Hey, no doubt about it. NO one wants to sue the pants off SB, we are just trying to get the stuff fixed. I am losing my a** on some units that are in the bad batch but I still want to use the things. Call me stupid, but when they work they work great. I have some Indoor ABs that have been on the air for a year now and never blinked. At $150 these are CPEs people around here can afford. I am ready to quit using POE and go back to LMR 400 runs. What we want here is real world results to get real world info to SB.
phantam wrote: > > > Ok T n T > > WOW Talk about a drastic calling for attention in my view, most of the > people on the board are working on resolving problems and your > response toa firmware issue is that they are advertised as carrier > class and that they don't offer cash refunds? Umm does cisco or > lucent? If so I'd gladly like to get my money back on some AP1000's or > CPE Ethernet Converters and a few cisco 350's. A class action suit? > Really I have yet to hear anyone that is pissed at the fact that they > only exchange units in a timely manner and wont give them there cash > back? Personally I don't recall many groups that will do cash refunds > from the primary company isn't this a point to deal with your SUPPLIER > if you feel you need to return goods cause you don't want them. > > As far as I can tell in the past SB has stood behind there problems > including phone calls from half way across the world at 10am to help > solve MANY users problems in a one on one basis, they take suggestions > and work to help mold there product. Really you have invested 6,000$ > wow I have spent over 25,000 upgrading my network with SB's powering > it and i have yet to find a reason to neglect the funds spent. > > AS A NOTE IT SAYS > > DOA Products must be returned in original condition, and the return > box must include all components and originally packaged with the > product, including cable, software, manual, etc. You must obtain an > RMA number before you return any defective or DOA products. > > REQUIRES ORIGINAL BOX ON DOA UNITS... DOA MEANS DEAD ON ARRIVAL HENCE > YOU JUST GOT IT SO THEY WANT IT BACK HOW THEY SENT IT SINCE IT WAS > DEAD AS SOON AS YOU GOT IT. > > As for the returning on a one to one basis it is not FINE PRINT it is > blatantly shown in Standard Sized text under the warranty conditions. > Not like they used size 1 font to try to hide it from you. > > Sorry if I'm being a di*k but this is just my take on your comment. > > Chris > -----Original Message----- > From: Tom & Toni Maris [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Sent: Saturday, July 19, 2003 10:44 PM > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > My husband Tom is very pissed. We have invested more than $6,000.00 > in this > gear and we are constantly having prtoblems. > On their web site thwy claim to be Carrier Class. Now we read the fine > print > on the rmapage and it says they will not give refund just replacement > units > and that you have to have the original box! > Original box, replacement unit's, no refunds, Carrier class. > This SmartBridges company certainly does not sound like an honest > company. > First I would like to know where they get off saying anything about > Carrier > class. > Then if they are so sure about their Carrier class junk, why do you > need an > original box to sned them back, and why don't they do refunds? > > Tom, has been talking about a lawsuite to make this Smartbridge > company > stand behind their products or give everyone their money back. He > thinks > that their is probably enough people like us who got ripped off to get > a > class action lawsuite against the company who sold us this pile of > junk > > Very very disapointed > > T n T > > > > > >From: "Blazen Wireless" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > >Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > >To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > >Subject: Re: [smartBridges] Anyone having issues with the new > firmware? > >Date: Sat, 19 Jul 2003 19:03:47 -0700 > > > >Okay so it appears I am not the only one having the problem here We > hav > >users at begining at 3.5 miles and some as far as 7.2 miles the last > >revision 0.01.06 just will not associate to any of my APS I had > sugested > >there is something going on here and I am finally able to get on this > list > >and post only to see what I have been telling support since last week > > >before > >the release only to be told its been working well in the "LAB" > > > >Here is my post from another forum these things need to be tested in > a > >consistant manor not just really close up. > >1. Measure signal at 1, 2, 3, 4,5 ,6 and 7 miles if possible > >2. At each point do some speed tests to confirm it is working and how > well > >or how bad as you can see at some ares out we get association but > speeds > >are > >WAY down. > >These are only 2 that need to be added to the list of testing before > ANY > >final revision is released to save time and nerves of those of us in > the > >field! > > > >I keep asking what is the closest and farthest they have been tested > in the > >"LAB" and I have yet to get an answer? is this something that is a > secret?? > >I too am not going to change firmware on the APPOS that are working > rock > >solid and have ALL my customers down. > > > > > > We have tried it (ver 0.01.06 rev 3 final release )and I have seen > >problems > >but to be fair we still need to identify if this firmware is > compatible > >with > >the OLD atmel chip they had. We tried this new firmware on the only > radio > >we > >have left since the other 2 locked up hardcore and are now doorstops > after > >doing firmware upgrades with rev 2 & rev 3 just before the final > release. > > > >Here is what we found after 3 hours of testing and we found the same > thing > >on rev 2 > > > >I don't how you guys feel about it and maybe this firmware is not > >compatible > >with the old good atmel chip per say. > >The two test radios that locked up we just bought less then a month > ago so > >I > >can only assume they had the problem. Unless they can come up with a > way to > >positively identify which units are suspect with the suspect chip. > > > >I suggest you do the same tests with a spare radio that you can > afford to > >lose if the firmware upgrade goes bad. Basically what happens is the > radio > >locks up and it no longer gives an Ethernet connection to log into > the > >radio, the power and wireless light stay on solid and you no longer > get a > >LAN connection or light many times I was told to reset and don't see > how > >that would work since that just resets passwords and the IP address > etc but > >I tried 20 times anyways they even sent me a utility to unlock it but > that > >was useless because you need a network connection to the radio > hahaha. > > > >Anyways in a nut shell the firmware after testing as you can see in > our > >notes does not work for us yet Smart bridges claims it works well in > the > >lab > >and others have tested as well which I would like to know how far > away they > >tested the radio. > > > >1. ver 0.01.04 loaded originally on this unit and at 3.5 miles we > associate > >fine and get download speeds in 900kbps to 1.2 megs > > > >2. Loaded ver 0.01.06 final rev into radio it loads fine and at same > 3.5 > >mile location we get not even half the speeds we did with rev 0.01.04 > we > >get > >200kbps to 300kbps at most and have lots of packet loss. > >RSSI 85% and signal quality 90-95% with both firmware. > > > >3. Moved to 5 mile location ran same speed tests with firmware > 0.01.04 get > >speeds of 800kbps consistently loaded ver 0.01.06 final revision and > we > >associate but thats it radio will not ping APPO on tower but we can > ping > >ABO > >radio with new firmware. RSSI 80% signal quality 80% with both > firmware. > > > >So as you can see this firmware will not work for us. I don't > understand > >what happened it seems that this is now possibly a timing issue? > > > >The only question I have is will version 0.01.06 work on old radios > with > >old > >atmel chip? and if not then we will proceed further to load the > 0.01.06 on > >clients radios but once again we have no way of telling which radios > have > >new or old atmel chip? > > > >Our coverage area begins at 3.5 miles and runs > >out to 7.2 miles. > > > >----- Original Message ----- > >From: "Colorado Wisp" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > >To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > >Sent: Saturday, July 19, 2003 1:18 PM > >Subject: RE: [smartBridges] Anyone having issues with the new > firmware? > > > > > >Nish, > > > >We updated several of one of our "overheating" units this morning and > it > >will not associate with our APs running 1.4j.5. We have no plans to > update > >the firmware on the APs, they have been rock solid. Is there going > to be > >firmware that will interact this firmware version? > > > >Chris > > > >--- > >Colorado WISP llc. http://www.cowisp.net > >Bringing high speed internet to rural communities. > >P.O. Box 55 > >Wellington, Colorado 80549 > >970-218-5295 > > > > > >-----Original Message----- > >From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > >[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > >On Behalf Of Nish Park > >Sent: Saturday, July 19, 2003 2:49 AM > >To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > >Subject: RE: [smartBridges] Anyone having issues with the new > firmware? > > > > > >Tim, > >Can you please elaborate a little more on this "still doing the same > >thing!". What was the problem, new unit (June or July purchase?), > RSSI and > >LQ values, Brand of AP? > > > >We have confirmed that the problem of loosing association at elevated > > >temperature has been solved. This has been the focus of all our > efforts and > >we are quire confident that issue no longer exist. Now we will be > focusing > >on testing if there has been any other side effects. > > > > >From some of the emails it appears that some of you are trying to > see > > >if > >the new F/W also fixes the old/lingering problem of "periodic > lockup". I > >will be pleasantly surprised to hear that it does, but that has not > been > >the > >focus of the current activity on hand. > > > >Thanks for your support. > > > >Nish > > > > > > > >-----Original Message----- > >From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > >[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > >On Behalf Of Tim Harris > >Sent: Saturday, July 19, 2003 12:32 PM > >To: '[EMAIL PROTECTED]' > >Subject: Re: [smartBridges] Anyone having issues with the new > firmware? > > > >Yep, I installed it this afternoon on a client's unit. Had to unplug > it to > >get it to start working after uploading the new firmware. Started > working > >fine. > > > >Customer called back an hour later and left two messages, still doing > the > >same thing! > > > >If it smells like it, if it looks like it........ > > > >Hmm, maybe the guy with the Hotmail address might have a point. This > seems > >to be getting ridiculous. > > > >I'm doing two more tomorrow morning, I'll post a response then.. > > > > > >Tim Harris, Operations > >www.dwisp.net > >[EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > > > >----- Original Message ----- > >From: "Sam" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > >To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > >Sent: Friday, July 18, 2003 10:09 AM > >Subject: [smartBridges] Anyone having issues with the new firmware? > > > > > > > Has anyone installed the new firmware? I'm getting ready to try, > but > > > wanted to check first to see what sort of luck others have had. > > > > > > Thanks > > > Sam > > > > > > > > > The PART-15.ORG smartBridges Discussion List > > > To Join: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] (in the body type subscribe > >smartBridges <yournickname> > > > To Remove: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] (in the body type > unsubscribe > >smartBridges) > > > Archives: http://archives.part-15.org > > > > > > >The PART-15.ORG smartBridges Discussion List > >To Join: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] (in the body type subscribe > >smartBridges <yournickname> To Remove: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > (in the > >body type unsubscribe > >smartBridges) > >Archives: http://archives.part-15.org > > > > > >The PART-15.ORG smartBridges Discussion List > >To Join: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] (in the body type subscribe > >smartBridges <yournickname> To Remove: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > (in the > >body type unsubscribe smartBridges) > >Archives: http://archives.part-15.org > > > >The PART-15.ORG smartBridges Discussion List > >To Join: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] (in the body type subscribe > >smartBridges <yournickname> > >To Remove: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] (in the body type unsubscribe > >smartBridges) > >Archives: http://archives.part-15.org > > > >The PART-15.ORG smartBridges Discussion List > >To Join: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] (in the body type subscribe > >smartBridges <yournickname> > >To Remove: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] (in the body type unsubscribe > >smartBridges) > >Archives: http://archives.part-15.org > > _________________________________________________________________ > The new MSN 8: smart spam protection and 2 months FREE* > http://join.msn.com/?page=features/junkmail > > The PART-15.ORG smartBridges Discussion List > To Join: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] (in the body type subscribe > smartBridges <yournickname> > To Remove: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] (in the body type unsubscribe > smartBridges) > Archives: http://archives.part-15.org The PART-15.ORG smartBridges Discussion List To Join: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] (in the body type subscribe smartBridges <yournickname> To Remove: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] (in the body type unsubscribe smartBridges) Archives: http://archives.part-15.org
