'm aware of is that whenever they tell you > about the awesome-sauce they have, they're definitely talking about LTE and > the near future. What they have right now is not the Corvette they're > trying to sell you. What they have now is equally quirky as the 320, but > 10x harder to use. It does have 4 antenna ports and if you want to, you > can run two base stations out of one unit, using two different channels and > two BSID's. So you do get two base stations for the price of two base > stations. Or the four antenna ports give you antenna diversity at the base > station....which they say gives you a little more margin in the upload > direction. They claim better performance, but I can't point to any of the > Compact base stations and say, "ah, this one is doing more than a 320 could > have." > > It's a good thing I'm not in sales. I would be terrible at it. It's not > a bad product, it's just not the awesome product I would like it to be. > > I was all about the Telrad koolaid until I sat in on a webinar and saw > the plethora of smoke and mirrors. Im concerned when a company has a > product with attached promises of greatness based on standards based > technology that hasnt yet been tested on their own hardware and the > promises have the caveat of no longer being standards based. But I do like > the promises of the magic they will have like being able to use what would > have been interference from another AP in the system as usable client > signal, however im not sure how much IP likes traversing to isolated sites > at once. > > I really hate not having any ethernet stats or control on the 320, I > never understood that being locked out > > On Tue, Feb 17, 2015 at 10:05 AM, Adam Moffett <[email protected] > <javascript:_e(%7B%7D,'cvml','[email protected]');>> wrote: > >> Did they promise you it's going to get better? >> >> Buying Wimax feels like buying a Chevy Cobalt for the price of a >> Corvette, based on the promise that they're delivering the Corvette next >> year. >> >> Moto never delivered the Corvette.� Alvarion/Telrad still says the >> Corvette is coming. >> >> I would have to check the MIB for the basestation, that was not >> something I ever tried to graph.� The CPE was generic Gemtek and >> Greenpacket stuff, so no, very little remote monitoring capability. >> � >> I dread every time I have to log into the Purewave GUI and do anything, >> it is so cumbersome.� I guess actually the Greenpacket GUI is easy to >> use, just lacking in functionality. >> � >> � >> *From:* Adam Moffett >> <javascript:_e(%7B%7D,'cvml','[email protected]');> >> *Sent:* Tuesday, February 17, 2015 9:44 AM >> *To:* [email protected] <javascript:_e(%7B%7D,'cvml','[email protected]');> >> *Subject:* Re: [AFMUG] 320SMs Gathering ethernet Error stats >> � >> Did any of your Purewave stuff give you ethernet error counters? >> >> So much for 4G stuff being �carrier class�.� Or maybe in that >> world, CPE is customer-owned-equipment and not the responsibility of the >> network operator to monitor. >> � >> � >> *From:* Adam Moffett >> <javascript:_e(%7B%7D,'cvml','[email protected]');> >> *Sent:* Tuesday, February 17, 2015 9:12 AM >> *To:* [email protected] <javascript:_e(%7B%7D,'cvml','[email protected]');> >> *Subject:* Re: [AFMUG] 320SMs Gathering ethernet Error stats >> � >> If you figure it out, let me know.� It's one of my biggest pet peeves >> about the 320. >> >> I'm sad to report that none of the Telrad CPE to seem to have it >> either.....so maybe a Gemtek chipset limitation? >> >> Is there an OID to gather Ethernet errors from the 320SMs in either >> bridge and/or NAT mode? >> >> � >> >> Paul >> >> � >> >> Paul McCall, Pres. >> >> PDMNet / Florida Broadband >> >> 658 Old Dixie Highway >> >> Vero Beach, FL 32962 >> >> 772-564-6800 office >> >> 772-473-0352 cell >> >> www.pdmnet.com >> >> [email protected] <javascript:_e(%7B%7D,'cvml','[email protected]');> >> >> � >> >> >> >> >> > > > -- > All parts should go together without forcing. You must remember that the > parts you are reassembling were disassembled by you. Therefore, if you > can't get them together again, there must be a reason. By all means, do not > use a hammer. -- IBM maintenance manual, 1925 > > >
