New Fairytales from iBurst

[GRES]

I had conversation with iBurst senior techie yesterday. They claim that directional external antenna heavily affects other users @ the same tower and even they had to rewrite software! Explanation was that they can’t explain as this is very complicated case (i.e. I am an idiot).
I have 2 questions may be somebody can give an answer:
1. How improvement of the link can bring negative effect to the system?
2. Why Kyosera make modem with external antenna socket?

And BTW – Why iBurst install hundreds of them?

 

[RichardP]

I had conversation with iBurst senior techie yesterday. They claim that directional external antenna heavily affects other users @ the same tower and even they had to rewrite software! Explanation was that they can’t explain as this is very complicated case (i.e. I am an idiot).
I have 2 questions may be somebody can give an answer:
1. How improvement of the link can bring negative effect to the system?
2. Why Kyosera make modem with external antenna socket?

And BTW – Why iBurst install hundreds of them?

Sounds like smoke and mirrors to me .. a client side antenna wont affect other users nor will it adversely affect anyone else. According to the Kyocera iBurst diagrams... eachlink has a dedicated 1Meg line and its not a shared segment (as in WiFi)... so my traffic should not affect anyone.

Personally- it sounds like a load of croc.

Richard

 

[regardtv]

Your comments are quite funny Gres... While at the ICASA hearings the representative from iBurst was touting the benefits of using directional antennas ....

As to my personal view:

While the use of a directional antenna may improve personal performance it creates an imbalance in the network load. Towers are distributed to help maintain a balanced load.

The iBurst system has been specifically designed for multipath signalling. Directional antennas will in general reduce the number of paths of such signals - reducing the overall effectiveness of the system.

The antennas that should have been supplied (a few are available) are the omni-directional antennas. These would have been the best to use - that's why the antennas HAVE an external socket.

iBurst's reason for sending out antennas may have been for commercial reasons ... get more ppl online using less towers....

*Just my thoughts*

 

[slimothy]

i think its because when you get an external antenna your speed improves and you can now use 1mbit and WBS preferred it when users were stuck with 128kbit or worse, and now that people get what they paid for WBS wants it back the way it was.

I think its hilarious that they told you its too complicated, if anything you should be telling them that.

 

[iBurst]

It pains WBS to have users not getting good speeds. We had a choice at WBS to either sell 128, or 256, 0r 512 but we decided against all that because the radio resources are available at full 1Mpers even when you are throttled.

 

[slimothy]

iburst, if i may ask, who exactly are you at WBS?

 

[GRES]

The iBurst system has been specifically designed for multipath signalling. Directional antennas will in general reduce the number of paths of such signals - reducing the overall effectiveness of the system.

This is ONLY for the ideal condition. When you (modem) have choise of more then one PROPERLY working towers. Still you can connect only with one tower at the time!

The antennas that should have been supplied (a few are available) are the omni-directional antennas. These would have been the best to use - that's why the antennas HAVE an external socket.

What about locations with -105dB signal? What about peoples around Northcliff?

 

[TheRoDent]

1. How improvement of the link can bring negative effect to the system?

This is utter bullsh1t they're feeding you mate. Antony McKechnie of iBurst deliberately made a point on Thursday at the ISPA iWeek (http://www.ispa.org.za/iweek/2005/presentations.shtml) that a better signal for someone on the fringes of reception area by means of an antenna uses exactly the same amount of radio resources as a bad quality signal user at the same spot. In fact, he made it clear that a better signal actually HELPS them.

2. Why Kyosera make modem with external antenna socket?
And BTW – Why iBurst install hundreds of them?

What is possibly happening is that due to your antennae doing the job well, they now actually have to provision more bandwidth, because people aren't only getting 56k modem performance on the fringe areas.

ROFL...

 

[seburn]

Maybe its something to do with the way they are shaping, coz thats the only software they would be writting?

 

[Simple Twist Of Fate]

Hmmm, it pained me so much to not receive the service I was paying for, so I informed WBS that WBS was in breach of contract, and got ADSL instead, now the pain is gone...

Absolutely, IC i got a chillpill too
ADSL

the equation was me+iburst=pain so therefore me-iburst=no pain
so to conclude: me (now pain free ) + ADSL = HAPPY

 

[regardtv]

This is ONLY for the ideal condition. When you (modem) have choise of more then one PROPERLY working towers. Still you can connect only with one tower at the time!

What about locations with -105dB signal? What about peoples around Northcliff?

Gres ... I am in complete agreement ... I don't argue the need for antennas. I simply think it's a requirement for additional tower coverage....

 

[GRES]

Which will bring no need for an extra antenna at all !
100% !!!!!!!!!!


Dreams . . . . .