What if your competitor isn't GPS sync'd? Or what if they want to do 80/20 on the down/uplink and we want to do 50/50?
Travis Chuck McCown - 3 wrote: > The very best reason to use canopy is because the competitors are using it. > It can peacefully coexist with other systems due to gps sync. We are in very > tight quarters with a fierce competitor in one very small market. But we > never cause each other technical grief. > > What other product can give my customers 20.2 Mbps (including guaranteed 7 mS > latency with 130 subs on an AP?) for $70/sub? > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: Travis Johnson > To: WISPA General List > Sent: Monday, November 24, 2008 10:07 PM > Subject: Re: [WISPA] WiMax delays? > > > Chuck, > > We don't use Canopy just because my competitors are using it. And really, > any more, the customer doesn't care HOW the bandwidth gets delivered. So why > not use a product that can deliver twice the bandwidth for 1/3 the price? ;) > > Travis > Microserv > > Chuck McCown - 3 wrote: > If you hang out over at [EMAIL PROTECTED] you will find more than a hundred > WISPs, many of them very small operations from 100-1000 subscribers that are > 100% canopy. And generally speaking they are kicking butt and taking names > in their markets. I disagree that Canopy is not marketed to the smaller > WISPS. It costs a little more to deploy but you earn it back with a fixed > guaranteed latency, high priority for voip, 10 mbps burst and many other > features that keep the customer happy and retained. Come to AF09 and see > how Motorola markets to the smaller WISPS. Moreover their new 430 line > delivers better performance for the price than Redline or Alvarion. And > they are still innovating. > > While I will admit I have a vested interest in seeing Canopy continue to > have legs, I don't think my opinions are unfounded. > > It is funny how the Canopy product line is so polarizing in this industry. > I picked it entirely by chance. It was either Canopy or Proxim. I am glad > I picked what I picked. Many others picked Trango. They are able to make > it work and earn money. I know of some folks that abandoned Trango for > Canopy. Don't personally know anyone who went the other way but I am sure > that someone will educated me to that situation as soon as I press the send > button. > > I don't understand human psychology well enough to even begin to explain why > this is such a polarizing topic. Cognitive dissonance seems to come into > play. > > > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "Butch Evans" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > To: "WISPA General List" <wireless@wispa.org> > Sent: Monday, November 24, 2008 9:45 PM > Subject: Re: [WISPA] WiMax delays? > > > On Mon, 24 Nov 2008, Travis Johnson wrote: > > I don't think this is entirely true. For us, it becomes a "value" > decision. If there was an AP that would deliver 100Mbps and could > support 1000 subscribers, I would be willing to pay $10,000+ for it > today. There is a real "gap" in the products that are available on > the market: > I don't disagree with your assessment of the current product matrix. > I don't even assume that ALL WISPs are "cheap". I am not sure I > would say that even MOST of them are cheap. But enough of them are > that the middle of the road products you want are missing in action. > > Next = Mikrotik > Next = Trango, Canopy, etc > Since they have fixed their wireless, I'd put MT in the same class > as Trango and Canopy. > > So, again, why hasn't there been an evolution of products the last > 2-3 years? Did everyone stop normal R&D to focus on WiMax? > I have an opinion (which I stated in rant form) about what happened > to the R&D. The Canopy line (which is a very nice radio) is a good > example. Motorola has delivered a product that just works. It is > expensive compared to other products sold to the same "marketplace", > but it is NOT expensive for what it delivers. Better, yet, they are > working to make a new product line that will improve upon what is > available today. But their primary market isn't the "normal" WISP. > They service companies that are better funded, which typically means > larger WISPs, cable companies and telcos. > > I really hope I didn't offend anyone with my rant. It wasn't > intended to do that. I really just wish our industry as a whole > would get out of the hole that we have dug with the "cheaper is > better" mindframe. > > -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- WISPA Wants You! Join today! http://signup.wispa.org/ -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
