Tranzeo vs Ubiquiti

[bpzle 0]

Anyone have any experience with Tranzeo? I got a recommendation for them for a point to point solution I'm working on.

Certainly much more expensive... Supposedly the packet throughput is better than Ubiquiti?

[Soundy 1]

Ubiquiti is way easier to pronounce...

[hardwired 0]

Yeah, but I keep misspelling Ubiquiti....

 

I've only used a little bit of Tranzeo equipment, and it worked fine, but in the last couple of years, I have used Ubiquiti almost exclusively, either their integrated products (NanoStation, etc), or their mini-PCI radio cards (XR2,XR5,SR9), in Mikrotik Routerboards.

 

PPS (packets per second) is more of a consideration when you are carrying a large quantity of small packets, which are more characteristic of VOIP transmission, and some types of Peer-to-Peer systems, but video is usually large packets.

 

Video is (usually) where TCP throughput capability is more important, which is where Ubiquiti performs very well, at a very nice price point.

 

The largest wireless ISP in my area (over 5000 subscribers) is beginning to change all of his gear over to Ubiquiti from Tranzeo as it ages, and for all new subscribers.

 

If you can list out your requirements of distance and data rates needed, I'd be glad to share some product selections that I've been using in similar situations. You can also ask questions at Ubiquiti's forum, they are pretty helpful (they can be a little rough on people asking really stupid questions, but then again, we can be here, too!) at http://ubnt.com/forum/index.php

[thewireguys 3]

I can't talk about Tranzeo but another high end wireless company was telling me they use there own wireless standard that is optimized for for video and VOIP data unlike Ubiquiti which is just standard 802.11.

[Soundy 1]

I can't talk about Tranzeo but another high end wireless company was telling me they use there own wireless standard that is optimized for for video and VOIP data unlike Ubiquiti which is just standard 802.11.

And who would this high-end company be?

 

The problem I have with proprietary systems like this is that it locks you into their hardware - if you want to expand things, you can only do it with their equipment.

 

Would you not be able to use a standard 802.11x network with QoS to achieve the same (or similarly effective) optimization?

 

And what does "theWIREguys" know about wireless anyway?

[thewireguys 3]

I can't talk about Tranzeo but another high end wireless company was telling me they use there own wireless standard that is optimized for for video and VOIP data unlike Ubiquiti which is just standard 802.11.

And who would this high-end company be?

 

The problem I have with proprietary systems like this is that it locks you into their hardware - if you want to expand things, you can only do it with their equipment.

 

Would you not be able to use a standard 802.11x network with QoS to achieve the same (or similarly effective) optimization?

 

And what does "theWIREguys" know about wireless anyway?

 

Airaya was the company I was talking about and also Firetide and Fludemesh say the something.

 

Well I have to disagree about proprietary systems and wireless. I want proprietary for wireless for security. You can't connect to a Airaya, Firetide, or Fludemesh wireless node without a matching device. Any old 802.11 device will not connect.

 

Wireless still needs a wire to connect to the network right?

[Soundy 1]

I can't talk about Tranzeo but another high end wireless company was telling me they use there own wireless standard that is optimized for for video and VOIP data unlike Ubiquiti which is just standard 802.11.

And who would this high-end company be?

 

The problem I have with proprietary systems like this is that it locks you into their hardware - if you want to expand things, you can only do it with their equipment.

 

Would you not be able to use a standard 802.11x network with QoS to achieve the same (or similarly effective) optimization?

 

And what does "theWIREguys" know about wireless anyway?

 

Airaya was the company I was talking about and also Firetide and Fludemesh say the something.

 

Well I have to disagree about proprietary systems and wireless. I want proprietary for wireless for security. You can't connect to a Airaya, Firetide, or Fludemesh wireless node without a matching device. Any old 802.11 device will not connect.

 

Ah, fair enough.

 

 

Wireless still needs a wire to connect to the network right?

 

Hmm, you got me there!

[hardwired 0]

And you are also listening to "HARDWIRED", remember

 

All of the products that have been mentioned have their place, but I have not found a better price to performance ratio than what I have found with Ubiquiti.

 

Ubiquiti's 802.11 based system IS slightly proprietary in the "N" data rate range equipment, especially when using their "Airmax" TDMA settings to allow more units to connect per AP (up to about 100, compared to a standard "G" rate AP that chokes at 20-30 connections), it will not interconnect with any other manufacturer's equipment.

 

Their "Airmax" setting also allows QoS (standard DSCP packet marking) on the over-the-air data.

 

You could also shape the data on the LAN side, before the wireless, but when you have multiple remote units connecting, you (as the AP) would not know which unit to listen to first, without wireless side data shaping...

[Soundy 1]

The other neat thing with Ubiquiti is that most of their products are supported by DD-WRT

[thewireguys 3]

Hardwire is right everything has it's place and you can't touch Ubiquiti for the price. Personal I will be building our own RB links in the future for our wireless devices

[3RDIGLBL 0]

Older thread I know....

 

We've used both Tranzeo and Ubiquiti products and mainly chose Tranzeo because of it's cold operating temp.

 

This past year we've installed many Ubiquiti products ignoring the fact that they were not rated as cold. Well we've hit -26F just last night and everything is running great. Wireless especially generates a lot of heat with a camera constantly hammering it. Gee we even have the Ubiquiti POE and an ACTi power supply in a plastic enclosure on a roof thinking it may die in the cold temps we've had recently but nope...all is good so far.

 

We even installed (2 years ago) 4 port residential netgear switches in a plastic outdoor enclosure not knowing if it would run all winter and so far we've had zero failures.

 

What we've learned.....take some of these specs with a grain of salt. Gotta get out there and test the stuff for yourself and ask others in the same environment what there experiences have been.

 

OK...I know this thread was not about environmental specs but that's my experience with these manufacturers. None have failed us in the field but why pay tripple when you don't have to.

[Soundy 1]

Keep in mind that all electronics generate heat, and wireless systems tend to generate a LOT... sticking it in a sealed box does a nice job of trapping that heat. I'd be willing to bet the ambient temperature right around the switch is substantially above -26

[3RDIGLBL 0]

I'd be willing to bet the ambient temperature right around the switch is substantially above -26

 

I don't doubt it. My fear was in the summer but being up here our summers don't get all that hot. So far we have not had any functional failures due to weather.

 

I'm sure you run into the cold temps where you are also right? Although you may stay a bit milder on average than us here not sure. We're near the Maine, New Brunswick, Quebec borders.

[Soundy 1]

I think we had a few days of around -10 here this winter (Vancouver area)... that's about it. Plenty of systems in the interior though, that see much colder temps without issue.

 

We always seem to get lots of problems over the winter from Calgary and Edmonton sites, but I suspect that's more to do with the cold affecting power stability, rather than the equipment itself.

[Sawbones 0]

I've got a couple of Ubiquiti bridges and APs deployed... no problems, and you can't beat the price.

[hardwired 0]

Well, I can vouch for the Ubiquiti stuff working in the heat for several years now, summer here can get to 115F.

 

I tend not to use secondary enclosures, because our climate does not really need them (low rainfall, almost no freezing temperatures), but I am guessing that in 115F ambient weather with direct sunlight exposure, that they get as hot or hotter than their rated temperature extremes.

[bpzle 0]

Older thread I know....

 

We've used both Tranzeo and Ubiquiti products and mainly chose Tranzeo because of it's cold operating temp.

 

This past year we've installed many Ubiquiti products ignoring the fact that they were not rated as cold. Well we've hit -26F just last night and everything is running great. Wireless especially generates a lot of heat with a camera constantly hammering it. Gee we even have the Ubiquiti POE and an ACTi power supply in a plastic enclosure on a roof thinking it may die in the cold temps we've had recently but nope...all is good so far.

 

We even installed (2 years ago) 4 port residential netgear switches in a plastic outdoor enclosure not knowing if it would run all winter and so far we've had zero failures.

 

What we've learned.....take some of these specs with a grain of salt. Gotta get out there and test the stuff for yourself and ask others in the same environment what there experiences have been.

 

OK...I know this thread was not about environmental specs but that's my experience with these manufacturers. None have failed us in the field but why pay tripple when you don't have to.

 

Thanks for the input!

[thewireguys 3]

I have a pair if the Fluidmesh 1100 MITO links coming to test. I also have a pair of Mikrotik SXT PTP links that I have been testing. So far I have a 100Mbps PTP link working in my office. Very impressive!

 

Can't wait to see how the Fluidmesh links compare.