Please send your money as we are backordered for development. Will send product as soon as we can fill the order. LOL.
Quoting Brian Rohrbacher <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: > I'll take 200. > > Rudolph Worrell wrote: > > >I am reading all of these posts and I see one thing here. Marketing! There > is > >little sense to this but a great deal of marketing being done for Mesh, 4.9, > > >and Muni WiFi. I see out of town guys chime in all the time and express how > > >well they can deploy and integrate networks. I am very curious about the > >actual implementations they have done that involved a large mountain ranges > > >with customers spaced every 5 miles who are behind trees, or has some > >obstruction to any towers. Better yet a neighborhood with devices on the > same > >frequencies that you cannot control. My guess is that their lab and specs > of > >their devices looks great but the actual deployment is a different story. > We > >all know that 2.4Ghz, 900Mhz, and 5.8Ghz, all have their limitations, and > will > >perform perhaps 10% to 20% worst than advertised. Do these guys know that? > > > > >As for the marketing bit, I have a 2.4Ghz wireless device that can > communicate > >at 100 mph, at distances of 100mi from the tower using 60foot dishes, giving > a > >throughput of 200Mbps. It sells for $50,000.00 per Clieint bridge and > >$600,000.00 per AP. Who wants to buy? > > > > > >Quoting Carl A Jeptha <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: > > > > > > > >>Well to one-up you, > >>Our local Utility has been offered Wimax Radios to be used in a Mesh > >>Network on a licensed Freq, so that they can read meters. > >>What really gets me is that these people with a few carefully chosen > >>words appear to know more than all of us put together. The gift of the > GAB. > >> > >>You have a Good Day now, > >> > >> > >>Carl A Jeptha > >>http://www.airnet.ca > >>office 905 349-2084 > >>Emergency only Pager 905 377-6900 > >>skype cajeptha > >> > >> > >> > >>Brad Larson wrote: > >> > >> > >>>I'm biting my tongue on this topic....I have been on enough of these > >>>projects, well over 50 in the last 12 months alone, and I have to say > >>> > >>> > >>there > >> > >> > >>>are a pile of people that don't know what they're getting into and many > >>> > >>> > >>will > >> > >> > >>>get hurt. For instance, I have a unnamed mesh vendor quoting 14 nodes per > >>>square mile for 100% coverage in a decent sized community in MA. They'll > >>>need at least 40ish... And please keep in mind that different parts of > the > >>>Country where tree lines/foliage, noise floors, and topology are > different > >>>create their own separate challenges. Throw in voice as some of the > >>>"wireless network experts" have advised and a whole new overlay of > >>> > >>> > >>problems > >> > >> > >>>surface. > >>> > >>>There is a place for mesh just like other tools in your kit but covering > >>>whole counties or even trying to cover a whole City is quite a stretch > >>> > >>> > >>IMHO. > >> > >> > >>>How did we get to this point of mesh first being considered a > "convenience > >>>or hotspot extension" to what it has become today where it is seen as the > >>>4th solution to the last mile or a cost effective roaming solution for > >>>public safety or city workers? > >>> > >>>I have seen designs in the NE US where 40 to 69 2.4 Ghz nodes per square > >>>mile are needed when a simple implement of 900 Mhz mobility with two base > >>>stations (redundant) per square mile can do the trick and save 90% of the > >>>cost of a mesh network. Use mesh in the parks, at the pool, in the > >>>restaurant district, or anywhere else people may want public access. And > >>>I'll add that opening up my notebook on a sunny day outside is pretty > much > >>> > >>> > >>a > >> > >> > >>>waste of battery power. I'm afraid Tempe AZ and St Cloud are just the > >>> > >>> > >>start > >> > >> > >>>of some of the bad press we're going to see related to our wireless > >>>industry. > >>> > >>>But then again, I'm a show me guy so if one of these major networks > >>> > >>> > >>actually > >> > >> > >>>works, has an ROI and doesn't become a boondoggle for tax payers, and > >>> > >>> > >>serves > >> > >> > >>>the public well then I'll be impressed. Brad > >>> > >>>-----Original Message----- > >>>From: John J. Thomas [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > >>>Sent: Tuesday, April 25, 2006 10:03 AM > >>>To: WISPA General List > >>>Subject: Re: [WISPA] Pioneering Wi-Fi City Sees Startup Woes > >>> > >>> > >>> > >>> > >>> > >>>>-----Original Message----- > >>>>From: George [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > >>>>Sent: Monday, April 24, 2006 09:02 AM > >>>>To: 'WISPA General List' > >>>>Subject: Re: [WISPA] Pioneering Wi-Fi City Sees Startup Woes > >>>> > >>>>John J. Thomas wrote: > >>>> > >>>> > >>>> > >>>>>inline... > >>>>> > >>>>>First off, the WISPs have to have the guts to talk to the city. Many > >>>>> > >>>>> > >>>>> > >>>simply refuse to do so, and are probably going to get the Muni WiFi > shoved > >>>down their throats. > >>> > >>> > >>> > >>>>I don't want to turn this into a battle of ideals. > >>>> > >>>> > >>>> > >>>George, you are welcome to believe anything that you want. Here are some > >>>facts; > >>>1. I work for Clare Computer Solutions and we are a Cisco Mesh certified > >>>network Integrator. > >>>2. Cities have approached US to install their networks > >>>3. These cities are not San Francisco sized, they are probably > populations > >>>100,000 and smaller. > >>>4. They are spending the money to put in infrastructure for City workers, > >>>first. Many are looking at providing Internet access second. > >>> > >>> > >>> > >>> > >>> > >>>>But how many local wisps have been chosen to date? > >>>>I bet Joe laura in NO got passed over without much consideration to him. > >>>>Joe is on this list, let him chime in here. > >>>> > >>>> > >>>> > >>>> > >>>>>Second, the cities are mostly going to use 2.4 GHz for access and > >>>>> > >>>>> > >>5.7-5.8 > >> > >> > >>>>> > >>>>> > >>>>> > >>>GHz for backhauls. WISP's will need to use 5.25-5.25 GHz and 900 MHz. > >>> > >>> > >>> > >>>>Almost every wisp today is using 2.4 to reach the customer and 5 gig for > > >>>>infrastructure and high end customers. Are you saying that wisps have to > > >>>>move off the existing spectrum and replace their equipment? > >>>> > >>>> > >>>> > >>>I am not saying that WISPS have to move off of 2.4. I am saying that if > >>>WISPs want to provide top quality service, then they may need to move off > >>> > >>> > >>of > >> > >> > >>>2.4 as it is getting crowded in lots of areas. > >>> > >>> > >>> > >>>>>In a word, service. The city will only be offering WiFi access-period. > >>>>> > >>>>> > >>>>> > >>>They won't be going out to peoples houses and doing installs, fixing > >>> > >>> > >>virii, > >> > >> > >>>doing firewalls, etc. > >>> > >>> > >>> > >>>>Here is a scenario, if a potential customer who is on the fence while > >>>>deciding to go to broadband was to hear that a new muni free wifi system > > >>>>is going to come on line or he can buy now with his local wisp, which > >>>>choice is the average consumer going to make? > >>>> > >>>> > >>>> > >>>Most are going to try the muni first. Some are going to be unsatisfied > and > >>>will look for a better deal. I'll give you an example. I had 384k SDSL to > >>> > >>> > >>my > >> > >> > >>>house and it was costing me $152 per month. In order to save money, I > >>>dropped the SDSL in favor of a cable modem. The cable modem can do 6 meg > >>>down and about 384k up for $43 per month and has been verified by > >>>DSLreports. Even my wife thinks the SDSL was better, I just couldn't > >>> > >>> > >>afford > >> > >> > >>>it anymore. If someone in Antioch CA were even offering wireless service > >>> > >>> > >>at > >> > >> > >>>$42 per month, I would be there. There is a subset of people that want > >>>quality, and are willing to pay for it. Two questions come up-can you > >>>deliver and are there enough to keep you from starving? > >>> > >>> > >>> > >>> > >>> > >>> > >>>>The support scenario happens long after the fact. > >>>> > >>>>George > >>>>-- > >>>>WISPA Wireless List: [email protected] > >>>> > >>>>Subscribe/Unsubscribe: > >>>>http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless > >>>> > >>>>Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/ > >>>> > >>>> > >>>> > >>>> > >>> > >>> > >>> > > > > > >------------------------------------------------- > >This mail sent through IMP: http://horde.org/imp/ > > > > > > > > -- > WISPA Wireless List: [email protected] > > Subscribe/Unsubscribe: > http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless > > Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/ > ------------------------------------------------- This mail sent through IMP: http://horde.org/imp/ -- WISPA Wireless List: [email protected] Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
