That's not the way I understand digital radio transmissions. They can
all get the same number of bit transitions per cycle. That being the
case, you will get 2.67x more maximum on a 2.4G link than a 900M link
and about 6.4x more on a 5.8G than 900M.
Try them in a clean environment, like your work area. What is the
maximum throughput you can get on a 900MHz link when your SNR is 80 or
90. I don't think you will ever see it doing air rates of 100M.
On 8/22/2013 3:28 PM, Mike Hammett wrote:
900 will move the same amount as data as 2.4, 3.65 and 5 GHz with all
else being the same.
If your throughput is low, you have too little signal for the noise
you're seeing.
-----
Mike Hammett
Intelligent Computing Solutions
http://www.ics-il.com
------------------------------------------------------------------------
*From: *"Sam Tetherow" <[email protected]>
*To: *"WISPA General List" <[email protected]>
*Sent: *Thursday, August 22, 2013 2:13:52 PM
*Subject: *Re: [WISPA] Latest trend for heavy wooded areas
I don't have anything to compare it to other than Tranzeo 900, but I
have had decent results with it. It obviously won't push the
throughput that 5G or even 2.4G will, even with the same channel
sizes, but UBNT salvaged most of my 900 customers when the Tranzeo
gear started running into problems.
On 08/22/2013 09:03 AM, Mike Hammett wrote:
How is it junk? IIRC, everyone I've asked that claimed a given 900
MHz system was junk had a poor RF environment.
-----
Mike Hammett
Intelligent Computing Solutions
http://www.ics-il.com
------------------------------------------------------------------------
*From: *"Erik Anderson" <[email protected]>
*To: *"WISPA General List" <[email protected]>
*Sent: *Thursday, August 22, 2013 8:49:55 AM
*Subject: *Re: [WISPA] Latest trend for heavy wooded areas
98% of our terrain is heavily wooded. Ubiquiti 900 is junk (but
their other products perform quite well when they can be used).
Cambium 900 is better. Out limited experience with whitespace has
been good. All of these technologies have very low bandwidth.
On 8/22/2013 12:04 AM, Chris Fabien wrote:
What are you guys deploying lately in heavily wooded areas?
We've used both Cambium pmp320 Wimax and UBNT M900, with mixed
results on both. We just put up a 130ft tower in a heavily
wooded river valley area, leaning towards the UBNT solution
but hate putting money into something I'm not really satisfied
with.
_______________________________________________
Wireless mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless
_______________________________________________
Wireless mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless
_______________________________________________
Wireless mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless
_______________________________________________
Wireless mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless
_______________________________________________
Wireless mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless
No virus found in this message.
Checked by AVG - www.avg.com <http://www.avg.com>
Version: 2013.0.3392 / Virus Database: 3211/6598 - Release Date: 08/22/13
--
Scott Reed
Owner
NewWays Networking, LLC
Wireless Networking
Network Design, Installation and Administration
Mikrotik Advanced Certified
www.nwwnet.net
(765) 855-1060
(765) 439-4253
(855) 231-6239
_______________________________________________
Wireless mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless
