No doubt there will be plenty of poorly run and designed (and may already be) ePMP and Mimosa networks, but I suspect that the majority of those networks will always be UBNT and maybe some MikroTik, simply because if you're comparing price and the specs that most people without a lot of experience are going to care about, Cambium looks like a pretty poor value in comparison, even with ePMP - as in "Why would I pay $100+ for a Force 200 and only does 200Mbps, when I can get a LiteBeam AC that does 450Mbps for like $60?". You probably aren't going to understand why things like GPS sync, and most of the things Cambium does better, matter until you try to run a fairly large network - and in a lot of cases they really don't matter until the network grows to a certain point, which makes UBNT a fine choice... in a lot of cases probably even the best choice.
On Fri, Sep 30, 2016 at 11:31 AM, Josh Reynolds <j...@kyneticwifi.com> wrote: > To add to this, there's a lot of poorly run UBNT networks out there simply > because the price made the equipment more accessable. > > I'm sure there's a fair share of poorly designed cambium networks as well, > but likely not as many (more money in the company, higher % of experienced > professionals, etc). > > I'm sure there will be just as many poorly designed and ran ePMP and > Mimosa networks given time :) > > On Sep 30, 2016 11:08 AM, "Paul Stewart" <p...@paulstewart.org> wrote: > >> ohhh… good conversation in my opinion. >> >> I came from a pure Cambium/Moto shop and now work with a company that is >> pure ubiquiti … but i’m not hands on with that side of the shop …. would >> say with everything I’ve seen from a distance that I really miss Cambium >> gear ;) >> >> >> > On Sep 30, 2016, at 9:47 AM, Sam Morris <w...@csilogan.com> wrote: >> > >> > Knowing what you know, if you were starting a WISP, based solely on >> performance and manageability, if you had to be 100% one or the other would >> you select Ubiquiti or Cambium 450x for your APs and CPE/SM hardware >> (leaving the backhaul out of the discussion)? >> > >> > Thanks, >> > Sam >> >>
