So, what I'm hearing you say is that you just want to buy a whole bunch of
12 port injectors and standardize on that?
On Fri, Mar 11, 2016 at 6:42 PM, Josh Luthman <j...@imaginenetworksllc.com>
wrote:
> I'd rather but a dozen 12 ports than 6 of one and 6 of another.
>
> Josh Luthman
> Office: 937-552-2340
> Direct: 937-552-2343
> 1100 Wayne St
> Suite 1337
> Troy, OH 45373
> On Mar 11, 2016 8:38 PM, "Forrest Christian (List Account)" <
> li...@packetflux.com> wrote:
>
>> Based on current plans, the rackmount version is going to be available in
>> either 4, 8, 12 or 16 port versions or 6, 12 or 18 port versions, depending
>> on whether I end up with 4 or 6 ports per 'chunk'.....all of these will be
>> upwardly expandable.
>>
>> So I think that handles pretty much anyone who wants a rackmounted unit.
>> Hopefully this will make everyone who wants one happy.
>>
>> On the 'smaller units', I of course have the 4 today. Mechanically 12
>> ports fit into the same space as two of the 4 port units, since I only need
>> one set of input and output jacks for the injector, so that's why I'm
>> thinking that way. I could go to 8 instead, but that opens up a whole can
>> of worms (as an example, just shrinking the case triggers the potential
>> need for a different din rail mounting kit).
>>
>> It sounds like 4 is too few and 12 is fine, although 8 would probably
>> work for many, if not most sites. Is that fair?
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> On Fri, Mar 11, 2016 at 4:03 PM, Bill Prince <part15...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>> In spite of the handful of those that might want a 16 or 18 port
>>> injector, I think you & packetflux would do better with a 12 port; or maybe
>>> even an 8 port. We have only one POP that would need the higher count.
>>>
>>> If you made a 16 or 18 port version, I would think rackmount only.
>>>
>>> bp
>>> <part15sbs{at}gmail{dot}com>
>>>
>>>
>>> On 3/11/2016 1:22 PM, Forrest Christian (List Account) wrote:
>>>
>>> So, I have in the fairly immediate future the new "universal" 4 port
>>> injector (in the same form factor as the existing syncinjectors)....
>>>
>>> And the rackmount unit is progressing well, so that's coming as well -
>>> up to 16 or 18 ports per 1U
>>>
>>> And then we have the item the question is about.
>>>
>>> I intended to build a 12 port unit in a double height din rail mountable
>>> enclosure. If you think about gluing two syncinjectors on top of each
>>> other and having 12 ports instead of 8 in that same space - that's what I'm
>>> talking about.
>>>
>>> I'm wondering how many people would use this last product. My thought
>>> would be that once you get to more than a handful of radios at a site,
>>> you're probably going to end up wanting the rackmount solution....
>>>
>>> Using two syncinjectors will get you to 8 radios in the same space as
>>> this proposed device, at 2/3 of the cost of the proposed device.
>>>
>>> How many of you would be using more than 8 radios at a site that you
>>> wouldn't just move to a rackmount unit?
>>>
>>> --
>>> *Forrest Christian* *CEO**, PacketFlux Technologies, Inc.*
>>> Tel: 406-449-3345 | Address: 3577 Countryside Road, Helena, MT 59602
>>> <forre...@imach.com>forre...@imach.com | <http://www.packetflux.com/>
>>> http://www.packetflux.com
>>> <http://www.linkedin.com/in/fwchristian>
>>> <http://facebook.com/packetflux> <http://twitter.com/@packetflux>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> *Forrest Christian* *CEO**, PacketFlux Technologies, Inc.*
>> Tel: 406-449-3345 | Address: 3577 Countryside Road, Helena, MT 59602
>> forre...@imach.com | http://www.packetflux.com
>> <http://www.linkedin.com/in/fwchristian>
>> <http://facebook.com/packetflux> <http://twitter.com/@packetflux>
>>
>>
--
*Forrest Christian* *CEO**, PacketFlux Technologies, Inc.*
Tel: 406-449-3345 | Address: 3577 Countryside Road, Helena, MT 59602
forre...@imach.com | http://www.packetflux.com
<http://www.linkedin.com/in/fwchristian> <http://facebook.com/packetflux>
<http://twitter.com/@packetflux>
