I can waste money on Mikrotik for a 2 year window until totally banned.
It looks like I can take Cambium to the bank at the moment.
Hopefully we will know soon if we can take Mimosa to the bank.
At some point I am going to stop wasting money on ubnt until the goods
are in hand and
working. Thank GOD I didn't jump on the gps and rocket ti bandwagon.
That would have been
expensive. Now I am wondering if I did make a mistake jumping on the
ubnt bandwagon too soon.
I can live without DFS for 6 more months, I can't live without UNII-1
any longer.
On 11/2/2014 9:07 PM, Mike Hammett wrote:
When someone brings up switching to Mikrotik wireless, I stop taking
them seriously. This is Mikrotik to the FCC: http://bit.ly/1wX04zi
UBNT probably don't know either or if they do, I certainly wouldn't
make announcements about the DFS process other than in progress.
Letting too much out to competitors at that point.
As this thread has just turned into Paul crying, I'm out.
-----
Mike Hammett
Intelligent Computing Solutions
http://www.ics-il.com
------------------------------------------------------------------------
*From: *"Paul" <[email protected]>
*To: *"ubnt users" <[email protected]>
*Sent: *Sunday, November 2, 2014 8:59:34 PM
*Subject: *Re: [Ubnt_users] NanoBeam M5 400
YES we are all having to assume. We get very little good info from
them that
we can take to the bank.
I don't little being treated like a mushroom!
Right now Mikrotik looks good for 2 years for non-DFS until ubnt can
get their sh** together
on their core products.
On 11/2/2014 8:54 PM, Mike Hammett wrote:
I assume that due to the sensitive nature of the DFS
certifications, they're not changing anything on those products
until the DFS is complete.
-----
Mike Hammett
Intelligent Computing Solutions
http://www.ics-il.com
------------------------------------------------------------------------
*From: *"Paul" <[email protected]>
*To: *"ubnt users" <[email protected]>
*Sent: *Sunday, November 2, 2014 8:51:41 PM
*Subject: *Re: [Ubnt_users] NanoBeam M5 400
But I assumed, and was wrong that UNII-1 would be a simple
permissive form filing
which later turned into a full DFS certification required for ubnt
for some reason.
DFS, I understand but most other companies had the permissive
change made
in June when allowed.
On 11/2/2014 8:44 PM, Chris Fabien wrote:
Okay, if Ben and Matt are here, what's the Date for DFS on
Nanobeam guys? Got a firm date you can commit to?
My biggest bitch right now is I need high-gain DFS CPEs and
nobody wants to stock nanobridges anymore, they're scared of
getting stuck with half a container once the Nanobeams get DFS
finally. So I'm faced with a long backorder on a product I
need or play the old ubnt scramble to find someone with a few
boxes to get me through another few weeks, which is a waste of
time an ends up costing me more ordering small quantities from
a random supplier and shipping it across the country.
On Sun, Nov 2, 2014 at 9:31 PM, Rory Conaway
<[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>> wrote:
Look, Ben and Matt are on this board. If you have a
complaint, tell them directly and give them a chance to
make it right. If they don't, then make that public. The
manufacturer should be liable to defective products, no
question, but nobody wants a reputation for cheating the
customer, especially not in a small and public community
like this. As for the DFS channels, I'm sure that will
get resolved and there was enough information around that
you should have known that feature, along with PTMP,
wasn't going to happen soon. But this is a small problem
compared to the cable and Rocket GPS. In those cases, the
product either didn't deliver what it was supposed to or
simply fell apart. Different situation.
Rory
-----Original Message-----
From: [email protected]
<mailto:[email protected]>
[mailto:[email protected]
<mailto:[email protected]>] On Behalf Of Paul
Sent: Sunday, November 2, 2014 7:21 PM
To: [email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>
Subject: Re: [Ubnt_users] NanoBeam M5 400
But we are stuck paying the bill. Especially on the cable
crap and time to replace and equipment setting on the
shelf unable to use.
On 11/2/2014 8:20 PM, Rory Conaway wrote:
> With the Rocket GPS, I agree. The should have publicly
offered to buy every single unit back. I'm still sitting
with 1/2 roll of the crappy melt in the sun cable that I
have to RMA. With this situation though, part of it was
Ubiquiti's fault, part of it was the FCC process and the
inefficiency of government in general. Holding an entire
industry back for months at a time is another example why
other countries out-manufacture us and our politicians are
inept at best, crooked at worst, for allowing this to happen.
>
> Rory
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: [email protected]
<mailto:[email protected]>
[mailto:[email protected]
<mailto:[email protected]>] On Behalf Of Paul
> Sent: Sunday, November 2, 2014 7:09 PM
> To: [email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>
> Subject: Re: [Ubnt_users] NanoBeam M5 400
>
> It's not hysteria when they extract money from us for
future promises and we had to pay a premium to get the
equipment early without the needed features.
>
> On 11/2/2014 8:01 PM, Larry A. Weidig wrote:
>> Not so sure it is hysteria as annoyance. The lack of
any real answers from Ubiquiti about this, the nearly
turtle pace that development of this product line goes
at,... Internally I kid with myself (only have jokingly)
that Cambium will release 5.6 of the ePMP line before
Ubiquiti does. Each of their releases have significant
updates as well.
>>
>>
>> Larry A. Weidig ( [email protected]
<mailto:[email protected]> )
>> Excel.Net, Inc. -- http://www.excel.net/
>> (920) 452-0455 <tel:%28920%29%20452-0455> --
Sheboygan/Plymouth area
>> (888) 489-9995 <tel:%28888%29%20489-9995> -- Other
areas, toll-free
>>
>> ----- Original Message -----
>> From: "Rory Conaway" <[email protected]
<mailto:[email protected]>>
>> To: "Ubiquiti Users Group" <[email protected]
<mailto:[email protected]>>
>> Sent: Sunday, November 2, 2014 6:56:03 PM
>> Subject: Re: [Ubnt_users] NanoBeam M5 400
>>
>> Tone down the hysteria guys. The FCC certifies
manufacturers in batch.
>> When Ubiquiti had to pull a radio from the FCC for an
issue, all their
>> radios went to the back of the line. That included the
Powerbeam.
>> That's the delay. But yes, the PowerBridge not getting
certified
>> totally sucked. I've got a bunch of them.
>>
>> Rory
>>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: [email protected]
<mailto:[email protected]>
>> [mailto:[email protected]
<mailto:[email protected]>]
>> On Behalf Of Paul
>> Sent: Sunday, November 2, 2014 5:45 PM
>> To: [email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>
>> Subject: Re: [Ubnt_users] NanoBeam M5 400
>>
>> So you are saying we take a risk every time we buy ubnt
equipment of
>> notting getting what was promised and expected unless
it is already
>> there? Maybe we shouldn't trust ubnt at their word?
>> I have a lot invested in ubnt and they are not feeling
very much like
>> a partner anymore!
>>
>>
>> On 11/2/2014 6:41 PM, Seth Mattinen wrote:
>>> On 11/2/14, 4:20 PM, Paul wrote:
>>>> So are you saying the Nanobeams and PTP-AC's we have
already bought
>>>> will not certify because of hardware problems?
>>>>
>>> No, he said they have a history of not certifying
everything and thus
>>> a risk of such a situation. The PowerBridge M5 for
example.
>>>
>>> ~Seth
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> Ubnt_users mailing list
>>> [email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>
>>> http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/ubnt_users
>>>
>>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Ubnt_users mailing list
>> [email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>
>> http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/ubnt_users
>> _______________________________________________
>> Ubnt_users mailing list
>> [email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>
>> http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/ubnt_users
>> _______________________________________________
>> Ubnt_users mailing list
>> [email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>
>> http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/ubnt_users
> _______________________________________________
> Ubnt_users mailing list
> [email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>
> http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/ubnt_users
> _______________________________________________
> Ubnt_users mailing list
> [email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>
> http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/ubnt_users
_______________________________________________
Ubnt_users mailing list
[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/ubnt_users
_______________________________________________
Ubnt_users mailing list
[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/ubnt_users
_______________________________________________
Ubnt_users mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/ubnt_users
_______________________________________________
Ubnt_users mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/ubnt_users
_______________________________________________
Ubnt_users mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/ubnt_users
_______________________________________________
Ubnt_users mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/ubnt_users
_______________________________________________
Ubnt_users mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/ubnt_users
_______________________________________________
Ubnt_users mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/ubnt_users
