Should be shipping Summer 2017! ☺ lol Thanks,
[DennisBurgessSignature] www.linktechs.net<http://www.linktechs.net/> – 314-735-0270 x103 – dmburg...@linktechs.net<mailto:dmburg...@linktechs.net> From: Af [mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com] On Behalf Of Mathew Howard Sent: Thursday, March 17, 2016 2:02 PM To: af <af@afmug.com> Subject: Re: [AFMUG] UBNT new product I'm beginning to wonder, why do we even care? :P On Thu, Mar 17, 2016 at 12:59 PM, Josh Reynolds <j...@kyneticwifi.com<mailto:j...@kyneticwifi.com>> wrote: Look at pic. Cut off one of those N connectors. Past the cut N connector down the side and width of the radio. Figure out l/w of regular N connector. Multiply. End result = close enough :) On Mar 17, 2016 12:54 PM, "Mathew Howard" <mhoward...@gmail.com<mailto:mhoward...@gmail.com>> wrote: It does look like it's a bit bigger to me, but probably still relatively small (as far as 11ghz radios go). On Thu, Mar 17, 2016 at 12:51 PM, Nate Burke <n...@blastcomm.com<mailto:n...@blastcomm.com>> wrote: Hard to get scale from that pic though. On 3/17/2016 12:26 PM, Jeremy wrote: Pic: On Thu, Mar 17, 2016 at 11:25 AM, Josh Reynolds <j...@kyneticwifi.com<mailto:j...@kyneticwifi.com>> wrote: When you say form factor I am thinking is it more like AF24/HD or more like AFx. It's obviously connectorized and more like X, but likely thicker to handle the N bulkheads. As far as absolute dimensions, I don't think those have been documented or mentioned anywhere. On Mar 17, 2016 12:22 PM, "Nate Burke" <n...@blastcomm.com<mailto:n...@blastcomm.com>> wrote: Is it the same form factor? I can't see 2 N-Connectors fitting on the current form factor. Maybe same shape but dimensionally bigger? The Sales Email from UBNT says available Summer 2016. On 3/17/2016 12:19 PM, Josh Reynolds wrote: Yes no unsure, I believe by summer On Mar 17, 2016 12:16 PM, "Josh Baird" <joshba...@gmail.com<mailto:joshba...@gmail.com>> wrote: I missed the UBNT session.. Is the form-factor of this radio the same as the other AirFiberX radios? Does it have a SFP interface? When will they be available? On Thu, Mar 17, 2016 at 1:05 PM, Josh Reynolds <j...@kyneticwifi.com<mailto:j...@kyneticwifi.com>> wrote: There was discussion about waveguide - I pushed for it. I mentioned the RF Elements adapters as well... In the end, it was decided that N connectors were more universal and adaptable to various antennas. On Thu, Mar 17, 2016 at 12:03 PM, George Skorup <geo...@cbcast.com<mailto:geo...@cbcast.com>> wrote: > Yup, I believe the B11 is ac based. The AF will do true FDD so you can > license standard coordinated channel pairs. And to top it off, they went the > Exalt path with field replaceable diplexers. And looks like you can reverse > the diplexer for high or low side. > > The N connector thing is kinda odd. As Chuck said, they would've been better > off with SMA @ 11GHz. Or even better, a f'n waveguide interface! C'mon UBNT! > > On 3/17/2016 10:40 AM, Mathew Howard wrote: > > I'm pretty sure Mimosa actually is 802.11 based, but yeah the airFiber > certainly is not. > > Also, do NOT compare airFiber quality with anything else UBNT makes... it's > on a completely different level than the airMax stuff. > > On Thu, Mar 17, 2016 at 10:33 AM, Josh Reynolds > <j...@kyneticwifi.com<mailto:j...@kyneticwifi.com>> > wrote: >> >> Mimosa isn't 802.11 based as far as I know. UBNT is doing this on >> AirFiber FPGA. Who's making 802.11 based 11G radios? >> >> On Thu, Mar 17, 2016 at 10:32 AM, TJ Trout >> <t...@voltbb.com<mailto:t...@voltbb.com>> wrote: >> > is anyone else concerned about the quality and reliability that comes >> > with >> > these low cost 802.11 based 11ghz radios?? >> > >> > On Thu, Mar 17, 2016 at 8:28 AM, Josh Reynolds >> > <j...@kyneticwifi.com<mailto:j...@kyneticwifi.com>> >> > wrote: >> >> >> >> When we bought our SAF stuff a few years back, we had to show our >> >> distributor our coordination docs before they would ship gear. >> >> >> >> On Thu, Mar 17, 2016 at 10:26 AM, Lewis Bergman >> >> <lewis.berg...@gmail.com<mailto:lewis.berg...@gmail.com>> >> >> wrote: >> >> > I don't know about turning sellers into enforcement arms of the FCC. >> >> > All >> >> > of >> >> > that is really the FCC's job. Has there really been a problem? >> >> > >> >> > On Thu, Mar 17, 2016, 10:17 AM Cassidy B. Larson >> >> > <c...@infowest.com<mailto:c...@infowest.com>> >> >> > wrote: >> >> >> >> >> >> That would be an awesome idea to limit random joes from lighting up >> >> >> un-registered/coordinated links. But shouldnt they do that for 3.65 >> >> >> as >> >> >> well? >> >> >> >> >> >> > On Mar 17, 2016, at 9:14 AM, Brian Sullivan >> >> >> > <installe...@foxvalley.net<mailto:installe...@foxvalley.net>> >> >> >> > wrote: >> >> >> > >> >> >> > Can't they force some sort of compliance with license keys you get >> >> >> > after >> >> >> > you prove your FCC application/coordination? >> >> >> >> >> > >> > >> > > > >
