Thanks for the response. Out of curiosity was this before the force 200 was available for 2.4? We have been using lots of force 200 in 2.4 and having good luck with LOS and NLOS locations. I can count on one hand where we can use the integrated units however.
We never did get into the reflectors and other options. From: Af [mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com] On Behalf Of Kurt Fankhauser Sent: Wednesday, November 30, 2016 6:34 PM To: af@afmug.com Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Nicely done, Cambium! Brandon, Yes I had a tower that was EPMP 2.4 before I converter it to 450 and the 450 is running much better. The ePMP really only worked in LOS and very limited would work on some NLOS links. I even had trouble with the EPMP on some LOS links. On Wed, Nov 30, 2016 at 6:59 PM, Brandon Yuchasz <li...@gogebicrange.net> wrote: Kurt, Have you tested the ePMP 2.4 as well? From: Af [mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com] On Behalf Of Kurt Fankhauser Sent: Wednesday, November 30, 2016 5:57 PM To: af@afmug.com Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Nicely done, Cambium! 2.4ghz PMP450 penetrates better than UBNT 2.4. Don't know if its the slant polarization helping or what. On Wed, Nov 30, 2016 at 6:47 PM, CBB - Jay Fuller <par...@cyberbroadband.net> wrote: Still the issue of 2.4 EPMP does not seem to penetrate as well as UBNT - at least from my field guys. I know there was some serious discussion on this once upon a time. ----- Original Message ----- From: Jon Langeler <mailto:jon-ispli...@michwave.net> To: af@afmug.com Sent: Wednesday, November 30, 2016 5:16 PM Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Nicely done, Cambium! I want to know the throughput comparisons? EPMP vs UBNT now? Jon Langeler Michwave Technologies, Inc. On Nov 30, 2016, at 10:57 AM, Mathew Howard <mhoward...@gmail.com> wrote: It's not a bad deal at all. We have several towers where we put up both UBNT and ePMP 5ghz APs, with the intention of eventually replacing all the UBNT CPE with ePMP and shutting down the old AP - this is going to save us a ton of time and money. On Wed, Nov 30, 2016 at 9:40 AM, That One Guy /sarcasm <thatoneguyst...@gmail.com> wrote: 35 bucks a pop to extend a depreciated hardware is not a bad deal at all they just said if you have a failed AP, theyll honor system your licenses to an existing AP you have so you dont have to wait on RMA Im beginning to wonder about Cambium, theyre building EPMP into a really hot product that is good enough to compete with the 450 in the margin markets Is this the same Cambium that bought moto, or has there been a restructuring? Because originally, they were bigger cocks than moto On Wed, Nov 30, 2016 at 9:36 AM, Jason Wilson <ja...@remotelylocated.com> wrote: Mikrotik? On Nov 30, 2016 7:31 AM, "That One Guy /sarcasm" <thatoneguyst...@gmail.com> wrote: we have been installing epmp SMs to ubnt backhauls on small sites by shutting off airmax until we get a chance to get EPMP APs at the site, this might give us a better window On Wed, Nov 30, 2016 at 9:28 AM, Adam Moffett <dmmoff...@gmail.com> wrote: Compatible doesn't mean "same". Software for an Intel 386 is compatible with an Intel Core isn't it? Point taken though...ePMP is still 802.11n. ------ Original Message ------ From: "Stefan Englhardt" <s...@genias.net> To: "af@afmug.com" <af@afmug.com> Sent: 11/30/2016 10:25:23 AM Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Nicely done, Cambium! They found out that their new ePMP CPEs use the same hardware as the oldest UBNT-Atheros-Crap. So no porting problem. Just install the same SW. Von: Af [mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com] Im Auftrag von That One Guy /sarcasm Gesendet: Mittwoch, 30. November 2016 16:12 An: af@afmug.com Betreff: Re: [AFMUG] Nicely done, Cambium! you have to wonder if at some point cambium hired marsellus wallace and some hard, pipe-hittin' people, who'll go to work on the ubnt managers here with a pair of pliers and a blow torch to get hardware access On Wed, Nov 30, 2016 at 9:05 AM, That One Guy /sarcasm <thatoneguyst...@gmail.com> wrote: im in the webinar, I didnt realize thats what the webinar was when I signed up for it but now im all giddy like a school girl On Wed, Nov 30, 2016 at 8:55 AM, Joe Novak <jno...@lrcomm.com> wrote: I prefer the Cambium direct link: http://www.cambiumnetworks.com/blog/dont-migrate---elevate/ Very interesting indeed... very interesting. On Wed, Nov 30, 2016 at 8:50 AM, Tyler Treat <tyler.tr...@cornbelttech.com> wrote: This ought to shake things up a bit. http://www.businesswire.com/news/home/20161130005468/en/ <http://www.businesswire.com/news/home/20161130005468/en/> <http://www.businesswire.com/news/home/20161130005468/en/> / www.businesswire.com / -- If you only see yourself as part of the team but you don't see your team as part of yourself you have already failed as part of the team. -- If you only see yourself as part of the team but you don't see your team as part of yourself you have already failed as part of the team. -- If you only see yourself as part of the team but you don't see your team as part of yourself you have already failed as part of the team. -- If you only see yourself as part of the team but you don't see your team as part of yourself you have already failed as part of the team.
