Exactly. Which is why those two vendors need to give more for less. The
benefit has to be so great, that its worth taking the chance to use it.
With the newer more flexible rules though, its much safer to install than 2
years ago, giving us more selection of antenna brands.
And just because uncertified gear is used, doesn't mean that its not
certifiable.
Its important that a consistent product line is used, that would meet the
certification, if ever required to get certified.
Tom DeReggi
RapidDSL & Wireless, Inc
IntAirNet- Fixed Wireless Broadband
----- Original Message -----
From: "Travis Johnson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "WISPA General List" <wireless@wispa.org>
Sent: Friday, August 18, 2006 3:23 PM
Subject: Re: [WISPA] Trango Atlas success story
Tom,
The other issue regarding RB532 or StarOS on a WAR board is the lack of
FCC certification.
Travis
Microserv
Tom DeReggi wrote:
Travis,
How would the WAR/V3 solution have worked any better than the
Routerboard 532 solution?
The WAR board has faster CPU, and can push the full 35 mbps. The
solution needed to be a fully outdoor mountable system.
You had to know that the RB532 would only do about 20Mbps of actual
throughput, so why would you quote that to begin with?
Actually not at the time I quotes. It was a big undersight on my part, I
should have know based on our many list debates from months earlier.
From previous testing months earlier I understood that I could get
14-15Mbps second with one CM9 at 10 miles. I had Atheros capabilty on
mind, and forgot about CPU need. So I thought that when I used Nstreme2
combining 2 CM9s or Turbo Mode or both I'd get double speed thus 30mb (I
forgot Nstreme was for Full Duplex instead of channel combining when
quoting, where was my head?) . What I learned two weeks ago in lab
testing, preparing for the install, after quoting the customer, was that
the bottleneck was the Mainboard CPU speed. When I realized my mistake,
I called the customer and converted the quote to a Trango unit, which I
thought should work best to meet spec.
The big mistake I made was that I forgot all about WAR boards. The quote
specificed True bridging, and at the time I did not realize that StarOS
V3 supported True Bridging. I learned after the fact, that it does. It
was an important client of mine, and I did not want to use something that
I had not tested or used yet personally, So I ate the profit margin based
on time constraints and maintaining professionalism not jerking the
customer around with new solutions every day. The reason I was limited
by Trango, is that Trango has a web presence and lists retail costs,
which my customer will see when they inquire about what we are providing
them, when I sell StarOS or Mikrotik it is an OEM solution, so they do
not have a reference of what my solution is typically sold at, as its
branded as our radio brand.
I like Trango alot for my needs as an ISP. It gives me the remote
troubleshooting tool and management features I need. But when I sell a
link to a end user, they don;t need those same benefits. The OEM
solution easilly met their need from a softwre perspective, if not more,
with the added routing OS type features.
My take on this is that for the reseller, OEM Branded WAR/StarOSV3 system
(or Mikrotik within its speed capabilties) is the solutions that will
allow integrators to make maximum profit margins. For example, I'd argue
that for resale, it could pass traffic equivellent to the Alvarion BH100,
and the $1000 solution could be sold for up to $7000 maximizing profit
potential, or at least a couple $1000 markup. I'm not saying the more
expensive main brand gear doesn;t have unique valuable features wirth
buying the gear for, I'm jsut saying the unique feature of the WAR
solution, is that it now has reached the speed capacity of the many high
cost PtP solutions, (Redline, Orhtogon, Ceragon, Avlarion, Etc) and can
compete on the criteria of speed.
I usually do not make purchasing decissions on resale advantages, because
I am usually a provider that buys product for my own use, and its not
about the profit, its about the benefit of features to me as the user.
But this case was a resale transaction that I did, and from a resale
point of view, it solved the customer's problem, but it did not solve
mine, which was to maximize profitabilty of the job. (of course I got
labor fee, that helped).
Tom DeReggi
RapidDSL & Wireless, Inc
IntAirNet- Fixed Wireless Broadband
----- Original Message ----- From: "Travis Johnson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "WISPA General List" <wireless@wispa.org>
Sent: Friday, August 18, 2006 11:28 AM
Subject: Re: [WISPA] Trango Atlas success story
Tom,
How would the WAR/V3 solution have worked any better than the
Routerboard 532 solution? You had to know that the RB532 would only do
about 20Mbps of actual throughput, so why would you quote that to begin
with?
Travis
Microserv
Tom DeReggi wrote:
Just completed install for client, that we quoted blind. The supposed
Near-LOS partial freznel obstruction from a building, unfortuneately
turned out to really mean NON-LOS through thick row of pine trees
between buildings. Buildings were probably 600 yards away from each
other. The Trango built-in antenna model installed pulled 46 mbps
throughput and zero packet loss, perfect link. WooHoo. (I know short
distance, but pine trees scare me, and often have unpredictable results
even when doing 900Mhz).
Only negative thing was Trango made the profit, allowing me only to
make $200 markup, instead of the original $1500, that I had originally
covered in my quote with a Routerboard 532 solution, that didn't get
the 30mbps capacity requirement. My pocket book, wishes I had the
War/V3 solution a week earlier :-(
Tom DeReggi
RapidDSL & Wireless, Inc
IntAirNet- Fixed Wireless Broadband
----- Original Message ----- From: "Tom DeReggi"
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "WISPA General List" <wireless@wispa.org>
Sent: Friday, August 18, 2006 10:25 AM
Subject: Re: [WISPA] Re: StarOS
Tom DeReggi
RapidDSL & Wireless, Inc
IntAirNet- Fixed Wireless Broadband
----- Original Message ----- From: "cw" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "WISPA General List" <wireless@wispa.org>
Sent: Thursday, August 17, 2006 2:44 PM
Subject: [WISPA] Re: StarOS
With the nazi administration currently in power, one should think
twice before deciding someone shouldn't be allowed to say or write
things. But, I must say this statement is like a Linux loon calling
FreeBSD crap. - cw
JohnnyO wrote:
I was not interested in reading posts labled Routerboard 532 and
Star-OS
crap. If I were interested in Star-OS crap instead of Mikrotik, then
I
would look for posts labled Star-OS !
--
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org
Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless
Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
--
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org
Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless
Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
--
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org
Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless
Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
--
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org
Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless
Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
--
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org
Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless
Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/