I forgot to mention Chris...If you do have stock with NanoBridge, don't hesitate to reach out to me or to use the stock locator tool. We are stocking locally in our warehouse as well to ensure availability.
On Sun, Nov 2, 2014 at 9:54 PM, Ben Moore <[email protected]> wrote: > Hi Chris - > > We can't give exacts, but I would expect prior to end of year for > Powerbeam (I know this is pretty open) and for AC early in Q1/2015. There > will be additional announcements related to AC in the next week or two > (related to PTMP, etc...). I know this was also asked on this list as well. > > We do try and answer and know we have recently answered this on other > lists/forums. > > Regards, > Ben > > On Sun, Nov 2, 2014 at 7:44 PM, Chris Fabien <[email protected]> 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]> >> 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
