I apologize everyone, I didn't realize searching the list archives for any related or similar discussion that Mr. Hammett had participated in was required before replying to a message that caught my attention.
On Sun, Nov 2, 2014 at 10:18 PM, Mike Hammett <[email protected]> wrote: > We have this same thread nearly every week, so yes. > > > > ----- > Mike Hammett > Intelligent Computing Solutions > http://www.ics-il.com > > ------------------------------ > *From: *"Chris Fabien" <[email protected]> > *To: *"Ubiquiti Users Group" <[email protected]> > *Sent: *Sunday, November 2, 2014 9:17:24 PM > > *Subject: *Re: [Ubnt_users] NanoBeam M5 400 > > Wow Mike was that really necessary? How rude.... > > On Sun, Nov 2, 2014 at 9:47 PM, Mike Hammett <[email protected]> > wrote: > >> It is impossible to provide a firm date when the FCC is at the helm. >> >> Yes, other vendors appear to be better at it, but maybe they started much >> earlier than we believe they did. Then again, maybe they are better. With >> something so opaque as the FCC DFS certification process, we'll never know. >> >> SO. JUST. SHUT. UP. >> >> >> Find enough people that want DFS gear right now and approach a vendor >> willing to vouch for that many units. They don't mind making the sale, they >> mind holding onto old gear. If it's sold before they order it, kinda takes >> out that risk. >> >> or check out the stock locator. >> >> >> >> ----- >> Mike Hammett >> Intelligent Computing Solutions >> http://www.ics-il.com >> >> ------------------------------ >> *From: *"Chris Fabien" <[email protected]> >> *To: *"Ubiquiti Users Group" <[email protected]> >> *Sent: *Sunday, November 2, 2014 8:44:23 PM >> >> *Subject: *Re: [Ubnt_users] NanoBeam M5 400 >> >> 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]> >> 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]] >>> On Behalf Of Paul >>> Sent: Sunday, November 2, 2014 7:21 PM >>> To: [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]] On Behalf Of Paul >>> > Sent: Sunday, November 2, 2014 7:09 PM >>> > To: [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] ) >>> >> Excel.Net, Inc. – http://www.excel.net/ >>> >> (920) 452-0455 – Sheboygan/Plymouth area >>> >> (888) 489-9995 – Other areas, toll-free >>> >> >>> >> ----- Original Message ----- >>> >> From: "Rory Conaway" <[email protected]> >>> >> To: "Ubiquiti Users Group" <[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]] >>> >> On Behalf Of Paul >>> >> Sent: Sunday, November 2, 2014 5:45 PM >>> >> To: [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] >>> >>> 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 >>> _______________________________________________ >>> 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
