I was told this was a rendering.

From: Jeremy 
Sent: Thursday, March 17, 2016 11:26 AM
To: [email protected] 
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] UBNT new product

Pic:

On Thu, Mar 17, 2016 at 11:25 AM, Josh Reynolds <[email protected]> wrote:

  When you say form factor I am thinking is it more like AF24/HD or more like 
AFx. It's obviously connectorized and more like X, but likely thicker to handle 
the N bulkheads. As far as absolute dimensions, I don't think those have been 
documented or mentioned anywhere.

  On Mar 17, 2016 12:22 PM, "Nate Burke" <[email protected]> wrote:

    Is it the same form factor? I can't see 2 N-Connectors fitting on the 
current form factor.  Maybe same shape but dimensionally bigger?

    The Sales Email from UBNT says available Summer 2016.




    On 3/17/2016 12:19 PM, Josh Reynolds wrote:

      Yes no unsure, I believe by summer

      On Mar 17, 2016 12:16 PM, "Josh Baird" <[email protected]> wrote:

        I missed the UBNT session..  Is the form-factor of this radio the same 
as the other AirFiberX radios?  Does it have a SFP interface?  When will they 
be available?


        On Thu, Mar 17, 2016 at 1:05 PM, Josh Reynolds <[email protected]> 
wrote:

          There was discussion about waveguide - I pushed for it. I mentioned
          the RF Elements adapters as well...

          In the end, it was decided that N connectors were more universal and
          adaptable to various antennas.


          On Thu, Mar 17, 2016 at 12:03 PM, George Skorup <[email protected]> 
wrote:
          > Yup, I believe the B11 is ac based. The AF will do true FDD so you 
can
          > license standard coordinated channel pairs. And to top it off, they 
went the
          > Exalt path with field replaceable diplexers. And looks like you can 
reverse
          > the diplexer for high or low side.
          >
          > The N connector thing is kinda odd. As Chuck said, they would've 
been better
          > off with SMA @ 11GHz. Or even better, a f'n waveguide interface! 
C'mon UBNT!
          >
          > On 3/17/2016 10:40 AM, Mathew Howard wrote:
          >
          > I'm pretty sure Mimosa actually is 802.11 based, but yeah the 
airFiber
          > certainly is not.
          >
          > Also, do NOT compare airFiber quality with anything else UBNT 
makes... it's
          > on a completely different level than the airMax stuff.
          >
          > On Thu, Mar 17, 2016 at 10:33 AM, Josh Reynolds 
<[email protected]>
          > wrote:
          >>
          >> Mimosa isn't 802.11 based as far as I know. UBNT is doing this on
          >> AirFiber FPGA. Who's making 802.11 based 11G radios?
          >>
          >> On Thu, Mar 17, 2016 at 10:32 AM, TJ Trout <[email protected]> wrote:
          >> > is anyone else concerned about the quality and reliability that 
comes
          >> > with
          >> > these low cost 802.11 based 11ghz radios??
          >> >
          >> > On Thu, Mar 17, 2016 at 8:28 AM, Josh Reynolds 
<[email protected]>
          >> > wrote:
          >> >>
          >> >> When we bought our SAF stuff a few years back, we had to show 
our
          >> >> distributor our coordination docs before they would ship gear.
          >> >>
          >> >> On Thu, Mar 17, 2016 at 10:26 AM, Lewis Bergman
          >> >> <[email protected]>
          >> >> wrote:
          >> >> > I don't know about turning sellers into enforcement arms of 
the FCC.
          >> >> > All
          >> >> > of
          >> >> > that is really the FCC's job. Has there really been a problem?
          >> >> >
          >> >> > On Thu, Mar 17, 2016, 10:17 AM Cassidy B. Larson 
<[email protected]>
          >> >> > wrote:
          >> >> >>
          >> >> >> That would be an awesome idea to limit random joes from 
lighting up
          >> >> >> un-registered/coordinated links.  But shouldnt they do that 
for 3.65
          >> >> >> as
          >> >> >> well?
          >> >> >>
          >> >> >> > On Mar 17, 2016, at 9:14 AM, Brian Sullivan
          >> >> >> > <[email protected]>
          >> >> >> > wrote:
          >> >> >> >
          >> >> >> > Can't they force some sort of compliance with license keys 
you get
          >> >> >> > after
          >> >> >> > you prove your FCC application/coordination?
          >> >> >>
          >> >> >
          >> >
          >> >
          >
          >
          >




Reply via email to