But Mike that is the Rub. All things are never the same. 900 is dirty and Susceptible to so much noise and reflection because the signal does not die as quick. I understand the “Theory” but still have a hard time understanding how a slower carrier wave (900MHz) can carry the same Data as 5800MHz carrier wave but I know that it could in a vacuum. The issue is we don’t live in a vacuum.
Steve Barnes General Manager PCSWIN.com Howard LLC. From: wireless-boun...@wispa.org [mailto:wireless-boun...@wispa.org] On Behalf Of Mike Hammett Sent: Thursday, August 22, 2013 3:28 PM To: WISPA General List Subject: Re: [WISPA] Latest trend for heavy wooded areas 900 will move the same amount as data as 2.4, 3.65 and 5 GHz with all else being the same. If your throughput is low, you have too little signal for the noise you're seeing. ----- Mike Hammett Intelligent Computing Solutions http://www.ics-il.com ________________________________ From: "Sam Tetherow" <tethe...@shwisp.net<mailto:tethe...@shwisp.net>> To: "WISPA General List" <wireless@wispa.org<mailto:wireless@wispa.org>> Sent: Thursday, August 22, 2013 2:13:52 PM Subject: Re: [WISPA] Latest trend for heavy wooded areas I don't have anything to compare it to other than Tranzeo 900, but I have had decent results with it. It obviously won't push the throughput that 5G or even 2.4G will, even with the same channel sizes, but UBNT salvaged most of my 900 customers when the Tranzeo gear started running into problems. On 08/22/2013 09:03 AM, Mike Hammett wrote: How is it junk? IIRC, everyone I've asked that claimed a given 900 MHz system was junk had a poor RF environment. ----- Mike Hammett Intelligent Computing Solutions http://www.ics-il.com ________________________________ From: "Erik Anderson" <erik.ander...@hocking.net><mailto:erik.ander...@hocking.net> To: "WISPA General List" <wireless@wispa.org><mailto:wireless@wispa.org> Sent: Thursday, August 22, 2013 8:49:55 AM Subject: Re: [WISPA] Latest trend for heavy wooded areas 98% of our terrain is heavily wooded. Ubiquiti 900 is junk (but their other products perform quite well when they can be used). Cambium 900 is better. Out limited experience with whitespace has been good. All of these technologies have very low bandwidth. On 8/22/2013 12:04 AM, Chris Fabien wrote: What are you guys deploying lately in heavily wooded areas? We've used both Cambium pmp320 Wimax and UBNT M900, with mixed results on both. We just put up a 130ft tower in a heavily wooded river valley area, leaning towards the UBNT solution but hate putting money into something I'm not really satisfied with. _______________________________________________ Wireless mailing list Wireless@wispa.org<mailto:Wireless@wispa.org> http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless _______________________________________________ Wireless mailing list Wireless@wispa.org<mailto:Wireless@wispa.org> http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless _______________________________________________ Wireless mailing list Wireless@wispa.org<mailto:Wireless@wispa.org> http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless _______________________________________________ Wireless mailing list Wireless@wispa.org<mailto:Wireless@wispa.org> http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless
_______________________________________________ Wireless mailing list Wireless@wispa.org http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless
