Too expensive for me... considering the alternatives. But yeah, that's true. A lot of operators are using it and making money... it certainly has it's place. We'll likely even be putting up more PMP450 in 900mhz and 3.65ghz in the future, since there really aren't cheaper alternatives there (UBNT 900mhz and 3.65ghz doesn't count...).
On Mon, Nov 9, 2015 at 9:33 AM, Josh Luthman <[email protected]> wrote: > Define too expensive... > > If operators can buy it, sell a service and be profitable than I don't > think it's too expensive. > > Josh Luthman > Office: 937-552-2340 > Direct: 937-552-2343 > 1100 Wayne St > Suite 1337 > Troy, OH 45373 > On Nov 9, 2015 10:25 AM, "Mathew Howard" <[email protected]> wrote: > >> I can't disagree that PMP450 is too expensive, but slow? ...compared to >> what? and what is less buggy than ePMP, other than PMP450? >> >> On Mon, Nov 9, 2015 at 8:47 AM, Josh Luthman <[email protected] >> > wrote: >> >>> like nearly everything from >>> Cambium..it is too expensive and soo low Bandwith for the customers. >>> >>> >>> Too expensive or slow :P >>> >>> Josh Luthman >>> Office: 937-552-2340 >>> Direct: 937-552-2343 >>> 1100 Wayne St >>> Suite 1337 >>> Troy, OH 45373 >>> On Nov 9, 2015 9:44 AM, "Adam Moffett" <[email protected]> wrote: >>> >>>> He didn't say ePMP was too expensive, he said it had too many bugs. >>>> >>>> On 11/9/2015 9:40 AM, Josh Luthman wrote: >>>> >>>> Dude he thinks EPMP is way too expensive. Doesn't read like a very >>>> rational post to me. >>>> >>>> Josh Luthman >>>> Office: 937-552-2340 >>>> Direct: 937-552-2343 >>>> 1100 Wayne St >>>> Suite 1337 >>>> Troy, OH 45373 >>>> On Nov 9, 2015 9:35 AM, "Sean Heskett" <[email protected]> wrote: >>>> >>>>> You must be doing something wrong because our experience is the >>>>> complete opposite with PMP450. >>>>> >>>>> What does your noise floor look like? >>>>> >>>>> -Sean >>>>> >>>>> On Sunday, November 8, 2015, Daniel Gerlach < >>>>> <[email protected]>[email protected]> wrote: >>>>> >>>>>> the 450 is a 4 years old pointless product like nearly everything from >>>>>> Cambium..it is too expensive and soo low Bandwith for the customers.We >>>>>> have thrown it out of the Network..The epmp serie has only bugs( we >>>>>> have found last week a new with heavy traffic and more than 35 CPE´s >>>>>> on a AP) and Cambium told me that they can not fix it before >>>>>> Christmas. >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> 2015-11-08 4:21 GMT+01:00 Eric Kuhnke <[email protected]>: >>>>>> > Same on any half duplex TDD platform with PtMP and low modulation >>>>>> (QPSK) >>>>>> > subscribers. If you have a ubnt 5 GHz AP with a bunch of clients in >>>>>> 64QAM >>>>>> > 3/4 to 64QAM 5/6 and a few are on the air using QPSK 1/2, it's >>>>>> going to drag >>>>>> > down the performance of that whole radio and sector significantly. >>>>>> It can be >>>>>> > as much as from 80 Mbps aggregate to 20 Mbps. Looking at the RSL >>>>>> thresholds >>>>>> > needed to operate at 1X in 450 terms, it sounds like a few of those >>>>>> client >>>>>> > radios are "just barely hanging on"... >>>>>> > >>>>>> > On Fri, Nov 6, 2015 at 10:37 AM, George Skorup <[email protected]> >>>>>> wrote: >>>>>> >> >>>>>> >> If those 1X and 2X downlink SMs are even moderately active, that >>>>>> really >>>>>> >> throws a wrench into the sector performance. This is true on any >>>>>> PMP >>>>>> >> platform. We've seen our fair share of it. We've moved a couple >>>>>> back to FSK >>>>>> >> which is something I never, ever want to do, but it was >>>>>> unfortunately >>>>>> >> necessary. >>>>>> >> >>>>>> >> >>>>>> >> On 11/6/2015 11:50 AM, Eric Muehleisen wrote: >>>>>> >>> >>>>>> >>> We have a few 450 AP's with 30-40 subscribers and have been >>>>>> getting >>>>>> >>> several slow speed complaints lately. I just chaulked it up to >>>>>> issues >>>>>> >>> with the SM since the AP rarely got over 20mb/s downlink. We >>>>>> upgraded >>>>>> >>> to 13.4 recently so we could watch our frame utilization. We >>>>>> started >>>>>> >>> graphing it over night and as you can see, we are hitting 100% for >>>>>> >>> sustained periods of time. During that time the AP is only doing >>>>>> >>> approx. 23mb/s. This particular AP has 34 registered SM and the >>>>>> >>> majority show 6x and 4x with 4 or 5 SM's at 2x and 1x. The >>>>>> performance >>>>>> >>> is a major disappointment. Anyone else have similar experiences? >>>>>> >>> >>>>>> >>> AP configuration: 20mhz channels, 2.5ms frame, 10 miles, 75% >>>>>> downlink, >>>>>> >>> 3 contention slots. >>>>>> >>> >>>>>> >>> Attached is a screenshot of the utilization and sector throughput >>>>>> >>> calculator from the Capacity Planner R13. >>>>>> >> >>>>>> >> >>>>>> > >>>>>> >>>>> >>>> >>
