Correct. Unmodified. On Feb 23, 2015 11:25 AM, "Adam Moffett" <[email protected]> wrote:
> > Does the software for the 3000 SU work on a 320 SM unmodified? Or did > Telrad have to make a special build for it? > > Nathan from Wisper just explained the situation to our class of 56 here > at WISPAmerica. I wish I'd recorded it. He explained just re- flashing 320 > SM connected to a Compact base station from the Motorola software load to > the TELRAD software load changed the SM performance from reading 27 dBm > output, yet being connected at lower modulations to dBm readings of - 9 to > +3, yet a achieving full modulation. Same SM hardware. That's one example > of just how much better even our firmware is. Nick says that is related to > the superiority of ATPC algorithm. > On Feb 23, 2015 8:58 AM, "That One Guy" <[email protected]> wrote: > >> I had a popiel pocket fisherman >> >> On Mon, Feb 23, 2015 at 8:54 AM, Ken Hohhof <[email protected]> wrote: >> >>> Remember the Shamwow guy? >>> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vince_Offer >>> >>> Offer's "smooth-talking condescension" was more suited to the >>> present "zeitgeist" than the "earnest fervor" of spokesmen like Mays >>> and Ron Popeil. >>> >>> I don’t know, I was always a sucker for Ron Popeil. Wait, there’s more. >>> >>> >>> *From:* That One Guy <[email protected]> >>> *Sent:* Monday, February 23, 2015 8:28 AM >>> *To:* [email protected] >>> *Subject:* Re: [AFMUG] Grail or Gauntlet? ...or Maybe Just >>> "Powerpointware"? >>> >>> This is reminiscent of that aggressive bald cambium sales rep, >>> insulting customers and making huge promises, I wonder what he does now. >>> >>> On Mon, Feb 23, 2015 at 4:36 AM, Gino Villarini <[email protected]> >>> wrote: >>> >>>> can’t compare LTE vs PMP450 protocol, 2 different beasts. Even >>>> under same RF conditions (same Tx power, same Rx sens) LTE will have better >>>> NLOS coverage. >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> Gino A. Villarini >>>> President >>>> Aeronet Wireless Broadband Corp. >>>> www.aeronetpr.com >>>> @aeronetpr >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> From: Jason McKemie <[email protected]> >>>> Reply-To: "[email protected]" <[email protected]> >>>> Date: Monday, February 23, 2015 at 4:01 AM >>>> To: "[email protected]" <[email protected]> >>>> Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Grail or Gauntlet? ...or Maybe Just >>>> "Powerpointware"? >>>> >>>> I think "RF levels" is the key phrase here - a bit of wordsmithing :) >>>> >>>> On Monday, February 23, 2015, Josh Reynolds <[email protected]> >>>> wrote: >>>> >>>>> Sensitivity does not change the power level of the received signal. >>>>> >>>>> -- >>>>> Josh Reynolds >>>>> CIO, SPITwSPOTSwww.spitwspots.com >>>>> >>>>> On 02/22/2015 08:42 PM, Patrick Leary wrote: >>>>> >>>>> ...also, seriously. You any like it's even possible to compute a link >>>>> budget without accounting for sensitivity, MIMO scheme etc. Thinking dBm >>>>> and dBi are the only numbers in the equation has me wondering how >>>>> experienced you are Adam. You do realize don't you it's impossible to >>>>> understand link budget without knowing a whole host of things besides the >>>>> output power and antenna gain? >>>>> On Feb 22, 2015 10:37 PM, "Adam Moffett" <[email protected]> wrote: >>>>> >>>>>> I read that quote before Patrick, and I am forced to wonder if that >>>>>> individual was in the United States and running at the correct (legal) >>>>>> power level. And I wonder if he was comparing the naked 10dbi SM to a >>>>>> 15dbi wimax CPE. You could definitely get 10db more by turning up the tx >>>>>> power all the way and using a bigger antenna, and maybe you can do some >>>>>> electronic magic to make a little more out of the signal you're getting, >>>>>> but there's no magic that makes more db's appear. If both systems >>>>>> started >>>>>> with the legal +40dbm then how does one end up with 10db more at the CPE? >>>>>> >>>>>> I'm a skeptic by nature. >>>>>> >>>>>> Testing back to back between Cambium and Telrad products on the >>>>>> same tower at the same azimuth, we found an average of 10dB better RF >>>>>> levels with Telrad’s equipment." >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>> >>> >>> >>> -- >>> 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 >>> >> >> >> >> -- >> 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 >> > >
