except that whole wire grid thing that holds the feed our in front of the dish. if that ever gets moved/bent before it gets installed... your focal will be off. I'm still not huge on it.
On Mon, Nov 3, 2014 at 10:04 AM, Mike Hammett <[email protected]> wrote: > The Force 100 is an absolute bear to assemble. It's worse than the > NanoBridge. I put a scathing review of it on the WSIPA Members and AFMUG > lists about 6 weeks ago. They have a new one coming out, though, that's a > lot better. > > > > ----- > Mike Hammett > Intelligent Computing Solutions > http://www.ics-il.com > > ------------------------------ > *From: *"Chris Ruschmann" <[email protected]> > *To: *"Ubiquiti Users Group" <[email protected]> > *Sent: *Monday, November 3, 2014 9:59:44 AM > > *Subject: *Re: [Ubnt_users] {Spam?} Re: NanoBeam M5 400 > > Are you saying the EPMP is a terrible CPE? Is it the size that sucks? > > > > *From:* [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] > *On Behalf Of *Mike Hammett > *Sent:* Sunday, November 2, 2014 6:24 PM > *To:* Ubiquiti Users Group > *Subject:* Re: [Ubnt_users] {Spam?} Re: NanoBeam M5 400 > > > > I've been deploying ePMP this year. > > Every once in a while I circle to see if the horse is still dead while I > deploy someone else's gear instead. > > U-NII1 > DFS > Sync > > > (Oh yeah, and a terrible CPE.) > > > > ----- > Mike Hammett > Intelligent Computing Solutions > http://www.ics-il.com > > > ------------------------------ > > *From: *"Paul" <[email protected]> > *To: *"ubnt users" <[email protected]> > *Sent: *Sunday, November 2, 2014 9:21:10 PM > *Subject: *Re: [Ubnt_users] {Spam?} Re: NanoBeam M5 400 > > OK Mike I will go away, but it still doesn't change the problem with ubnt! > > 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]> <[email protected]> > *To: *"ubnt users" <[email protected]> <[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]> <[email protected]> > *To: *"ubnt users" <[email protected]> <[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]> > 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 > > > > _______________________________________________ > 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 > > -- Adair Winter VP, Network Operations / Owner Amarillo Wireless | 806.316.5071 C: 806.231.7180 http://www.amarillowireless.net
_______________________________________________ Ubnt_users mailing list [email protected] http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/ubnt_users
