Tom, Can you achieve a solid link with the Trango Atals Fox for more than 1 mile ?
Gino A. Villarini [EMAIL PROTECTED] Aeronet Wireless Broadband Corp. tel 787.273.4143 fax 787.273.4145 -----Original Message----- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Tom DeReggi Sent: Sunday, September 24, 2006 4:13 PM To: WISPA General List Subject: Re: [WISPA] vendor specs Trango is no where near $400 for Atlas Foxes. Trango's Atlas Fox's distance without dish is just about the same as the standard Canopy CPE (same DBI antenna). Remember that Trango lists retail on their site to protest the WISP. Low volume WISP special pricing is granted to any WISP. Tom DeReggi RapidDSL & Wireless, Inc IntAirNet- Fixed Wireless Broadband ----- Original Message ----- From: "Anthony Will" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "WISPA General List" <wireless@wispa.org> Sent: Friday, September 22, 2006 11:17 PM Subject: Re: [WISPA] vendor specs > Your numbers are a bit off on the canopy and when i looked on the trango > site it looks more in the range of $400 per unit at 30 pack pricing for > trango's. I believe your getting that price but at what qualities? > I have a couple hundred in the air and I have Midwest Wireless the 5th > largest WISP in the country playing in my back yard using Alvarions junk > BA2 system all over the place. And I also have a local ILEC, Stonebridge > and the remains of Xtratyme all over the rest of my coverage area. My > PtmP system is all 900mhz and 2.4 ghz using omni's and I dont have any > issues with interference. The longest customer link I have on 900mhz is > 18.5 miles and the longest 2.4 link is 12 miles. I use omni's so that I > dont completely destroy the airwaves for others that are playing in the > same sand box. > Canopy pricing: > AP = $898 (Advantage $1554) Single pricing > CPE = $267 (Advantage $402 ) 25pack pricing Add $40 a unit for 15 mile > range (stinger or beehive dish all FCC certified) > CPE = $216 (Advantage $324) 100 pack pricing Add $25 a unit for 15 mile > range (stinger or beehive dish all FCC certified) > > Anthony Will > Broadband Corp. > > > Travis Johnson wrote: >> Hi, >> >> I changed the subject line to reflect more the direction of this >> discussion (Trango vs. Canopy vs. Alvarion)... ;) >> >> This is just off the top of my head, and I would love to see more data on >> any of these radios: >> >> Trango 5830AP - $1,079 retail >> Dual polarity >> 10Mbps (auto up/down ratio) >> Easy management (CLI and web) >> $149 CPE ($199 up to 10 miles) >> >> Canopy 5.7 AP - $970 (Advantage $1,974) >> C/I advantage >> Fixed up/down ratio >> $490 CPE ($737 advantage) >> >> Alvarion VL AP - $4,500 (rough retail) >> 36Mbps and 40,000pps >> $1,000 CPE >> >> For whatever it's worth, we have over 2,500 CPE in the air and over 2,000 >> are Trango (900mhz, 2.4ghz, 5.8ghz). The Trango product has worked very >> well for us, and we are located on some mountaintop repeater locations >> that literally have over 100 antennas (paging, HAM, WISPs, etc.) within >> 100 yards of each other. >> >> Our biggest problem is frequency availability at all (regardless of radio >> choice)... we have a 2.4ghz AP at a repeater station that is "full". We >> attempted to install a second sector today and ran a site survey at this >> location.... across the entire 2.4ghz band, the "average" signals ranged >> from -25 to -55 at the best. :( >> >> Travis >> Microserv >> >> Jon Langeler wrote: >> >>> Tom, I have nothing to gain or lose by telling you what we've not only >>> extensivley tested but also experienced over 6 years. We started using >>> canopy since it began shipping and at least 100 trango SU between 3 >>> different towers since beta. I just hate to see fellow wisp protest that >>> there isn't a good product and struggle when their actually is a pretty >>> darn good one...and on top of that has an upgrade path in it's vision, >>> it keeps getting better. >>> >>> ARQ does not affect C/I like FEC does for example. When you say ARQ is >>> fixing any resiliance problems that may be true. But you'll also suffer >>> from increased latency and less throughput during those retransmissions. >>> Not good if you want to support VOIP and keep customers happy. Having a >>> low C/I means the system will be stable more often and maintain a lower >>> retrans. Trango's ARQ is not even an option in the 5800 model which is >>> what you and I probably have a decent percentage of in our Trango >>> networks. Having a low C/I requirement affects other things like >>> increases the range of a product. I'm laying out facts, you can convince >>> yourself of whatever you want... >>> >>> Jon Langeler >>> Michwave Tech. >>> >>> Tom DeReggi wrote: >>> >>>> Nice try, but I've found that comment to be not at all true. I have >>>> often chosen to avoid canopy user's channels, but because I am a good >>>> WISP neighbor, not because I had to. Why fight if you can cooperate. >>>> On a SPEC sheet Canopy does boast the lowest C/I. But Trango's >>>> specified C/I was reported before considering ARQ. And Trango has >>>> always underspec'd their spec sheets. C/I is not nearly as relevant as >>>> SNR resilience anyway. With Arq, we've easilly ran links as low as 4 db >>>> above the average noise floor, reliably. There is VERY little >>>> difference between the Trango and Canopy C/I in real world usage. The >>>> Trango just adds more polarities as more options to work around it, >>>> when needed. One of the reasons we like Trango is its resilience to >>>> noise, that gives us the abilty to fight it out and stand our ground. >>>> The Foxes w/ DISH, have excellent ARQ and resilience to Noise, within >>>> their range and LOS. >>>> >>>> When we start to have trouble with Trango, is when we start to push the >>>> limits of the technology. Its a LOS technology that we attempt NLOS >>>> with. My arguement is also not that we can't be the last man standing. >>>> Its that when the battle happens the customer sees it, and the customer >>>> does not tolerate it. IF a Canopy and Trango went to war, one might >>>> survive a little better than the other, but ultimately both customers >>>> would feel the interference the majority of the time. >>>> >>>> Tom DeReggi >>>> RapidDSL & Wireless, Inc >>>> IntAirNet- Fixed Wireless Broadband >>> >>> > -- > WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org > > Subscribe/Unsubscribe: > http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless > > Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/ > > > -- > No virus found in this incoming message. > Checked by AVG Free Edition. > Version: 7.1.405 / Virus Database: 268.12.8/455 - Release Date: 9/22/2006 > > -- WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/ -- WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
