That would be an incorrect assumption… Matt
From: Af [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Gino Villarini Sent: Wednesday, March 16, 2016 10:53 AM To: Animal Farm <[email protected]> Subject: Re: [AFMUG] 450M So im assuming 4 streams @ 256qam 125 Mbps = 500 Mbps On Wed, Mar 16, 2016 at 11:40 AM, Ken Hohhof <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>> wrote: 450m increases AP capacity by letting the AP talk to multiple SMs at the same time. I don’t think it increases throughput to an individual SM, that is the same as now (but note 30 and 40 MHz channels coming on 450). 450m is a new AP and antenna, it will work with existing 450 and 450i SMs. From: Craig Schmaderer<mailto:[email protected]> Sent: Wednesday, March 16, 2016 10:09 AM To: [email protected]<mailto:[email protected]> Subject: Re: [AFMUG] 450M Have they said anything about a new cheaper sm that does the entire 5ghz band and gb ethernet, otherwise a 450i is still going to be needed to take advantage of that 500mb, even mu-mimo on 2 sms can only do 200mb? not 500mb right? I think aaron gave a hint a few weeks back about a new sm. ________________________________ From: Af <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>> on behalf of Chuck McCown <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>> Sent: Wednesday, March 16, 2016 9:45 AM To: [email protected]<mailto:[email protected]> Subject: Re: [AFMUG] 450M Right but you can do +100 Mbps aggregate to a 450 SM. From: Gino Villarini<mailto:[email protected]> Sent: Wednesday, March 16, 2016 8:02 AM To: Animal Farm<mailto:[email protected]> Subject: Re: [AFMUG] 450M 500 aggregated in the AP, not to SMs... ? On Wed, Mar 16, 2016 at 9:56 AM, Adam Moffett <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>> wrote: ouch. On 3/16/2016 9:36 AM, Brian Sullivan wrote: Just like FSK? On 3/16/2016 7:40 AM, Chuck McCown wrote: Backwards compatibility. With existing 450
