[AFMUG] EPMP Minimum System Specs <rant>

[Nate Burke]

Ok, Cambium, this is a little sad. My Field Laptop, a Lenovo S10-3t,
Atom Processor with Windows 8.1 cannot load the EPMP WEB Pages in a
timely manner. We're talking 40-60 seconds for initial load, and 20-30
seconds per screen refresh/menu change. Since I'm going to have to go
to the boss, and tell him that I need a new laptop to do any field
troubleshooting for these new radios, what are the minimum system specs
for a machine to view the EPMP Screens? Unless Cambium is going to get
their Web interface under control as of Yesterday.

They still swear that the GUI was all developed in house and not
purchased (something I still can't believe). I'd like to know who the
engineers/managers are who signed off on that design. I can only
imaging that there was a group of guys sitting around the conference
table, watching the presentation on the GUI on the projector up front,
all nodding their heads in agreement, "I think this is a wonderful
layout, the field tech's won't mind waiting a couple extra minutes for
the pages to load so they can look this pretty!!"

I think that Cambium should step up and get engineers from ALL aspects
of product development out into the field. 40 seconds waiting for the
page to load is fine when you're sitting in the office, but not when you
have the laptop balanced on a stack of firewood in the freezing rain
trying to get to the monitoring page to see why a radio isn't linking
up. I think that every WISP on this list would be more than happy to
host an engineer for a day. Heck, even if they go into the parking lot
and assemble it on the tailgate of someone's Pickup, they'll get some
idea of what we experience.

I have a feeling that if all steps of the Dev process took a week in the
field, We'd have a radio that had a GUI that responded instantly on any
device, and radios that assembled and mounted (and unmounted) with 1
gloved hand.

</rant>
Nate

[Chuck McCown]

Push the turbo button...

-----Original Message-----
From: Nate Burke
Sent: Tuesday, January 20, 2015 9:57 AM
To: Animal Farm
Subject: [AFMUG] EPMP Minimum System Specs

Ok, Cambium, this is a little sad. My Field Laptop, a Lenovo S10-3t,
Atom Processor with Windows 8.1 cannot load the EPMP WEB Pages in a
timely manner. We're talking 40-60 seconds for initial load, and 20-30
seconds per screen refresh/menu change. Since I'm going to have to go
to the boss, and tell him that I need a new laptop to do any field
troubleshooting for these new radios, what are the minimum system specs
for a machine to view the EPMP Screens? Unless Cambium is going to get
their Web interface under control as of Yesterday.

They still swear that the GUI was all developed in house and not
purchased (something I still can't believe). I'd like to know who the
engineers/managers are who signed off on that design. I can only
imaging that there was a group of guys sitting around the conference
table, watching the presentation on the GUI on the projector up front,
all nodding their heads in agreement, "I think this is a wonderful
layout, the field tech's won't mind waiting a couple extra minutes for
the pages to load so they can look this pretty!!"

I think that Cambium should step up and get engineers from ALL aspects
of product development out into the field. 40 seconds waiting for the
page to load is fine when you're sitting in the office, but not when you
have the laptop balanced on a stack of firewood in the freezing rain
trying to get to the monitoring page to see why a radio isn't linking
up. I think that every WISP on this list would be more than happy to
host an engineer for a day. Heck, even if they go into the parking lot
and assemble it on the tailgate of someone's Pickup, they'll get some
idea of what we experience.

I have a feeling that if all steps of the Dev process took a week in the
field, We'd have a radio that had a GUI that responded instantly on any
device, and radios that assembled and mounted (and unmounted) with 1
gloved hand.

</rant>
Nate

[Vlad Sedov]

This has been one of our biggest complaints from day one.
The interface, while it has gotten slightly more usable, is still
complete garbage. It's unpredictable, slow, and inconsistent.. Let alone
the features that just don't work.

Why on earth did they not just stick with a field-tested, fast, usable
interface from the Canopy line? Nobody buys a radio for it's slide-out
menus and pretty HTML5 crap.
We need, fast, intuitive, consistent.. Forget the shiny.

grr

Vlad


On 1/20/2015 10:57 AM, Nate Burke wrote:
> Ok, Cambium, this is a little sad. My Field Laptop, a Lenovo S10-3t,
> Atom Processor with Windows 8.1 cannot load the EPMP WEB Pages in a
> timely manner. We're talking 40-60 seconds for initial load, and
> 20-30 seconds per screen refresh/menu change. Since I'm going to have
> to go to the boss, and tell him that I need a new laptop to do any
> field troubleshooting for these new radios, what are the minimum
> system specs for a machine to view the EPMP Screens? Unless Cambium
> is going to get their Web interface under control as of Yesterday.
>
> They still swear that the GUI was all developed in house and not
> purchased (something I still can't believe). I'd like to know who the
> engineers/managers are who signed off on that design. I can only
> imaging that there was a group of guys sitting around the conference
> table, watching the presentation on the GUI on the projector up front,
> all nodding their heads in agreement, "I think this is a wonderful
> layout, the field tech's won't mind waiting a couple extra minutes for
> the pages to load so they can look this pretty!!"
>
> I think that Cambium should step up and get engineers from ALL aspects
> of product development out into the field. 40 seconds waiting for the
> page to load is fine when you're sitting in the office, but not when
> you have the laptop balanced on a stack of firewood in the freezing
> rain trying to get to the monitoring page to see why a radio isn't
> linking up. I think that every WISP on this list would be more than
> happy to host an engineer for a day. Heck, even if they go into the
> parking lot and assemble it on the tailgate of someone's Pickup,
> they'll get some idea of what we experience.
>
> I have a feeling that if all steps of the Dev process took a week in
> the field, We'd have a radio that had a GUI that responded instantly
> on any device, and radios that assembled and mounted (and unmounted)
> with 1 gloved hand.
>
> </rant>
> Nate

[Josh Luthman]

#1 issue
Monitor -> Wireless

The most critical part of an install page and it's slow, confusing, auto
refresh scrolls up. Vomit.


Josh Luthman
Office: 937-552-2340
Direct: 937-552-2343
1100 Wayne St
Suite 1337
Troy, OH 45373

On Tue, Jan 20, 2015 at 12:15 PM, Vlad Sedov <***@atlasok.com> wrote:

> This has been one of our biggest complaints from day one.
> The interface, while it has gotten slightly more usable, is still complete
> garbage. It's unpredictable, slow, and inconsistent.. Let alone the
> features that just don't work.
>
> Why on earth did they not just stick with a field-tested, fast, usable
> interface from the Canopy line? Nobody buys a radio for it's slide-out
> menus and pretty HTML5 crap.
> We need, fast, intuitive, consistent.. Forget the shiny.
>
> grr
>
> Vlad
>
>
>
> On 1/20/2015 10:57 AM, Nate Burke wrote:
>
>> Ok, Cambium, this is a little sad. My Field Laptop, a Lenovo S10-3t,
>> Atom Processor with Windows 8.1 cannot load the EPMP WEB Pages in a timely
>> manner. We're talking 40-60 seconds for initial load, and 20-30 seconds
>> per screen refresh/menu change. Since I'm going to have to go to the boss,
>> and tell him that I need a new laptop to do any field troubleshooting for
>> these new radios, what are the minimum system specs for a machine to view
>> the EPMP Screens? Unless Cambium is going to get their Web interface under
>> control as of Yesterday.
>>
>> They still swear that the GUI was all developed in house and not
>> purchased (something I still can't believe). I'd like to know who the
>> engineers/managers are who signed off on that design. I can only imaging
>> that there was a group of guys sitting around the conference table,
>> watching the presentation on the GUI on the projector up front, all nodding
>> their heads in agreement, "I think this is a wonderful layout, the field
>> tech's won't mind waiting a couple extra minutes for the pages to load so
>> they can look this pretty!!"
>>
>> I think that Cambium should step up and get engineers from ALL aspects of
>> product development out into the field. 40 seconds waiting for the page to
>> load is fine when you're sitting in the office, but not when you have the
>> laptop balanced on a stack of firewood in the freezing rain trying to get
>> to the monitoring page to see why a radio isn't linking up. I think that
>> every WISP on this list would be more than happy to host an engineer for a
>> day. Heck, even if they go into the parking lot and assemble it on the
>> tailgate of someone's Pickup, they'll get some idea of what we experience.
>>
>> I have a feeling that if all steps of the Dev process took a week in the
>> field, We'd have a radio that had a GUI that responded instantly on any
>> device, and radios that assembled and mounted (and unmounted) with 1 gloved
>> hand.
>>
>> </rant>
>> Nate
>>
>
>

[Josh Reynolds]

This!!!!!!!!

Hey Ubiquiti, by the way, I don't mind "pretty" as long as it's fast and informative.

One thing I really really like about MikroTik is that the interface isn't pretty, but damn it's fast and informative. The ability to comment virtually everything is very nice as well.

On January 20, 2015 8:15:15 AM AKST, Vlad Sedov <***@atlasok.com> wrote:
>This has been one of our biggest complaints from day one.
>The interface, while it has gotten slightly more usable, is still
>complete garbage. It's unpredictable, slow, and inconsistent.. Let
>alone
>the features that just don't work.
>
>Why on earth did they not just stick with a field-tested, fast, usable
>interface from the Canopy line? Nobody buys a radio for it's slide-out
>menus and pretty HTML5 crap.
>We need, fast, intuitive, consistent.. Forget the shiny.
>
>grr
>
>Vlad
>
>
>On 1/20/2015 10:57 AM, Nate Burke wrote:
>> Ok, Cambium, this is a little sad. My Field Laptop, a Lenovo S10-3t,
>
>> Atom Processor with Windows 8.1 cannot load the EPMP WEB Pages in a
>> timely manner. We're talking 40-60 seconds for initial load, and
>> 20-30 seconds per screen refresh/menu change. Since I'm going to
>have
>> to go to the boss, and tell him that I need a new laptop to do any
>> field troubleshooting for these new radios, what are the minimum
>> system specs for a machine to view the EPMP Screens? Unless Cambium
>> is going to get their Web interface under control as of Yesterday.
>>
>> They still swear that the GUI was all developed in house and not
>> purchased (something I still can't believe). I'd like to know who
>the
>> engineers/managers are who signed off on that design. I can only
>> imaging that there was a group of guys sitting around the conference
>> table, watching the presentation on the GUI on the projector up
>front,
>> all nodding their heads in agreement, "I think this is a wonderful
>> layout, the field tech's won't mind waiting a couple extra minutes
>for
>> the pages to load so they can look this pretty!!"
>>
>> I think that Cambium should step up and get engineers from ALL
>aspects
>> of product development out into the field. 40 seconds waiting for
>the
>> page to load is fine when you're sitting in the office, but not when
>> you have the laptop balanced on a stack of firewood in the freezing
>> rain trying to get to the monitoring page to see why a radio isn't
>> linking up. I think that every WISP on this list would be more than
>> happy to host an engineer for a day. Heck, even if they go into the
>> parking lot and assemble it on the tailgate of someone's Pickup,
>> they'll get some idea of what we experience.
>>
>> I have a feeling that if all steps of the Dev process took a week in
>> the field, We'd have a radio that had a GUI that responded instantly
>> on any device, and radios that assembled and mounted (and unmounted)
>> with 1 gloved hand.
>>
>> </rant>
>> Nate

--
Sent from my Android device with K-9 Mail. Please excuse my brevity.

[Chuck McCown]

Perhaps Chuck Macenski could do a little moonlighting for Cambium...

-----Original Message-----
From: Nate Burke
Sent: Tuesday, January 20, 2015 9:57 AM
To: Animal Farm
Subject: [AFMUG] EPMP Minimum System Specs

Ok, Cambium, this is a little sad. My Field Laptop, a Lenovo S10-3t,
Atom Processor with Windows 8.1 cannot load the EPMP WEB Pages in a
timely manner. We're talking 40-60 seconds for initial load, and 20-30
seconds per screen refresh/menu change. Since I'm going to have to go
to the boss, and tell him that I need a new laptop to do any field
troubleshooting for these new radios, what are the minimum system specs
for a machine to view the EPMP Screens? Unless Cambium is going to get
their Web interface under control as of Yesterday.

They still swear that the GUI was all developed in house and not
purchased (something I still can't believe). I'd like to know who the
engineers/managers are who signed off on that design. I can only
imaging that there was a group of guys sitting around the conference
table, watching the presentation on the GUI on the projector up front,
all nodding their heads in agreement, "I think this is a wonderful
layout, the field tech's won't mind waiting a couple extra minutes for
the pages to load so they can look this pretty!!"

I think that Cambium should step up and get engineers from ALL aspects
of product development out into the field. 40 seconds waiting for the
page to load is fine when you're sitting in the office, but not when you
have the laptop balanced on a stack of firewood in the freezing rain
trying to get to the monitoring page to see why a radio isn't linking
up. I think that every WISP on this list would be more than happy to
host an engineer for a day. Heck, even if they go into the parking lot
and assemble it on the tailgate of someone's Pickup, they'll get some
idea of what we experience.

I have a feeling that if all steps of the Dev process took a week in the
field, We'd have a radio that had a GUI that responded instantly on any
device, and radios that assembled and mounted (and unmounted) with 1
gloved hand.

</rant>
Nate

[Josh Luthman]

Login takes forever. The first like 10-15 seconds just load and load and
load. Once you're in, it's acceptable in terms of page rendering.


Josh Luthman
Office: 937-552-2340
Direct: 937-552-2343
1100 Wayne St
Suite 1337
Troy, OH 45373

On Tue, Jan 20, 2015 at 1:22 PM, Sean Heskett <***@zirkel.us> wrote:

> we use macbook pro's and the ePMP GUI has never been slow for us. It was
> UGLY, but they fixed that with version 2.0 haha.
>
> not sure why everyone says it's slow tho because we've never seen it.
>
> 2 cents
>
> -sean
>
>
>
> On Tue, Jan 20, 2015 at 9:57 AM, Nate Burke <***@blastcomm.com> wrote:
>
>> Ok, Cambium, this is a little sad. My Field Laptop, a Lenovo S10-3t,
>> Atom Processor with Windows 8.1 cannot load the EPMP WEB Pages in a timely
>> manner. We're talking 40-60 seconds for initial load, and 20-30 seconds
>> per screen refresh/menu change. Since I'm going to have to go to the boss,
>> and tell him that I need a new laptop to do any field troubleshooting for
>> these new radios, what are the minimum system specs for a machine to view
>> the EPMP Screens? Unless Cambium is going to get their Web interface under
>> control as of Yesterday.
>>
>> They still swear that the GUI was all developed in house and not
>> purchased (something I still can't believe). I'd like to know who the
>> engineers/managers are who signed off on that design. I can only imaging
>> that there was a group of guys sitting around the conference table,
>> watching the presentation on the GUI on the projector up front, all nodding
>> their heads in agreement, "I think this is a wonderful layout, the field
>> tech's won't mind waiting a couple extra minutes for the pages to load so
>> they can look this pretty!!"
>>
>> I think that Cambium should step up and get engineers from ALL aspects of
>> product development out into the field. 40 seconds waiting for the page to
>> load is fine when you're sitting in the office, but not when you have the
>> laptop balanced on a stack of firewood in the freezing rain trying to get
>> to the monitoring page to see why a radio isn't linking up. I think that
>> every WISP on this list would be more than happy to host an engineer for a
>> day. Heck, even if they go into the parking lot and assemble it on the
>> tailgate of someone's Pickup, they'll get some idea of what we experience.
>>
>> I have a feeling that if all steps of the Dev process took a week in the
>> field, We'd have a radio that had a GUI that responded instantly on any
>> device, and radios that assembled and mounted (and unmounted) with 1 gloved
>> hand.
>>
>> </rant>
>> Nate
>>
>
>

[Josh Luthman]

Why are you/others arguing that the speed is just fine? This doesn't even
make sense. There are people with slower laptops that work with other
modern devices and epmp is the only interface that loads slow. There's no
point in arguing peoples valid complaints. Are you trying to direct the
engineers attention to something else?


Josh Luthman
Office: 937-552-2340
Direct: 937-552-2343
1100 Wayne St
Suite 1337
Troy, OH 45373

On Tue, Jan 20, 2015 at 1:30 PM, Mike Hammett <***@ics-il.net> wrote:

> Three, maybe four seconds to load the initial screen and then two maybe
> three seconds to login. As I doubt a screen capture will work when I'm
> RDPed in, I'll record the entire login process when I get home and post it
> up on YouTube.
>
>
>
> -----
> Mike Hammett
> Intelligent Computing Solutions
> http://www.ics-il.com
>
> ------------------------------
> *From: *"Josh Luthman" <***@imaginenetworksllc.com>
> *To: ****@afmug.com
> *Sent: *Tuesday, January 20, 2015 12:26:09 PM
> *Subject: *Re: [AFMUG] EPMP Minimum System Specs <rant>
>
> Login takes forever. The first like 10-15 seconds just load and load and
> load. Once you're in, it's acceptable in terms of page rendering.
>
>
> Josh Luthman
> Office: 937-552-2340
> Direct: 937-552-2343
> 1100 Wayne St
> Suite 1337
> Troy, OH 45373
>
> On Tue, Jan 20, 2015 at 1:22 PM, Sean Heskett <***@zirkel.us> wrote:
>
>> we use macbook pro's and the ePMP GUI has never been slow for us. It was
>> UGLY, but they fixed that with version 2.0 haha.
>>
>> not sure why everyone says it's slow tho because we've never seen it.
>>
>> 2 cents
>>
>> -sean
>>
>>
>>
>> On Tue, Jan 20, 2015 at 9:57 AM, Nate Burke <***@blastcomm.com> wrote:
>>
>>> Ok, Cambium, this is a little sad. My Field Laptop, a Lenovo S10-3t,
>>> Atom Processor with Windows 8.1 cannot load the EPMP WEB Pages in a timely
>>> manner. We're talking 40-60 seconds for initial load, and 20-30 seconds
>>> per screen refresh/menu change. Since I'm going to have to go to the boss,
>>> and tell him that I need a new laptop to do any field troubleshooting for
>>> these new radios, what are the minimum system specs for a machine to view
>>> the EPMP Screens? Unless Cambium is going to get their Web interface under
>>> control as of Yesterday.
>>>
>>> They still swear that the GUI was all developed in house and not
>>> purchased (something I still can't believe). I'd like to know who the
>>> engineers/managers are who signed off on that design. I can only imaging
>>> that there was a group of guys sitting around the conference table,
>>> watching the presentation on the GUI on the projector up front, all nodding
>>> their heads in agreement, "I think this is a wonderful layout, the field
>>> tech's won't mind waiting a couple extra minutes for the pages to load so
>>> they can look this pretty!!"
>>>
>>> I think that Cambium should step up and get engineers from ALL aspects
>>> of product development out into the field. 40 seconds waiting for the page
>>> to load is fine when you're sitting in the office, but not when you have
>>> the laptop balanced on a stack of firewood in the freezing rain trying to
>>> get to the monitoring page to see why a radio isn't linking up. I think
>>> that every WISP on this list would be more than happy to host an engineer
>>> for a day. Heck, even if they go into the parking lot and assemble it on
>>> the tailgate of someone's Pickup, they'll get some idea of what we
>>> experience.
>>>
>>> I have a feeling that if all steps of the Dev process took a week in the
>>> field, We'd have a radio that had a GUI that responded instantly on any
>>> device, and radios that assembled and mounted (and unmounted) with 1 gloved
>>> hand.
>>>
>>> </rant>
>>> Nate
>>>
>>
>>
>
>

[Josh Luthman]

I doubt that 4 of my high end machines all have the same problem. The
interface takes too long when it first shows up. Maybe it's because it
gets all the information at once, maybe not. Don't care. I want it to be
more smooth and faster.

My phone (Droid Maxx) is one of the most recent models for Android. The
interface is terribly slow and clumsy on that.

Well if you feel a poor technology choice was the cause, that's fine, but
it's just flat out wrong. I don't want to carry a big fat i7 laptop up the
tower when I could just simply use my phone. It works with Ubiquiti, FSK
Cambium, Tranzeo, Trango, Mikrotik, etc it should only make sense the one
product with a clumsy interface needs fixed instead of changing my devices
that work with the competitors products (as well as different products
under their portfolio).


Josh Luthman
Office: 937-552-2340
Direct: 937-552-2343
1100 Wayne St
Suite 1337
Troy, OH 45373

On Tue, Jan 20, 2015 at 1:36 PM, Sean Heskett <***@zirkel.us> wrote:

> i'm just stating that on all of our computers i've never seen the ePMP
> page load slowly.
>
> maybe it's a computer problem and not a device problem, just trying to
> bring valid input to the discussion.
>
> On Tue, Jan 20, 2015 at 11:34 AM, Josh Luthman <
> ***@imaginenetworksllc.com> wrote:
>
>> Why are you/others arguing that the speed is just fine? This doesn't
>> even make sense. There are people with slower laptops that work with other
>> modern devices and epmp is the only interface that loads slow. There's no
>> point in arguing peoples valid complaints. Are you trying to direct the
>> engineers attention to something else?
>>
>>
>> Josh Luthman
>> Office: 937-552-2340
>> Direct: 937-552-2343
>> 1100 Wayne St
>> Suite 1337
>> Troy, OH 45373
>>
>> On Tue, Jan 20, 2015 at 1:30 PM, Mike Hammett <***@ics-il.net> wrote:
>>
>>> Three, maybe four seconds to load the initial screen and then two maybe
>>> three seconds to login. As I doubt a screen capture will work when I'm
>>> RDPed in, I'll record the entire login process when I get home and post it
>>> up on YouTube.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> -----
>>> Mike Hammett
>>> Intelligent Computing Solutions
>>> http://www.ics-il.com
>>>
>>> ------------------------------
>>> *From: *"Josh Luthman" <***@imaginenetworksllc.com>
>>> *To: ****@afmug.com
>>> *Sent: *Tuesday, January 20, 2015 12:26:09 PM
>>> *Subject: *Re: [AFMUG] EPMP Minimum System Specs <rant>
>>>
>>> Login takes forever. The first like 10-15 seconds just load and load
>>> and load. Once you're in, it's acceptable in terms of page rendering.
>>>
>>>
>>> Josh Luthman
>>> Office: 937-552-2340
>>> Direct: 937-552-2343
>>> 1100 Wayne St
>>> Suite 1337
>>> Troy, OH 45373
>>>
>>> On Tue, Jan 20, 2015 at 1:22 PM, Sean Heskett <***@zirkel.us> wrote:
>>>
>>>> we use macbook pro's and the ePMP GUI has never been slow for us. It
>>>> was UGLY, but they fixed that with version 2.0 haha.
>>>>
>>>> not sure why everyone says it's slow tho because we've never seen it.
>>>>
>>>> 2 cents
>>>>
>>>> -sean
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> On Tue, Jan 20, 2015 at 9:57 AM, Nate Burke <***@blastcomm.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> Ok, Cambium, this is a little sad. My Field Laptop, a Lenovo S10-3t,
>>>>> Atom Processor with Windows 8.1 cannot load the EPMP WEB Pages in a timely
>>>>> manner. We're talking 40-60 seconds for initial load, and 20-30 seconds
>>>>> per screen refresh/menu change. Since I'm going to have to go to the boss,
>>>>> and tell him that I need a new laptop to do any field troubleshooting for
>>>>> these new radios, what are the minimum system specs for a machine to view
>>>>> the EPMP Screens? Unless Cambium is going to get their Web interface under
>>>>> control as of Yesterday.
>>>>>
>>>>> They still swear that the GUI was all developed in house and not
>>>>> purchased (something I still can't believe). I'd like to know who the
>>>>> engineers/managers are who signed off on that design. I can only imaging
>>>>> that there was a group of guys sitting around the conference table,
>>>>> watching the presentation on the GUI on the projector up front, all nodding
>>>>> their heads in agreement, "I think this is a wonderful layout, the field
>>>>> tech's won't mind waiting a couple extra minutes for the pages to load so
>>>>> they can look this pretty!!"
>>>>>
>>>>> I think that Cambium should step up and get engineers from ALL aspects
>>>>> of product development out into the field. 40 seconds waiting for the page
>>>>> to load is fine when you're sitting in the office, but not when you have
>>>>> the laptop balanced on a stack of firewood in the freezing rain trying to
>>>>> get to the monitoring page to see why a radio isn't linking up. I think
>>>>> that every WISP on this list would be more than happy to host an engineer
>>>>> for a day. Heck, even if they go into the parking lot and assemble it on
>>>>> the tailgate of someone's Pickup, they'll get some idea of what we
>>>>> experience.
>>>>>
>>>>> I have a feeling that if all steps of the Dev process took a week in
>>>>> the field, We'd have a radio that had a GUI that responded instantly on any
>>>>> device, and radios that assembled and mounted (and unmounted) with 1 gloved
>>>>> hand.
>>>>>
>>>>> </rant>
>>>>> Nate
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
>

[James Howard]

It seems the point that's trying to be made is that your poor technology choices are that you don't have only Apple devices.....

From: Af [mailto:af-***@afmug.com] On Behalf Of Josh Luthman
Sent: Tuesday, January 20, 2015 12:44 PM
To: ***@afmug.com
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] EPMP Minimum System Specs <rant>

I doubt that 4 of my high end machines all have the same problem. The interface takes too long when it first shows up. Maybe it's because it gets all the information at once, maybe not. Don't care. I want it to be more smooth and faster.

My phone (Droid Maxx) is one of the most recent models for Android. The interface is terribly slow and clumsy on that.

Well if you feel a poor technology choice was the cause, that's fine, but it's just flat out wrong. I don't want to carry a big fat i7 laptop up the tower when I could just simply use my phone. It works with Ubiquiti, FSK Cambium, Tranzeo, Trango, Mikrotik, etc it should only make sense the one product with a clumsy interface needs fixed instead of changing my devices that work with the competitors products (as well as different products under their portfolio).


Josh Luthman
Office: 937-552-2340
Direct: 937-552-2343
1100 Wayne St
Suite 1337
Troy, OH 45373

On Tue, Jan 20, 2015 at 1:36 PM, Sean Heskett <***@zirkel.us<mailto:***@zirkel.us>> wrote:
i'm just stating that on all of our computers i've never seen the ePMP page load slowly.

maybe it's a computer problem and not a device problem, just trying to bring valid input to the discussion.

On Tue, Jan 20, 2015 at 11:34 AM, Josh Luthman <***@imaginenetworksllc.com<mailto:***@imaginenetworksllc.com>> wrote:
Why are you/others arguing that the speed is just fine? This doesn't even make sense. There are people with slower laptops that work with other modern devices and epmp is the only interface that loads slow. There's no point in arguing peoples valid complaints. Are you trying to direct the engineers attention to something else?


Josh Luthman
Office: 937-552-2340<tel:[phone]>
Direct: 937-552-2343<tel:[phone]>
1100 Wayne St
Suite 1337
Troy, OH 45373

On Tue, Jan 20, 2015 at 1:30 PM, Mike Hammett <***@ics-il.net<mailto:***@ics-il.net>> wrote:
Three, maybe four seconds to load the initial screen and then two maybe three seconds to login. As I doubt a screen capture will work when I'm RDPed in, I'll record the entire login process when I get home and post it up on YouTube.


-----
Mike Hammett
Intelligent Computing Solutions
http://www.ics-il.com

________________________________
From: "Josh Luthman" <***@imaginenetworksllc.com<mailto:***@imaginenetworksllc.com>>
To: ***@afmug.com<mailto:***@afmug.com>
Sent: Tuesday, January 20, 2015 12:26:09 PM
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] EPMP Minimum System Specs <rant>
Login takes forever. The first like 10-15 seconds just load and load and load. Once you're in, it's acceptable in terms of page rendering.


Josh Luthman
Office: 937-552-2340<tel:[phone]>
Direct: 937-552-2343<tel:[phone]>
1100 Wayne St
Suite 1337
Troy, OH 45373

On Tue, Jan 20, 2015 at 1:22 PM, Sean Heskett <***@zirkel.us<mailto:***@zirkel.us>> wrote:
we use macbook pro's and the ePMP GUI has never been slow for us. It was UGLY, but they fixed that with version 2.0 haha.

not sure why everyone says it's slow tho because we've never seen it.

2 cents

-sean



On Tue, Jan 20, 2015 at 9:57 AM, Nate Burke <***@blastcomm.com<mailto:***@blastcomm.com>> wrote:
Ok, Cambium, this is a little sad. My Field Laptop, a Lenovo S10-3t, Atom Processor with Windows 8.1 cannot load the EPMP WEB Pages in a timely manner. We're talking 40-60 seconds for initial load, and 20-30 seconds per screen refresh/menu change. Since I'm going to have to go to the boss, and tell him that I need a new laptop to do any field troubleshooting for these new radios, what are the minimum system specs for a machine to view the EPMP Screens? Unless Cambium is going to get their Web interface under control as of Yesterday.

They still swear that the GUI was all developed in house and not purchased (something I still can't believe). I'd like to know who the engineers/managers are who signed off on that design. I can only imaging that there was a group of guys sitting around the conference table, watching the presentation on the GUI on the projector up front, all nodding their heads in agreement, "I think this is a wonderful layout, the field tech's won't mind waiting a couple extra minutes for the pages to load so they can look this pretty!!"

I think that Cambium should step up and get engineers from ALL aspects of product development out into the field. 40 seconds waiting for the page to load is fine when you're sitting in the office, but not when you have the laptop balanced on a stack of firewood in the freezing rain trying to get to the monitoring page to see why a radio isn't linking up. I think that every WISP on this list would be more than happy to host an engineer for a day. Heck, even if they go into the parking lot and assemble it on the tailgate of someone's Pickup, they'll get some idea of what we experience.

I have a feeling that if all steps of the Dev process took a week in the field, We'd have a radio that had a GUI that responded instantly on any device, and radios that assembled and mounted (and unmounted) with 1 gloved hand.

</rant>
Nate






________________________________
Total Control Panel

Login<https://asp.reflexion.net/login?domain=litewire.net>


To: ***@litewire.net<https://asp.reflexion.net/address-properties?aID=242260993&domain=litewire.net>

From: 0000014b08a883e2-7aabbe58-dc97-47e2-b8ae-71c6340abd63-***@amazonses.com<https://asp.reflexion.net/address-properties?aID=2994751605&domain=litewire.net>


Remove<https://asp.reflexion.net/FooterAction?ver=2&un-wl-sender-domain=1&rID=242260993&aID=2994751605&domain=litewire.net> amazonses.com from my allow list



You received this message because the domain amazonses.com is on your allow list.

[Josh Luthman]

Mike doesn't have Apple stuff primarily/at all.


Josh Luthman
Office: 937-552-2340
Direct: 937-552-2343
1100 Wayne St
Suite 1337
Troy, OH 45373

On Tue, Jan 20, 2015 at 1:54 PM, James Howard <***@litewire.net> wrote:

> It seems the point that’s trying to be made is that your poor technology
> choices are that you don’t have only Apple devices
..
>
>
>
> *From:* Af [mailto:af-***@afmug.com] *On Behalf Of *Josh Luthman
> *Sent:* Tuesday, January 20, 2015 12:44 PM
> *To:* ***@afmug.com
> *Subject:* Re: [AFMUG] EPMP Minimum System Specs <rant>
>
>
>
> I doubt that 4 of my high end machines all have the same problem. The
> interface takes too long when it first shows up. Maybe it's because it
> gets all the information at once, maybe not. Don't care. I want it to be
> more smooth and faster.
>
>
>
> My phone (Droid Maxx) is one of the most recent models for Android. The
> interface is terribly slow and clumsy on that.
>
>
>
> Well if you feel a poor technology choice was the cause, that's fine, but
> it's just flat out wrong. I don't want to carry a big fat i7 laptop up the
> tower when I could just simply use my phone. It works with Ubiquiti, FSK
> Cambium, Tranzeo, Trango, Mikrotik, etc it should only make sense the one
> product with a clumsy interface needs fixed instead of changing my devices
> that work with the competitors products (as well as different products
> under their portfolio).
>
>
>
>
> Josh Luthman
> Office: 937-552-2340
> Direct: 937-552-2343
> 1100 Wayne St
> Suite 1337
> Troy, OH 45373
>
>
>
> On Tue, Jan 20, 2015 at 1:36 PM, Sean Heskett <***@zirkel.us> wrote:
>
> i'm just stating that on all of our computers i've never seen the ePMP
> page load slowly.
>
>
>
> maybe it's a computer problem and not a device problem, just trying to
> bring valid input to the discussion.
>
>
>
> On Tue, Jan 20, 2015 at 11:34 AM, Josh Luthman <
> ***@imaginenetworksllc.com> wrote:
>
> Why are you/others arguing that the speed is just fine? This doesn't even
> make sense. There are people with slower laptops that work with other
> modern devices and epmp is the only interface that loads slow. There's no
> point in arguing peoples valid complaints. Are you trying to direct the
> engineers attention to something else?
>
>
>
>
> Josh Luthman
> Office: 937-552-2340
> Direct: 937-552-2343
> 1100 Wayne St
> Suite 1337
> Troy, OH 45373
>
>
>
> On Tue, Jan 20, 2015 at 1:30 PM, Mike Hammett <***@ics-il.net> wrote:
>
> Three, maybe four seconds to load the initial screen and then two maybe
> three seconds to login. As I doubt a screen capture will work when I'm
> RDPed in, I'll record the entire login process when I get home and post it
> up on YouTube.
>
>
>
> -----
> Mike Hammett
> Intelligent Computing Solutions
> http://www.ics-il.com
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> *From: *"Josh Luthman" <***@imaginenetworksllc.com>
> *To: ****@afmug.com
> *Sent: *Tuesday, January 20, 2015 12:26:09 PM
> *Subject: *Re: [AFMUG] EPMP Minimum System Specs <rant>
>
> Login takes forever. The first like 10-15 seconds just load and load and
> load. Once you're in, it's acceptable in terms of page rendering.
>
>
>
>
> Josh Luthman
> Office: 937-552-2340
> Direct: 937-552-2343
> 1100 Wayne St
> Suite 1337
> Troy, OH 45373
>
>
>
> On Tue, Jan 20, 2015 at 1:22 PM, Sean Heskett <***@zirkel.us> wrote:
>
> we use macbook pro's and the ePMP GUI has never been slow for us. It was
> UGLY, but they fixed that with version 2.0 haha.
>
>
>
> not sure why everyone says it's slow tho because we've never seen it.
>
>
>
> 2 cents
>
>
>
> -sean
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> On Tue, Jan 20, 2015 at 9:57 AM, Nate Burke <***@blastcomm.com> wrote:
>
> Ok, Cambium, this is a little sad. My Field Laptop, a Lenovo S10-3t, Atom
> Processor with Windows 8.1 cannot load the EPMP WEB Pages in a timely
> manner. We're talking 40-60 seconds for initial load, and 20-30 seconds
> per screen refresh/menu change. Since I'm going to have to go to the boss,
> and tell him that I need a new laptop to do any field troubleshooting for
> these new radios, what are the minimum system specs for a machine to view
> the EPMP Screens? Unless Cambium is going to get their Web interface under
> control as of Yesterday.
>
> They still swear that the GUI was all developed in house and not purchased
> (something I still can't believe). I'd like to know who the
> engineers/managers are who signed off on that design. I can only imaging
> that there was a group of guys sitting around the conference table,
> watching the presentation on the GUI on the projector up front, all nodding
> their heads in agreement, "I think this is a wonderful layout, the field
> tech's won't mind waiting a couple extra minutes for the pages to load so
> they can look this pretty!!"
>
> I think that Cambium should step up and get engineers from ALL aspects of
> product development out into the field. 40 seconds waiting for the page to
> load is fine when you're sitting in the office, but not when you have the
> laptop balanced on a stack of firewood in the freezing rain trying to get
> to the monitoring page to see why a radio isn't linking up. I think that
> every WISP on this list would be more than happy to host an engineer for a
> day. Heck, even if they go into the parking lot and assemble it on the
> tailgate of someone's Pickup, they'll get some idea of what we experience.
>
> I have a feeling that if all steps of the Dev process took a week in the
> field, We'd have a radio that had a GUI that responded instantly on any
> device, and radios that assembled and mounted (and unmounted) with 1 gloved
> hand.
>
> </rant>
> Nate
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> *Total Control Panel*
>
> Login <https://asp.reflexion.net/login?domain=litewire.net>
>
> To: ***@litewire.net
> <https://asp.reflexion.net/address-properties?aID=242260993&domain=litewire.net>
>
> From:
> 0000014b08a883e2-7aabbe58-dc97-47e2-b8ae-71c6340abd63-***@amazonses.com
> <https://asp.reflexion.net/address-properties?aID=2994751605&domain=litewire.net>
>
> Remove
> <https://asp.reflexion.net/FooterAction?ver=2&un-wl-sender-domain=1&rID=242260993&aID=2994751605&domain=litewire.net>
> amazonses.com from my allow list
>
> *You received this message because the domain amazonses.com
> <http://amazonses.com> is on your allow list.*
>
>
>

[Chuck McCown]

Yeah but you bought the advantage GUI license, right?

From: Sean Heskett
Sent: Tuesday, January 20, 2015 11:45 AM
To: ***@afmug.com
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] EPMP Minimum System Specs <rant>

less than 5 seconds on my iPhone as well.



On Tue, Jan 20, 2015 at 11:43 AM, Josh Luthman <***@imaginenetworksllc.com> wrote:

I doubt that 4 of my high end machines all have the same problem. The interface takes too long when it first shows up. Maybe it's because it gets all the information at once, maybe not. Don't care. I want it to be more smooth and faster.

My phone (Droid Maxx) is one of the most recent models for Android. The interface is terribly slow and clumsy on that.

Well if you feel a poor technology choice was the cause, that's fine, but it's just flat out wrong. I don't want to carry a big fat i7 laptop up the tower when I could just simply use my phone. It works with Ubiquiti, FSK Cambium, Tranzeo, Trango, Mikrotik, etc it should only make sense the one product with a clumsy interface needs fixed instead of changing my devices that work with the competitors products (as well as different products under their portfolio).



Josh Luthman
Office: 937-552-2340
Direct: 937-552-2343
1100 Wayne St
Suite 1337
Troy, OH 45373


On Tue, Jan 20, 2015 at 1:36 PM, Sean Heskett <***@zirkel.us> wrote:

i'm just stating that on all of our computers i've never seen the ePMP page load slowly.

maybe it's a computer problem and not a device problem, just trying to bring valid input to the discussion.

On Tue, Jan 20, 2015 at 11:34 AM, Josh Luthman <***@imaginenetworksllc.com> wrote:

Why are you/others arguing that the speed is just fine? This doesn't even make sense. There are people with slower laptops that work with other modern devices and epmp is the only interface that loads slow. There's no point in arguing peoples valid complaints. Are you trying to direct the engineers attention to something else?



Josh Luthman
Office: 937-552-2340
Direct: 937-552-2343
1100 Wayne St
Suite 1337
Troy, OH 45373


On Tue, Jan 20, 2015 at 1:30 PM, Mike Hammett <***@ics-il.net> wrote:

Three, maybe four seconds to load the initial screen and then two maybe three seconds to login. As I doubt a screen capture will work when I'm RDPed in, I'll record the entire login process when I get home and post it up on YouTube.




-----
Mike Hammett
Intelligent Computing Solutions
http://www.ics-il.com



------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: "Josh Luthman" <***@imaginenetworksllc.com>
To: ***@afmug.com
Sent: Tuesday, January 20, 2015 12:26:09 PM
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] EPMP Minimum System Specs <rant>


Login takes forever. The first like 10-15 seconds just load and load and load. Once you're in, it's acceptable in terms of page rendering.


Josh Luthman
Office: 937-552-2340
Direct: 937-552-2343
1100 Wayne St
Suite 1337
Troy, OH 45373

On Tue, Jan 20, 2015 at 1:22 PM, Sean Heskett <***@zirkel.us> wrote:

we use macbook pro's and the ePMP GUI has never been slow for us. It was UGLY, but they fixed that with version 2.0 haha.

not sure why everyone says it's slow tho because we've never seen it.

2 cents

-sean



On Tue, Jan 20, 2015 at 9:57 AM, Nate Burke <***@blastcomm.com> wrote:

Ok, Cambium, this is a little sad. My Field Laptop, a Lenovo S10-3t, Atom Processor with Windows 8.1 cannot load the EPMP WEB Pages in a timely manner. We're talking 40-60 seconds for initial load, and 20-30 seconds per screen refresh/menu change. Since I'm going to have to go to the boss, and tell him that I need a new laptop to do any field troubleshooting for these new radios, what are the minimum system specs for a machine to view the EPMP Screens? Unless Cambium is going to get their Web interface under control as of Yesterday.

They still swear that the GUI was all developed in house and not purchased (something I still can't believe). I'd like to know who the engineers/managers are who signed off on that design. I can only imaging that there was a group of guys sitting around the conference table, watching the presentation on the GUI on the projector up front, all nodding their heads in agreement, "I think this is a wonderful layout, the field tech's won't mind waiting a couple extra minutes for the pages to load so they can look this pretty!!"

I think that Cambium should step up and get engineers from ALL aspects of product development out into the field. 40 seconds waiting for the page to load is fine when you're sitting in the office, but not when you have the laptop balanced on a stack of firewood in the freezing rain trying to get to the monitoring page to see why a radio isn't linking up. I think that every WISP on this list would be more than happy to host an engineer for a day. Heck, even if they go into the parking lot and assemble it on the tailgate of someone's Pickup, they'll get some idea of what we experience.

I have a feeling that if all steps of the Dev process took a week in the field, We'd have a radio that had a GUI that responded instantly on any device, and radios that assembled and mounted (and unmounted) with 1 gloved hand.

</rant>
Nate

[Adam Moffett]

I don't know what makes the GUI slow for you or anybody else....I have
literally never seen it load slowly. Even on a crummy old Atom. Even
on a cell phone.

I don't know what to say.

> I doubt that 4 of my high end machines all have the same problem. The
> interface takes too long when it first shows up. Maybe it's because
> it gets all the information at once, maybe not. Don't care. I want
> it to be more smooth and faster.
>
> My phone (Droid Maxx) is one of the most recent models for Android.
> The interface is terribly slow and clumsy on that.
>
> Well if you feel a poor technology choice was the cause, that's fine,
> but it's just flat out wrong. I don't want to carry a big fat i7
> laptop up the tower when I could just simply use my phone. It works
> with Ubiquiti, FSK Cambium, Tranzeo, Trango, Mikrotik, etc it should
> only make sense the one product with a clumsy interface needs fixed
> instead of changing my devices that work with the competitors products
> (as well as different products under their portfolio).
>
>
> Josh Luthman
> Office: 937-552-2340
> Direct: 937-552-2343
> 1100 Wayne St
> Suite 1337
> Troy, OH 45373
>
> On Tue, Jan 20, 2015 at 1:36 PM, Sean Heskett <***@zirkel.us
> <mailto:***@zirkel.us>> wrote:
>
> i'm just stating that on all of our computers i've never seen the
> ePMP page load slowly.
>
> maybe it's a computer problem and not a device problem, just
> trying to bring valid input to the discussion.
>
> On Tue, Jan 20, 2015 at 11:34 AM, Josh Luthman
> <***@imaginenetworksllc.com <mailto:***@imaginenetworksllc.com>>
> wrote:
>
> Why are you/others arguing that the speed is just fine? This
> doesn't even make sense. There are people with slower laptops
> that work with other modern devices and epmp is the only
> interface that loads slow. There's no point in arguing
> peoples valid complaints. Are you trying to direct the
> engineers attention to something else?
>
>
> Josh Luthman
> Office: 937-552-2340 <tel:[phone]>
> Direct: 937-552-2343 <tel:[phone]>
> 1100 Wayne St
> Suite 1337
> Troy, OH 45373
>
> On Tue, Jan 20, 2015 at 1:30 PM, Mike Hammett
> <***@ics-il.net <mailto:***@ics-il.net>> wrote:
>
> Three, maybe four seconds to load the initial screen and
> then two maybe three seconds to login. As I doubt a screen
> capture will work when I'm RDPed in, I'll record the
> entire login process when I get home and post it up on
> YouTube.
>
>
>
> -----
> Mike Hammett
> Intelligent Computing Solutions
> http://www.ics-il.com
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
> *From: *"Josh Luthman" <***@imaginenetworksllc.com
> <mailto:***@imaginenetworksllc.com>>
> *To: ****@afmug.com <mailto:***@afmug.com>
> *Sent: *Tuesday, January 20, 2015 12:26:09 PM
> *Subject: *Re: [AFMUG] EPMP Minimum System Specs <rant>
>
> Login takes forever. The first like 10-15 seconds just
> load and load and load. Once you're in, it's acceptable
> in terms of page rendering.
>
>
> Josh Luthman
> Office: 937-552-2340 <tel:[phone]>
> Direct: 937-552-2343 <tel:[phone]>
> 1100 Wayne St
> Suite 1337
> Troy, OH 45373
>
> On Tue, Jan 20, 2015 at 1:22 PM, Sean Heskett
> <***@zirkel.us <mailto:***@zirkel.us>> wrote:
>
> we use macbook pro's and the ePMP GUI has never been
> slow for us. It was UGLY, but they fixed that with
> version 2.0 haha.
>
> not sure why everyone says it's slow tho because we've
> never seen it.
>
> 2 cents
>
> -sean
>
>
>
> On Tue, Jan 20, 2015 at 9:57 AM, Nate Burke
> <***@blastcomm.com <mailto:***@blastcomm.com>> wrote:
>
> Ok, Cambium, this is a little sad. My Field
> Laptop, a Lenovo S10-3t, Atom Processor with
> Windows 8.1 cannot load the EPMP WEB Pages in a
> timely manner. We're talking 40-60 seconds for
> initial load, and 20-30 seconds per screen
> refresh/menu change. Since I'm going to have to
> go to the boss, and tell him that I need a new
> laptop to do any field troubleshooting for these
> new radios, what are the minimum system specs for
> a machine to view the EPMP Screens? Unless Cambium
> is going to get their Web interface under control
> as of Yesterday.
>
> They still swear that the GUI was all developed in
> house and not purchased (something I still can't
> believe). I'd like to know who the
> engineers/managers are who signed off on that
> design. I can only imaging that there was a group
> of guys sitting around the conference table,
> watching the presentation on the GUI on the
> projector up front, all nodding their heads in
> agreement, "I think this is a wonderful layout,
> the field tech's won't mind waiting a couple extra
> minutes for the pages to load so they can look
> this pretty!!"
>
> I think that Cambium should step up and get
> engineers from ALL aspects of product development
> out into the field. 40 seconds waiting for the
> page to load is fine when you're sitting in the
> office, but not when you have the laptop balanced
> on a stack of firewood in the freezing rain trying
> to get to the monitoring page to see why a radio
> isn't linking up. I think that every WISP on this
> list would be more than happy to host an engineer
> for a day. Heck, even if they go into the parking
> lot and assemble it on the tailgate of someone's
> Pickup, they'll get some idea of what we experience.
>
> I have a feeling that if all steps of the Dev
> process took a week in the field, We'd have a
> radio that had a GUI that responded instantly on
> any device, and radios that assembled and mounted
> (and unmounted) with 1 gloved hand.
>
> </rant>
> Nate
>
>
>
>
>
>
>

[Jeremy]

I've never used EPMP but I have noticed some interfaces lag on one browser
and not on another. What browser is everyone using when they see lag?
What browser are those of you who aren't seeing lag using?

On Tue, Jan 20, 2015 at 11:59 AM, Ken Hohhof <***@kwisp.com> wrote:

> Good job of merging 2 threads! You win one free Internet!
>
> *From:* Chuck McCown <***@wbmfg.com>
> *Sent:* Tuesday, January 20, 2015 12:48 PM
> *To:* ***@afmug.com
> *Subject:* Re: [AFMUG] EPMP Minimum System Specs <rant>
>
> Yeah but you bought the advantage GUI license, right?
>
> *From:* Sean Heskett <***@zirkel.us>
> *Sent:* Tuesday, January 20, 2015 11:45 AM
> *To:* ***@afmug.com
> *Subject:* Re: [AFMUG] EPMP Minimum System Specs <rant>
>
> less than 5 seconds on my iPhone as well.
>
>
>
> On Tue, Jan 20, 2015 at 11:43 AM, Josh Luthman <
> ***@imaginenetworksllc.com> wrote:
>
>> I doubt that 4 of my high end machines all have the same problem. The
>> interface takes too long when it first shows up. Maybe it's because it
>> gets all the information at once, maybe not. Don't care. I want it to be
>> more smooth and faster.
>>
>> My phone (Droid Maxx) is one of the most recent models for Android. The
>> interface is terribly slow and clumsy on that.
>>
>> Well if you feel a poor technology choice was the cause, that's fine, but
>> it's just flat out wrong. I don't want to carry a big fat i7 laptop up the
>> tower when I could just simply use my phone. It works with Ubiquiti, FSK
>> Cambium, Tranzeo, Trango, Mikrotik, etc it should only make sense the one
>> product with a clumsy interface needs fixed instead of changing my devices
>> that work with the competitors products (as well as different products
>> under their portfolio).
>>
>>
>> Josh Luthman
>> Office: 937-552-2340
>> Direct: 937-552-2343
>> 1100 Wayne St
>> Suite 1337
>> Troy, OH 45373
>>
>> On Tue, Jan 20, 2015 at 1:36 PM, Sean Heskett <***@zirkel.us> wrote:
>>
>>> i'm just stating that on all of our computers i've never seen the ePMP
>>> page load slowly.
>>>
>>> maybe it's a computer problem and not a device problem, just trying to
>>> bring valid input to the discussion.
>>>
>>> On Tue, Jan 20, 2015 at 11:34 AM, Josh Luthman <
>>> ***@imaginenetworksllc.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>> Why are you/others arguing that the speed is just fine? This doesn't
>>>> even make sense. There are people with slower laptops that work with other
>>>> modern devices and epmp is the only interface that loads slow. There's no
>>>> point in arguing peoples valid complaints. Are you trying to direct the
>>>> engineers attention to something else?
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Josh Luthman
>>>> Office: 937-552-2340
>>>> Direct: 937-552-2343
>>>> 1100 Wayne St
>>>> Suite 1337
>>>> Troy, OH 45373
>>>>
>>>> On Tue, Jan 20, 2015 at 1:30 PM, Mike Hammett <***@ics-il.net> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> Three, maybe four seconds to load the initial screen and then two
>>>>> maybe three seconds to login. As I doubt a screen capture will work when
>>>>> I'm RDPed in, I'll record the entire login process when I get home and post
>>>>> it up on YouTube.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> -----
>>>>> Mike Hammett
>>>>> Intelligent Computing Solutions
>>>>> http://www.ics-il.com
>>>>>
>>>>> ------------------------------
>>>>> *From: *"Josh Luthman" <***@imaginenetworksllc.com>
>>>>> *To: ****@afmug.com
>>>>> *Sent: *Tuesday, January 20, 2015 12:26:09 PM
>>>>> *Subject: *Re: [AFMUG] EPMP Minimum System Specs <rant>
>>>>>
>>>>> Login takes forever. The first like 10-15 seconds just load and
>>>>> load and load. Once you're in, it's acceptable in terms of page rendering.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Josh Luthman
>>>>> Office: 937-552-2340
>>>>> Direct: 937-552-2343
>>>>> 1100 Wayne St
>>>>> Suite 1337
>>>>> Troy, OH 45373
>>>>>
>>>>> On Tue, Jan 20, 2015 at 1:22 PM, Sean Heskett <***@zirkel.us> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> we use macbook pro's and the ePMP GUI has never been slow for us. It
>>>>>> was UGLY, but they fixed that with version 2.0 haha.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> not sure why everyone says it's slow tho because we've never seen it.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> 2 cents
>>>>>>
>>>>>> -sean
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> On Tue, Jan 20, 2015 at 9:57 AM, Nate Burke <***@blastcomm.com>
>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Ok, Cambium, this is a little sad. My Field Laptop, a Lenovo
>>>>>>> S10-3t, Atom Processor with Windows 8.1 cannot load the EPMP WEB Pages in a
>>>>>>> timely manner. We're talking 40-60 seconds for initial load, and 20-30
>>>>>>> seconds per screen refresh/menu change. Since I'm going to have to go to
>>>>>>> the boss, and tell him that I need a new laptop to do any field
>>>>>>> troubleshooting for these new radios, what are the minimum system specs for
>>>>>>> a machine to view the EPMP Screens? Unless Cambium is going to get their
>>>>>>> Web interface under control as of Yesterday.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> They still swear that the GUI was all developed in house and not
>>>>>>> purchased (something I still can't believe). I'd like to know who the
>>>>>>> engineers/managers are who signed off on that design. I can only imaging
>>>>>>> that there was a group of guys sitting around the conference table,
>>>>>>> watching the presentation on the GUI on the projector up front, all nodding
>>>>>>> their heads in agreement, "I think this is a wonderful layout, the field
>>>>>>> tech's won't mind waiting a couple extra minutes for the pages to load so
>>>>>>> they can look this pretty!!"
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> I think that Cambium should step up and get engineers from ALL
>>>>>>> aspects of product development out into the field. 40 seconds waiting for
>>>>>>> the page to load is fine when you're sitting in the office, but not when
>>>>>>> you have the laptop balanced on a stack of firewood in the freezing rain
>>>>>>> trying to get to the monitoring page to see why a radio isn't linking up.
>>>>>>> I think that every WISP on this list would be more than happy to host an
>>>>>>> engineer for a day. Heck, even if they go into the parking lot and assemble
>>>>>>> it on the tailgate of someone's Pickup, they'll get some idea of what we
>>>>>>> experience.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> I have a feeling that if all steps of the Dev process took a week in
>>>>>>> the field, We'd have a radio that had a GUI that responded instantly on any
>>>>>>> device, and radios that assembled and mounted (and unmounted) with 1 gloved
>>>>>>> hand.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> </rant>
>>>>>>> Nate
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>
>

[Jeremy]

Example: Powercode mostly loads and then seems to hang for quite awhile on
Firefox, but loads fast on Chrome.

On Tue, Jan 20, 2015 at 12:04 PM, Jeremy <***@gmail.com> wrote:

> I've never used EPMP but I have noticed some interfaces lag on one browser
> and not on another. What browser is everyone using when they see lag?
> What browser are those of you who aren't seeing lag using?
>
> On Tue, Jan 20, 2015 at 11:59 AM, Ken Hohhof <***@kwisp.com> wrote:
>
>> Good job of merging 2 threads! You win one free Internet!
>>
>> *From:* Chuck McCown <***@wbmfg.com>
>> *Sent:* Tuesday, January 20, 2015 12:48 PM
>> *To:* ***@afmug.com
>> *Subject:* Re: [AFMUG] EPMP Minimum System Specs <rant>
>>
>> Yeah but you bought the advantage GUI license, right?
>>
>> *From:* Sean Heskett <***@zirkel.us>
>> *Sent:* Tuesday, January 20, 2015 11:45 AM
>> *To:* ***@afmug.com
>> *Subject:* Re: [AFMUG] EPMP Minimum System Specs <rant>
>>
>> less than 5 seconds on my iPhone as well.
>>
>>
>>
>> On Tue, Jan 20, 2015 at 11:43 AM, Josh Luthman <
>> ***@imaginenetworksllc.com> wrote:
>>
>>> I doubt that 4 of my high end machines all have the same problem. The
>>> interface takes too long when it first shows up. Maybe it's because it
>>> gets all the information at once, maybe not. Don't care. I want it to be
>>> more smooth and faster.
>>>
>>> My phone (Droid Maxx) is one of the most recent models for Android. The
>>> interface is terribly slow and clumsy on that.
>>>
>>> Well if you feel a poor technology choice was the cause, that's fine,
>>> but it's just flat out wrong. I don't want to carry a big fat i7 laptop up
>>> the tower when I could just simply use my phone. It works with Ubiquiti,
>>> FSK Cambium, Tranzeo, Trango, Mikrotik, etc it should only make sense the
>>> one product with a clumsy interface needs fixed instead of changing my
>>> devices that work with the competitors products (as well as different
>>> products under their portfolio).
>>>
>>>
>>> Josh Luthman
>>> Office: 937-552-2340
>>> Direct: 937-552-2343
>>> 1100 Wayne St
>>> Suite 1337
>>> Troy, OH 45373
>>>
>>> On Tue, Jan 20, 2015 at 1:36 PM, Sean Heskett <***@zirkel.us> wrote:
>>>
>>>> i'm just stating that on all of our computers i've never seen the ePMP
>>>> page load slowly.
>>>>
>>>> maybe it's a computer problem and not a device problem, just trying to
>>>> bring valid input to the discussion.
>>>>
>>>> On Tue, Jan 20, 2015 at 11:34 AM, Josh Luthman <
>>>> ***@imaginenetworksllc.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> Why are you/others arguing that the speed is just fine? This doesn't
>>>>> even make sense. There are people with slower laptops that work with other
>>>>> modern devices and epmp is the only interface that loads slow. There's no
>>>>> point in arguing peoples valid complaints. Are you trying to direct the
>>>>> engineers attention to something else?
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Josh Luthman
>>>>> Office: 937-552-2340
>>>>> Direct: 937-552-2343
>>>>> 1100 Wayne St
>>>>> Suite 1337
>>>>> Troy, OH 45373
>>>>>
>>>>> On Tue, Jan 20, 2015 at 1:30 PM, Mike Hammett <***@ics-il.net>
>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> Three, maybe four seconds to load the initial screen and then two
>>>>>> maybe three seconds to login. As I doubt a screen capture will work when
>>>>>> I'm RDPed in, I'll record the entire login process when I get home and post
>>>>>> it up on YouTube.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> -----
>>>>>> Mike Hammett
>>>>>> Intelligent Computing Solutions
>>>>>> http://www.ics-il.com
>>>>>>
>>>>>> ------------------------------
>>>>>> *From: *"Josh Luthman" <***@imaginenetworksllc.com>
>>>>>> *To: ****@afmug.com
>>>>>> *Sent: *Tuesday, January 20, 2015 12:26:09 PM
>>>>>> *Subject: *Re: [AFMUG] EPMP Minimum System Specs <rant>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Login takes forever. The first like 10-15 seconds just load and
>>>>>> load and load. Once you're in, it's acceptable in terms of page rendering.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Josh Luthman
>>>>>> Office: 937-552-2340
>>>>>> Direct: 937-552-2343
>>>>>> 1100 Wayne St
>>>>>> Suite 1337
>>>>>> Troy, OH 45373
>>>>>>
>>>>>> On Tue, Jan 20, 2015 at 1:22 PM, Sean Heskett <***@zirkel.us>
>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> we use macbook pro's and the ePMP GUI has never been slow for us.
>>>>>>> It was UGLY, but they fixed that with version 2.0 haha.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> not sure why everyone says it's slow tho because we've never seen it.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> 2 cents
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> -sean
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> On Tue, Jan 20, 2015 at 9:57 AM, Nate Burke <***@blastcomm.com>
>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Ok, Cambium, this is a little sad. My Field Laptop, a Lenovo
>>>>>>>> S10-3t, Atom Processor with Windows 8.1 cannot load the EPMP WEB Pages in a
>>>>>>>> timely manner. We're talking 40-60 seconds for initial load, and 20-30
>>>>>>>> seconds per screen refresh/menu change. Since I'm going to have to go to
>>>>>>>> the boss, and tell him that I need a new laptop to do any field
>>>>>>>> troubleshooting for these new radios, what are the minimum system specs for
>>>>>>>> a machine to view the EPMP Screens? Unless Cambium is going to get their
>>>>>>>> Web interface under control as of Yesterday.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> They still swear that the GUI was all developed in house and not
>>>>>>>> purchased (something I still can't believe). I'd like to know who the
>>>>>>>> engineers/managers are who signed off on that design. I can only imaging
>>>>>>>> that there was a group of guys sitting around the conference table,
>>>>>>>> watching the presentation on the GUI on the projector up front, all nodding
>>>>>>>> their heads in agreement, "I think this is a wonderful layout, the field
>>>>>>>> tech's won't mind waiting a couple extra minutes for the pages to load so
>>>>>>>> they can look this pretty!!"
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> I think that Cambium should step up and get engineers from ALL
>>>>>>>> aspects of product development out into the field. 40 seconds waiting for
>>>>>>>> the page to load is fine when you're sitting in the office, but not when
>>>>>>>> you have the laptop balanced on a stack of firewood in the freezing rain
>>>>>>>> trying to get to the monitoring page to see why a radio isn't linking up.
>>>>>>>> I think that every WISP on this list would be more than happy to host an
>>>>>>>> engineer for a day. Heck, even if they go into the parking lot and assemble
>>>>>>>> it on the tailgate of someone's Pickup, they'll get some idea of what we
>>>>>>>> experience.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> I have a feeling that if all steps of the Dev process took a week
>>>>>>>> in the field, We'd have a radio that had a GUI that responded instantly on
>>>>>>>> any device, and radios that assembled and mounted (and unmounted) with 1
>>>>>>>> gloved hand.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> </rant>
>>>>>>>> Nate
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>
>

[Josh Luthman]

Everyone uses Chrome nowadays.


Josh Luthman
Office: 937-552-2340
Direct: 937-552-2343
1100 Wayne St
Suite 1337
Troy, OH 45373

On Tue, Jan 20, 2015 at 2:05 PM, Jeremy <***@gmail.com> wrote:

> Example: Powercode mostly loads and then seems to hang for quite awhile
> on Firefox, but loads fast on Chrome.
>
> On Tue, Jan 20, 2015 at 12:04 PM, Jeremy <***@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> I've never used EPMP but I have noticed some interfaces lag on one
>> browser and not on another. What browser is everyone using when they see
>> lag? What browser are those of you who aren't seeing lag using?
>>
>> On Tue, Jan 20, 2015 at 11:59 AM, Ken Hohhof <***@kwisp.com> wrote:
>>
>>> Good job of merging 2 threads! You win one free Internet!
>>>
>>> *From:* Chuck McCown <***@wbmfg.com>
>>> *Sent:* Tuesday, January 20, 2015 12:48 PM
>>> *To:* ***@afmug.com
>>> *Subject:* Re: [AFMUG] EPMP Minimum System Specs <rant>
>>>
>>> Yeah but you bought the advantage GUI license, right?
>>>
>>> *From:* Sean Heskett <***@zirkel.us>
>>> *Sent:* Tuesday, January 20, 2015 11:45 AM
>>> *To:* ***@afmug.com
>>> *Subject:* Re: [AFMUG] EPMP Minimum System Specs <rant>
>>>
>>> less than 5 seconds on my iPhone as well.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> On Tue, Jan 20, 2015 at 11:43 AM, Josh Luthman <
>>> ***@imaginenetworksllc.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>> I doubt that 4 of my high end machines all have the same problem. The
>>>> interface takes too long when it first shows up. Maybe it's because it
>>>> gets all the information at once, maybe not. Don't care. I want it to be
>>>> more smooth and faster.
>>>>
>>>> My phone (Droid Maxx) is one of the most recent models for Android.
>>>> The interface is terribly slow and clumsy on that.
>>>>
>>>> Well if you feel a poor technology choice was the cause, that's fine,
>>>> but it's just flat out wrong. I don't want to carry a big fat i7 laptop up
>>>> the tower when I could just simply use my phone. It works with Ubiquiti,
>>>> FSK Cambium, Tranzeo, Trango, Mikrotik, etc it should only make sense the
>>>> one product with a clumsy interface needs fixed instead of changing my
>>>> devices that work with the competitors products (as well as different
>>>> products under their portfolio).
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Josh Luthman
>>>> Office: 937-552-2340
>>>> Direct: 937-552-2343
>>>> 1100 Wayne St
>>>> Suite 1337
>>>> Troy, OH 45373
>>>>
>>>> On Tue, Jan 20, 2015 at 1:36 PM, Sean Heskett <***@zirkel.us> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> i'm just stating that on all of our computers i've never seen the ePMP
>>>>> page load slowly.
>>>>>
>>>>> maybe it's a computer problem and not a device problem, just trying to
>>>>> bring valid input to the discussion.
>>>>>
>>>>> On Tue, Jan 20, 2015 at 11:34 AM, Josh Luthman <
>>>>> ***@imaginenetworksllc.com> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> Why are you/others arguing that the speed is just fine? This doesn't
>>>>>> even make sense. There are people with slower laptops that work with other
>>>>>> modern devices and epmp is the only interface that loads slow. There's no
>>>>>> point in arguing peoples valid complaints. Are you trying to direct the
>>>>>> engineers attention to something else?
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Josh Luthman
>>>>>> Office: 937-552-2340
>>>>>> Direct: 937-552-2343
>>>>>> 1100 Wayne St
>>>>>> Suite 1337
>>>>>> Troy, OH 45373
>>>>>>
>>>>>> On Tue, Jan 20, 2015 at 1:30 PM, Mike Hammett <***@ics-il.net>
>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Three, maybe four seconds to load the initial screen and then two
>>>>>>> maybe three seconds to login. As I doubt a screen capture will work when
>>>>>>> I'm RDPed in, I'll record the entire login process when I get home and post
>>>>>>> it up on YouTube.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> -----
>>>>>>> Mike Hammett
>>>>>>> Intelligent Computing Solutions
>>>>>>> http://www.ics-il.com
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> ------------------------------
>>>>>>> *From: *"Josh Luthman" <***@imaginenetworksllc.com>
>>>>>>> *To: ****@afmug.com
>>>>>>> *Sent: *Tuesday, January 20, 2015 12:26:09 PM
>>>>>>> *Subject: *Re: [AFMUG] EPMP Minimum System Specs <rant>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Login takes forever. The first like 10-15 seconds just load and
>>>>>>> load and load. Once you're in, it's acceptable in terms of page rendering.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Josh Luthman
>>>>>>> Office: 937-552-2340
>>>>>>> Direct: 937-552-2343
>>>>>>> 1100 Wayne St
>>>>>>> Suite 1337
>>>>>>> Troy, OH 45373
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> On Tue, Jan 20, 2015 at 1:22 PM, Sean Heskett <***@zirkel.us>
>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> we use macbook pro's and the ePMP GUI has never been slow for us.
>>>>>>>> It was UGLY, but they fixed that with version 2.0 haha.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> not sure why everyone says it's slow tho because we've never seen
>>>>>>>> it.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> 2 cents
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> -sean
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> On Tue, Jan 20, 2015 at 9:57 AM, Nate Burke <***@blastcomm.com>
>>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Ok, Cambium, this is a little sad. My Field Laptop, a Lenovo
>>>>>>>>> S10-3t, Atom Processor with Windows 8.1 cannot load the EPMP WEB Pages in a
>>>>>>>>> timely manner. We're talking 40-60 seconds for initial load, and 20-30
>>>>>>>>> seconds per screen refresh/menu change. Since I'm going to have to go to
>>>>>>>>> the boss, and tell him that I need a new laptop to do any field
>>>>>>>>> troubleshooting for these new radios, what are the minimum system specs for
>>>>>>>>> a machine to view the EPMP Screens? Unless Cambium is going to get their
>>>>>>>>> Web interface under control as of Yesterday.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> They still swear that the GUI was all developed in house and not
>>>>>>>>> purchased (something I still can't believe). I'd like to know who the
>>>>>>>>> engineers/managers are who signed off on that design. I can only imaging
>>>>>>>>> that there was a group of guys sitting around the conference table,
>>>>>>>>> watching the presentation on the GUI on the projector up front, all nodding
>>>>>>>>> their heads in agreement, "I think this is a wonderful layout, the field
>>>>>>>>> tech's won't mind waiting a couple extra minutes for the pages to load so
>>>>>>>>> they can look this pretty!!"
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> I think that Cambium should step up and get engineers from ALL
>>>>>>>>> aspects of product development out into the field. 40 seconds waiting for
>>>>>>>>> the page to load is fine when you're sitting in the office, but not when
>>>>>>>>> you have the laptop balanced on a stack of firewood in the freezing rain
>>>>>>>>> trying to get to the monitoring page to see why a radio isn't linking up.
>>>>>>>>> I think that every WISP on this list would be more than happy to host an
>>>>>>>>> engineer for a day. Heck, even if they go into the parking lot and assemble
>>>>>>>>> it on the tailgate of someone's Pickup, they'll get some idea of what we
>>>>>>>>> experience.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> I have a feeling that if all steps of the Dev process took a week
>>>>>>>>> in the field, We'd have a radio that had a GUI that responded instantly on
>>>>>>>>> any device, and radios that assembled and mounted (and unmounted) with 1
>>>>>>>>> gloved hand.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> </rant>
>>>>>>>>> Nate
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>

[Tyler Treat]

​pretty much...

________________________________
From: Af <af-***@afmug.com> on behalf of Josh Luthman <***@imaginenetworksllc.com>
Sent: Tuesday, January 20, 2015 1:08 PM
To: ***@afmug.com
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] EPMP Minimum System Specs <rant>

Everyone uses Chrome nowadays.


Josh Luthman
Office: 937-552-2340
Direct: 937-552-2343
1100 Wayne St
Suite 1337
Troy, OH 45373

On Tue, Jan 20, 2015 at 2:05 PM, Jeremy <***@gmail.com<mailto:***@gmail.com>> wrote:
Example: Powercode mostly loads and then seems to hang for quite awhile on Firefox, but loads fast on Chrome.

On Tue, Jan 20, 2015 at 12:04 PM, Jeremy <***@gmail.com<mailto:***@gmail.com>> wrote:
I've never used EPMP but I have noticed some interfaces lag on one browser and not on another. What browser is everyone using when they see lag? What browser are those of you who aren't seeing lag using?

On Tue, Jan 20, 2015 at 11:59 AM, Ken Hohhof <***@kwisp.com<mailto:***@kwisp.com>> wrote:
Good job of merging 2 threads! You win one free Internet!

From: Chuck McCown<mailto:***@wbmfg.com>
Sent: Tuesday, January 20, 2015 12:48 PM
To: ***@afmug.com<mailto:***@afmug.com>
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] EPMP Minimum System Specs <rant>

Yeah but you bought the advantage GUI license, right?

From: Sean Heskett<mailto:***@zirkel.us>
Sent: Tuesday, January 20, 2015 11:45 AM
To: ***@afmug.com<mailto:***@afmug.com>
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] EPMP Minimum System Specs <rant>

less than 5 seconds on my iPhone as well.



On Tue, Jan 20, 2015 at 11:43 AM, Josh Luthman <***@imaginenetworksllc.com<mailto:***@imaginenetworksllc.com>> wrote:
I doubt that 4 of my high end machines all have the same problem. The interface takes too long when it first shows up. Maybe it's because it gets all the information at once, maybe not. Don't care. I want it to be more smooth and faster.

My phone (Droid Maxx) is one of the most recent models for Android. The interface is terribly slow and clumsy on that.

Well if you feel a poor technology choice was the cause, that's fine, but it's just flat out wrong. I don't want to carry a big fat i7 laptop up the tower when I could just simply use my phone. It works with Ubiquiti, FSK Cambium, Tranzeo, Trango, Mikrotik, etc it should only make sense the one product with a clumsy interface needs fixed instead of changing my devices that work with the competitors products (as well as different products under their portfolio).


Josh Luthman
Office: 937-552-2340<tel:[phone]>
Direct: 937-552-2343<tel:[phone]>
1100 Wayne St
Suite 1337
Troy, OH 45373

On Tue, Jan 20, 2015 at 1:36 PM, Sean Heskett <***@zirkel.us<mailto:***@zirkel.us>> wrote:
i'm just stating that on all of our computers i've never seen the ePMP page load slowly.

maybe it's a computer problem and not a device problem, just trying to bring valid input to the discussion.

On Tue, Jan 20, 2015 at 11:34 AM, Josh Luthman <***@imaginenetworksllc.com<mailto:***@imaginenetworksllc.com>> wrote:
Why are you/others arguing that the speed is just fine? This doesn't even make sense. There are people with slower laptops that work with other modern devices and epmp is the only interface that loads slow. There's no point in arguing peoples valid complaints. Are you trying to direct the engineers attention to something else?


Josh Luthman
Office: 937-552-2340<tel:[phone]>
Direct: 937-552-2343<tel:[phone]>
1100 Wayne St
Suite 1337
Troy, OH 45373

On Tue, Jan 20, 2015 at 1:30 PM, Mike Hammett <***@ics-il.net<mailto:***@ics-il.net>> wrote:
Three, maybe four seconds to load the initial screen and then two maybe three seconds to login. As I doubt a screen capture will work when I'm RDPed in, I'll record the entire login process when I get home and post it up on YouTube.



-----
Mike Hammett
Intelligent Computing Solutions
http://www.ics-il.com

________________________________
From: "Josh Luthman" <***@imaginenetworksllc.com<mailto:***@imaginenetworksllc.com>>
To: ***@afmug.com<mailto:***@afmug.com>
Sent: Tuesday, January 20, 2015 12:26:09 PM
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] EPMP Minimum System Specs <rant>

Login takes forever. The first like 10-15 seconds just load and load and load. Once you're in, it's acceptable in terms of page rendering.


Josh Luthman
Office: 937-552-2340<tel:[phone]>
Direct: 937-552-2343<tel:[phone]>
1100 Wayne St
Suite 1337
Troy, OH 45373

On Tue, Jan 20, 2015 at 1:22 PM, Sean Heskett <***@zirkel.us<mailto:***@zirkel.us>> wrote:
we use macbook pro's and the ePMP GUI has never been slow for us. It was UGLY, but they fixed that with version 2.0 haha.

not sure why everyone says it's slow tho because we've never seen it.

2 cents

-sean



On Tue, Jan 20, 2015 at 9:57 AM, Nate Burke <***@blastcomm.com<mailto:***@blastcomm.com>> wrote:
Ok, Cambium, this is a little sad. My Field Laptop, a Lenovo S10-3t, Atom Processor with Windows 8.1 cannot load the EPMP WEB Pages in a timely manner. We're talking 40-60 seconds for initial load, and 20-30 seconds per screen refresh/menu change. Since I'm going to have to go to the boss, and tell him that I need a new laptop to do any field troubleshooting for these new radios, what are the minimum system specs for a machine to view the EPMP Screens? Unless Cambium is going to get their Web interface under control as of Yesterday.

They still swear that the GUI was all developed in house and not purchased (something I still can't believe). I'd like to know who the engineers/managers are who signed off on that design. I can only imaging that there was a group of guys sitting around the conference table, watching the presentation on the GUI on the projector up front, all nodding their heads in agreement, "I think this is a wonderful layout, the field tech's won't mind waiting a couple extra minutes for the pages to load so they can look this pretty!!"

I think that Cambium should step up and get engineers from ALL aspects of product development out into the field. 40 seconds waiting for the page to load is fine when you're sitting in the office, but not when you have the laptop balanced on a stack of firewood in the freezing rain trying to get to the monitoring page to see why a radio isn't linking up. I think that every WISP on this list would be more than happy to host an engineer for a day. Heck, even if they go into the parking lot and assemble it on the tailgate of someone's Pickup, they'll get some idea of what we experience.

I have a feeling that if all steps of the Dev process took a week in the field, We'd have a radio that had a GUI that responded instantly on any device, and radios that assembled and mounted (and unmounted) with 1 gloved hand.

</rant>
Nate

[Mathew Howard]

okay... I just timed it, on my phone (Galaxy S4) it takes about 25 seconds
to get to the login... to actually get logged in and the first page loaded
took me a full minute - for comparison, I can log into a UBNT radio and get
the main page loaded in under 15 seconds.

It takes 4-5 seconds to get to the login on my desktop.

On Tue, Jan 20, 2015 at 12:53 PM, Adam Moffett <***@gmail.com> wrote:

> I don't know what makes the GUI slow for you or anybody else....I have
> literally never seen it load slowly. Even on a crummy old Atom. Even on a
> cell phone.
>
> I don't know what to say.
>
>
> I doubt that 4 of my high end machines all have the same problem. The
> interface takes too long when it first shows up. Maybe it's because it
> gets all the information at once, maybe not. Don't care. I want it to be
> more smooth and faster.
>
> My phone (Droid Maxx) is one of the most recent models for Android. The
> interface is terribly slow and clumsy on that.
>
> Well if you feel a poor technology choice was the cause, that's fine,
> but it's just flat out wrong. I don't want to carry a big fat i7 laptop up
> the tower when I could just simply use my phone. It works with Ubiquiti,
> FSK Cambium, Tranzeo, Trango, Mikrotik, etc it should only make sense the
> one product with a clumsy interface needs fixed instead of changing my
> devices that work with the competitors products (as well as different
> products under their portfolio).
>
>
> Josh Luthman
> Office: 937-552-2340
> Direct: 937-552-2343
> 1100 Wayne St
> Suite 1337
> Troy, OH 45373
>
> On Tue, Jan 20, 2015 at 1:36 PM, Sean Heskett <***@zirkel.us> wrote:
>
>> i'm just stating that on all of our computers i've never seen the ePMP
>> page load slowly.
>>
>> maybe it's a computer problem and not a device problem, just trying to
>> bring valid input to the discussion.
>>
>> On Tue, Jan 20, 2015 at 11:34 AM, Josh Luthman <
>> ***@imaginenetworksllc.com> wrote:
>>
>>> Why are you/others arguing that the speed is just fine? This doesn't
>>> even make sense. There are people with slower laptops that work with other
>>> modern devices and epmp is the only interface that loads slow. There's no
>>> point in arguing peoples valid complaints. Are you trying to direct the
>>> engineers attention to something else?
>>>
>>>
>>> Josh Luthman
>>> Office: 937-552-2340
>>> Direct: 937-552-2343
>>> 1100 Wayne St
>>> Suite 1337
>>> Troy, OH 45373
>>>
>>> On Tue, Jan 20, 2015 at 1:30 PM, Mike Hammett <***@ics-il.net> wrote:
>>>
>>>> Three, maybe four seconds to load the initial screen and then two
>>>> maybe three seconds to login. As I doubt a screen capture will work when
>>>> I'm RDPed in, I'll record the entire login process when I get home and post
>>>> it up on YouTube.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> -----
>>>> Mike Hammett
>>>> Intelligent Computing Solutions
>>>> http://www.ics-il.com
>>>>
>>>> ------------------------------
>>>> *From: *"Josh Luthman" <***@imaginenetworksllc.com>
>>>> *To: ****@afmug.com
>>>> *Sent: *Tuesday, January 20, 2015 12:26:09 PM
>>>> *Subject: *Re: [AFMUG] EPMP Minimum System Specs <rant>
>>>>
>>>> Login takes forever. The first like 10-15 seconds just load and
>>>> load and load. Once you're in, it's acceptable in terms of page rendering.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Josh Luthman
>>>> Office: 937-552-2340
>>>> Direct: 937-552-2343
>>>> 1100 Wayne St
>>>> Suite 1337
>>>> Troy, OH 45373
>>>>
>>>> On Tue, Jan 20, 2015 at 1:22 PM, Sean Heskett <***@zirkel.us> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> we use macbook pro's and the ePMP GUI has never been slow for us. It
>>>>> was UGLY, but they fixed that with version 2.0 haha.
>>>>>
>>>>> not sure why everyone says it's slow tho because we've never seen it.
>>>>>
>>>>> 2 cents
>>>>>
>>>>> -sean
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> On Tue, Jan 20, 2015 at 9:57 AM, Nate Burke <***@blastcomm.com>
>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> Ok, Cambium, this is a little sad. My Field Laptop, a Lenovo S10-3t,
>>>>>> Atom Processor with Windows 8.1 cannot load the EPMP WEB Pages in a timely
>>>>>> manner. We're talking 40-60 seconds for initial load, and 20-30 seconds
>>>>>> per screen refresh/menu change. Since I'm going to have to go to the boss,
>>>>>> and tell him that I need a new laptop to do any field troubleshooting for
>>>>>> these new radios, what are the minimum system specs for a machine to view
>>>>>> the EPMP Screens? Unless Cambium is going to get their Web interface under
>>>>>> control as of Yesterday.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> They still swear that the GUI was all developed in house and not
>>>>>> purchased (something I still can't believe). I'd like to know who the
>>>>>> engineers/managers are who signed off on that design. I can only imaging
>>>>>> that there was a group of guys sitting around the conference table,
>>>>>> watching the presentation on the GUI on the projector up front, all nodding
>>>>>> their heads in agreement, "I think this is a wonderful layout, the field
>>>>>> tech's won't mind waiting a couple extra minutes for the pages to load so
>>>>>> they can look this pretty!!"
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I think that Cambium should step up and get engineers from ALL
>>>>>> aspects of product development out into the field. 40 seconds waiting for
>>>>>> the page to load is fine when you're sitting in the office, but not when
>>>>>> you have the laptop balanced on a stack of firewood in the freezing rain
>>>>>> trying to get to the monitoring page to see why a radio isn't linking up.
>>>>>> I think that every WISP on this list would be more than happy to host an
>>>>>> engineer for a day. Heck, even if they go into the parking lot and assemble
>>>>>> it on the tailgate of someone's Pickup, they'll get some idea of what we
>>>>>> experience.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I have a feeling that if all steps of the Dev process took a week in
>>>>>> the field, We'd have a radio that had a GUI that responded instantly on any
>>>>>> device, and radios that assembled and mounted (and unmounted) with 1 gloved
>>>>>> hand.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> </rant>
>>>>>> Nate
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>
>
>

[Adam Moffett]

I almost always use Firefox.
> I've never used EPMP but I have noticed some interfaces lag on one
> browser and not on another. What browser is everyone using when they
> see lag? What browser are those of you who aren't seeing lag using?
>
> On Tue, Jan 20, 2015 at 11:59 AM, Ken Hohhof <***@kwisp.com
> <mailto:***@kwisp.com>> wrote:
>
> Good job of merging 2 threads! You win one free Internet!
> *From:* Chuck McCown <mailto:***@wbmfg.com>
> *Sent:* Tuesday, January 20, 2015 12:48 PM
> *To:* ***@afmug.com <mailto:***@afmug.com>
> *Subject:* Re: [AFMUG] EPMP Minimum System Specs <rant>
> Yeah but you bought the advantage GUI license, right?
> *From:* Sean Heskett <mailto:***@zirkel.us>
> *Sent:* Tuesday, January 20, 2015 11:45 AM
> *To:* ***@afmug.com <mailto:***@afmug.com>
> *Subject:* Re: [AFMUG] EPMP Minimum System Specs <rant>
> less than 5 seconds on my iPhone as well.
> On Tue, Jan 20, 2015 at 11:43 AM, Josh Luthman
> <***@imaginenetworksllc.com <mailto:***@imaginenetworksllc.com>>
> wrote:
>
> I doubt that 4 of my high end machines all have the same
> problem. The interface takes too long when it first shows up.
> Maybe it's because it gets all the information at once, maybe
> not. Don't care. I want it to be more smooth and faster.
> My phone (Droid Maxx) is one of the most recent models for
> Android. The interface is terribly slow and clumsy on that.
> Well if you feel a poor technology choice was the cause,
> that's fine, but it's just flat out wrong. I don't want to
> carry a big fat i7 laptop up the tower when I could just
> simply use my phone. It works with Ubiquiti, FSK Cambium,
> Tranzeo, Trango, Mikrotik, etc it should only make sense the
> one product with a clumsy interface needs fixed instead of
> changing my devices that work with the competitors products
> (as well as different products under their portfolio).
>
> Josh Luthman
> Office: 937-552-2340 <tel:[phone]>
> Direct: 937-552-2343 <tel:[phone]>
> 1100 Wayne St
> Suite 1337
> Troy, OH 45373
>
> On Tue, Jan 20, 2015 at 1:36 PM, Sean Heskett <***@zirkel.us
> <mailto:***@zirkel.us>> wrote:
>
> i'm just stating that on all of our computers i've never
> seen the ePMP page load slowly.
> maybe it's a computer problem and not a device problem,
> just trying to bring valid input to the discussion.
> On Tue, Jan 20, 2015 at 11:34 AM, Josh Luthman
> <***@imaginenetworksllc.com
> <mailto:***@imaginenetworksllc.com>> wrote:
>
> Why are you/others arguing that the speed is just
> fine? This doesn't even make sense. There are people
> with slower laptops that work with other modern
> devices and epmp is the only interface that loads
> slow. There's no point in arguing peoples valid
> complaints. Are you trying to direct the engineers
> attention to something else?
>
> Josh Luthman
> Office: 937-552-2340 <tel:[phone]>
> Direct: 937-552-2343 <tel:[phone]>
> 1100 Wayne St
> Suite 1337
> Troy, OH 45373
>
> On Tue, Jan 20, 2015 at 1:30 PM, Mike Hammett
> <***@ics-il.net <mailto:***@ics-il.net>> wrote:
>
> Three, maybe four seconds to load the initial
> screen and then two maybe three seconds to login.
> As I doubt a screen capture will work when I'm
> RDPed in, I'll record the entire login process
> when I get home and post it up on YouTube.
>
>
>
> -----
> Mike Hammett
> Intelligent Computing Solutions
> http://www.ics-il.com
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
> *From: *"Josh Luthman"
> <***@imaginenetworksllc.com
> <mailto:***@imaginenetworksllc.com>>
> *To: ****@afmug.com <mailto:***@afmug.com>
> *Sent: *Tuesday, January 20, 2015 12:26:09 PM
> *Subject: *Re: [AFMUG] EPMP Minimum System Specs
> <rant>
>
> Login takes forever. The first like 10-15 seconds
> just load and load and load. Once you're in, it's
> acceptable in terms of page rendering.
> Josh Luthman
> Office: 937-552-2340 <tel:[phone]>
> Direct: 937-552-2343 <tel:[phone]>
> 1100 Wayne St
> Suite 1337
> Troy, OH 45373
> On Tue, Jan 20, 2015 at 1:22 PM, Sean Heskett
> <***@zirkel.us <mailto:***@zirkel.us>> wrote:
>
> we use macbook pro's and the ePMP GUI has
> never been slow for us. It was UGLY, but they
> fixed that with version 2.0 haha.
> not sure why everyone says it's slow tho
> because we've never seen it.
> 2 cents
> -sean
> On Tue, Jan 20, 2015 at 9:57 AM, Nate Burke
> <***@blastcomm.com
> <mailto:***@blastcomm.com>> wrote:
>
> Ok, Cambium, this is a little sad. My
> Field Laptop, a Lenovo S10-3t, Atom
> Processor with Windows 8.1 cannot load the
> EPMP WEB Pages in a timely manner. We're
> talking 40-60 seconds for initial load,
> and 20-30 seconds per screen refresh/menu
> change. Since I'm going to have to go to
> the boss, and tell him that I need a new
> laptop to do any field troubleshooting for
> these new radios, what are the minimum
> system specs for a machine to view the
> EPMP Screens? Unless Cambium is going to
> get their Web interface under control as
> of Yesterday.
>
> They still swear that the GUI was all
> developed in house and not purchased
> (something I still can't believe). I'd
> like to know who the engineers/managers
> are who signed off on that design. I can
> only imaging that there was a group of
> guys sitting around the conference table,
> watching the presentation on the GUI on
> the projector up front, all nodding their
> heads in agreement, "I think this is a
> wonderful layout, the field tech's won't
> mind waiting a couple extra minutes for
> the pages to load so they can look this
> pretty!!"
>
> I think that Cambium should step up and
> get engineers from ALL aspects of product
> development out into the field. 40
> seconds waiting for the page to load is
> fine when you're sitting in the office,
> but not when you have the laptop balanced
> on a stack of firewood in the freezing
> rain trying to get to the monitoring page
> to see why a radio isn't linking up. I
> think that every WISP on this list would
> be more than happy to host an engineer for
> a day. Heck, even if they go into the
> parking lot and assemble it on the
> tailgate of someone's Pickup, they'll get
> some idea of what we experience.
>
> I have a feeling that if all steps of the
> Dev process took a week in the field, We'd
> have a radio that had a GUI that responded
> instantly on any device, and radios that
> assembled and mounted (and unmounted) with
> 1 gloved hand.
>
> </rant>
> Nate
>
>

[James Howard]

I've heard that there are people like you. :P


From: Af [mailto:af-***@afmug.com] On Behalf Of Adam Moffett
Sent: Tuesday, January 20, 2015 1:12 PM
To: ***@afmug.com
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] EPMP Minimum System Specs <rant>


I almost always use Firefox.
I've never used EPMP but I have noticed some interfaces lag on one browser and not on another. What browser is everyone using when they see lag? What browser are those of you who aren't seeing lag using?

On Tue, Jan 20, 2015 at 11:59 AM, Ken Hohhof <***@kwisp.com<mailto:***@kwisp.com>> wrote:
Good job of merging 2 threads! You win one free Internet!

From: Chuck McCown<mailto:***@wbmfg.com>
Sent: Tuesday, January 20, 2015 12:48 PM
To: ***@afmug.com<mailto:***@afmug.com>
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] EPMP Minimum System Specs <rant>

Yeah but you bought the advantage GUI license, right?

From: Sean Heskett<mailto:***@zirkel.us>
Sent: Tuesday, January 20, 2015 11:45 AM
To: ***@afmug.com<mailto:***@afmug.com>
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] EPMP Minimum System Specs <rant>

less than 5 seconds on my iPhone as well.



On Tue, Jan 20, 2015 at 11:43 AM, Josh Luthman <***@imaginenetworksllc.com<mailto:***@imaginenetworksllc.com>> wrote:
I doubt that 4 of my high end machines all have the same problem. The interface takes too long when it first shows up. Maybe it's because it gets all the information at once, maybe not. Don't care. I want it to be more smooth and faster.

My phone (Droid Maxx) is one of the most recent models for Android. The interface is terribly slow and clumsy on that.

Well if you feel a poor technology choice was the cause, that's fine, but it's just flat out wrong. I don't want to carry a big fat i7 laptop up the tower when I could just simply use my phone. It works with Ubiquiti, FSK Cambium, Tranzeo, Trango, Mikrotik, etc it should only make sense the one product with a clumsy interface needs fixed instead of changing my devices that work with the competitors products (as well as different products under their portfolio).


Josh Luthman
Office: 937-552-2340<tel:[phone]>
Direct: 937-552-2343<tel:[phone]>
1100 Wayne St
Suite 1337
Troy, OH 45373

On Tue, Jan 20, 2015 at 1:36 PM, Sean Heskett <***@zirkel.us<mailto:***@zirkel.us>> wrote:
i'm just stating that on all of our computers i've never seen the ePMP page load slowly.

maybe it's a computer problem and not a device problem, just trying to bring valid input to the discussion.

On Tue, Jan 20, 2015 at 11:34 AM, Josh Luthman <***@imaginenetworksllc.com<mailto:***@imaginenetworksllc.com>> wrote:
Why are you/others arguing that the speed is just fine? This doesn't even make sense. There are people with slower laptops that work with other modern devices and epmp is the only interface that loads slow. There's no point in arguing peoples valid complaints. Are you trying to direct the engineers attention to something else?


Josh Luthman
Office: 937-552-2340<tel:[phone]>
Direct: 937-552-2343<tel:[phone]>
1100 Wayne St
Suite 1337
Troy, OH 45373

On Tue, Jan 20, 2015 at 1:30 PM, Mike Hammett <***@ics-il.net<mailto:***@ics-il.net>> wrote:
Three, maybe four seconds to load the initial screen and then two maybe three seconds to login. As I doubt a screen capture will work when I'm RDPed in, I'll record the entire login process when I get home and post it up on YouTube.


-----
Mike Hammett
Intelligent Computing Solutions
http://www.ics-il.com

________________________________
From: "Josh Luthman" <***@imaginenetworksllc.com<mailto:***@imaginenetworksllc.com>>
To: ***@afmug.com<mailto:***@afmug.com>
Sent: Tuesday, January 20, 2015 12:26:09 PM
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] EPMP Minimum System Specs <rant>
Login takes forever. The first like 10-15 seconds just load and load and load. Once you're in, it's acceptable in terms of page rendering.


Josh Luthman
Office: 937-552-2340<tel:[phone]>
Direct: 937-552-2343<tel:[phone]>
1100 Wayne St
Suite 1337
Troy, OH 45373

On Tue, Jan 20, 2015 at 1:22 PM, Sean Heskett <***@zirkel.us<mailto:***@zirkel.us>> wrote:
we use macbook pro's and the ePMP GUI has never been slow for us. It was UGLY, but they fixed that with version 2.0 haha.

not sure why everyone says it's slow tho because we've never seen it.

2 cents

-sean



On Tue, Jan 20, 2015 at 9:57 AM, Nate Burke <***@blastcomm.com<mailto:***@blastcomm.com>> wrote:
Ok, Cambium, this is a little sad. My Field Laptop, a Lenovo S10-3t, Atom Processor with Windows 8.1 cannot load the EPMP WEB Pages in a timely manner. We're talking 40-60 seconds for initial load, and 20-30 seconds per screen refresh/menu change. Since I'm going to have to go to the boss, and tell him that I need a new laptop to do any field troubleshooting for these new radios, what are the minimum system specs for a machine to view the EPMP Screens? Unless Cambium is going to get their Web interface under control as of Yesterday.

They still swear that the GUI was all developed in house and not purchased (something I still can't believe). I'd like to know who the engineers/managers are who signed off on that design. I can only imaging that there was a group of guys sitting around the conference table, watching the presentation on the GUI on the projector up front, all nodding their heads in agreement, "I think this is a wonderful layout, the field tech's won't mind waiting a couple extra minutes for the pages to load so they can look this pretty!!"

I think that Cambium should step up and get engineers from ALL aspects of product development out into the field. 40 seconds waiting for the page to load is fine when you're sitting in the office, but not when you have the laptop balanced on a stack of firewood in the freezing rain trying to get to the monitoring page to see why a radio isn't linking up. I think that every WISP on this list would be more than happy to host an engineer for a day. Heck, even if they go into the parking lot and assemble it on the tailgate of someone's Pickup, they'll get some idea of what we experience.

I have a feeling that if all steps of the Dev process took a week in the field, We'd have a radio that had a GUI that responded instantly on any device, and radios that assembled and mounted (and unmounted) with 1 gloved hand.

</rant>
Nate










________________________________
Total Control Panel

Login<https://asp.reflexion.net/login?domain=litewire.net>


To: ***@litewire.net<https://asp.reflexion.net/address-properties?aID=242260993&domain=litewire.net>

From: 0000014b08c1d582-5ef00760-a373-48ce-a3b3-1f57661697fd-***@amazonses.com<https://asp.reflexion.net/address-properties?aID=2994845535&domain=litewire.net>


Remove<https://asp.reflexion.net/FooterAction?ver=2&un-wl-sender-domain=1&rID=242260993&aID=2994845535&domain=litewire.net> amazonses.com from my allow list



You received this message because the domain amazonses.com is on your allow list.

[Adam Moffett]

Who's everyone?
> Everyone uses Chrome nowadays.
>
>
> Josh Luthman
> Office: 937-552-2340
> Direct: 937-552-2343
> 1100 Wayne St
> Suite 1337
> Troy, OH 45373
>
> On Tue, Jan 20, 2015 at 2:05 PM, Jeremy <***@gmail.com
> <mailto:***@gmail.com>> wrote:
>
> Example: Powercode mostly loads and then seems to hang for quite
> awhile on Firefox, but loads fast on Chrome.
>
> On Tue, Jan 20, 2015 at 12:04 PM, Jeremy <***@gmail.com
> <mailto:***@gmail.com>> wrote:
>
> I've never used EPMP but I have noticed some interfaces lag on
> one browser and not on another. What browser is everyone
> using when they see lag? What browser are those of you who
> aren't seeing lag using?
>
> On Tue, Jan 20, 2015 at 11:59 AM, Ken Hohhof <***@kwisp.com
> <mailto:***@kwisp.com>> wrote:
>
> Good job of merging 2 threads! You win one free Internet!
> *From:* Chuck McCown <mailto:***@wbmfg.com>
> *Sent:* Tuesday, January 20, 2015 12:48 PM
> *To:* ***@afmug.com <mailto:***@afmug.com>
> *Subject:* Re: [AFMUG] EPMP Minimum System Specs <rant>
> Yeah but you bought the advantage GUI license, right?
> *From:* Sean Heskett <mailto:***@zirkel.us>
> *Sent:* Tuesday, January 20, 2015 11:45 AM
> *To:* ***@afmug.com <mailto:***@afmug.com>
> *Subject:* Re: [AFMUG] EPMP Minimum System Specs <rant>
> less than 5 seconds on my iPhone as well.
> On Tue, Jan 20, 2015 at 11:43 AM, Josh Luthman
> <***@imaginenetworksllc.com
> <mailto:***@imaginenetworksllc.com>> wrote:
>
> I doubt that 4 of my high end machines all have the
> same problem. The interface takes too long when it
> first shows up. Maybe it's because it gets all the
> information at once, maybe not. Don't care. I want
> it to be more smooth and faster.
> My phone (Droid Maxx) is one of the most recent models
> for Android. The interface is terribly slow and
> clumsy on that.
> Well if you feel a poor technology choice was the
> cause, that's fine, but it's just flat out wrong. I
> don't want to carry a big fat i7 laptop up the tower
> when I could just simply use my phone. It works with
> Ubiquiti, FSK Cambium, Tranzeo, Trango, Mikrotik, etc
> it should only make sense the one product with a
> clumsy interface needs fixed instead of changing my
> devices that work with the competitors products (as
> well as different products under their portfolio).
>
> Josh Luthman
> Office: 937-552-2340 <tel:[phone]>
> Direct: 937-552-2343 <tel:[phone]>
> 1100 Wayne St
> Suite 1337
> Troy, OH 45373
>
> On Tue, Jan 20, 2015 at 1:36 PM, Sean Heskett
> <***@zirkel.us <mailto:***@zirkel.us>> wrote:
>
> i'm just stating that on all of our computers i've
> never seen the ePMP page load slowly.
> maybe it's a computer problem and not a device
> problem, just trying to bring valid input to the
> discussion.
> On Tue, Jan 20, 2015 at 11:34 AM, Josh Luthman
> <***@imaginenetworksllc.com
> <mailto:***@imaginenetworksllc.com>> wrote:
>
> Why are you/others arguing that the speed is
> just fine? This doesn't even make sense.
> There are people with slower laptops that work
> with other modern devices and epmp is the only
> interface that loads slow. There's no point
> in arguing peoples valid complaints. Are you
> trying to direct the engineers attention to
> something else?
>
> Josh Luthman
> Office: 937-552-2340 <tel:[phone]>
> Direct: 937-552-2343 <tel:[phone]>
> 1100 Wayne St
> Suite 1337
> Troy, OH 45373
>
> On Tue, Jan 20, 2015 at 1:30 PM, Mike Hammett
> <***@ics-il.net <mailto:***@ics-il.net>>
> wrote:
>
> Three, maybe four seconds to load the
> initial screen and then two maybe three
> seconds to login. As I doubt a screen
> capture will work when I'm RDPed in, I'll
> record the entire login process when I get
> home and post it up on YouTube.
>
>
>
> -----
> Mike Hammett
> Intelligent Computing Solutions
> http://www.ics-il.com
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
> *From: *"Josh Luthman"
> <***@imaginenetworksllc.com
> <mailto:***@imaginenetworksllc.com>>
> *To: ****@afmug.com <mailto:***@afmug.com>
> *Sent: *Tuesday, January 20, 2015 12:26:09 PM
> *Subject: *Re: [AFMUG] EPMP Minimum System
> Specs <rant>
>
> Login takes forever. The first like 10-15
> seconds just load and load and load. Once
> you're in, it's acceptable in terms of
> page rendering.
> Josh Luthman
> Office: 937-552-2340 <tel:[phone]>
> Direct: 937-552-2343 <tel:[phone]>
> 1100 Wayne St
> Suite 1337
> Troy, OH 45373
> On Tue, Jan 20, 2015 at 1:22 PM, Sean
> Heskett <***@zirkel.us
> <mailto:***@zirkel.us>> wrote:
>
> we use macbook pro's and the ePMP GUI
> has never been slow for us. It was
> UGLY, but they fixed that with version
> 2.0 haha.
> not sure why everyone says it's slow
> tho because we've never seen it.
> 2 cents
> -sean
> On Tue, Jan 20, 2015 at 9:57 AM, Nate
> Burke <***@blastcomm.com
> <mailto:***@blastcomm.com>> wrote:
>
> Ok, Cambium, this is a little
> sad. My Field Laptop, a Lenovo
> S10-3t, Atom Processor with
> Windows 8.1 cannot load the EPMP
> WEB Pages in a timely manner.
> We're talking 40-60 seconds for
> initial load, and 20-30 seconds
> per screen refresh/menu change.
> Since I'm going to have to go to
> the boss, and tell him that I need
> a new laptop to do any field
> troubleshooting for these new
> radios, what are the minimum
> system specs for a machine to view
> the EPMP Screens? Unless Cambium
> is going to get their Web
> interface under control as of
> Yesterday.
>
> They still swear that the GUI was
> all developed in house and not
> purchased (something I still can't
> believe). I'd like to know who
> the engineers/managers are who
> signed off on that design. I can
> only imaging that there was a
> group of guys sitting around the
> conference table, watching the
> presentation on the GUI on the
> projector up front, all nodding
> their heads in agreement, "I think
> this is a wonderful layout, the
> field tech's won't mind waiting a
> couple extra minutes for the pages
> to load so they can look this
> pretty!!"
>
> I think that Cambium should step
> up and get engineers from ALL
> aspects of product development out
> into the field. 40 seconds
> waiting for the page to load is
> fine when you're sitting in the
> office, but not when you have the
> laptop balanced on a stack of
> firewood in the freezing rain
> trying to get to the monitoring
> page to see why a radio isn't
> linking up. I think that every
> WISP on this list would be more
> than happy to host an engineer for
> a day. Heck, even if they go into
> the parking lot and assemble it on
> the tailgate of someone's Pickup,
> they'll get some idea of what we
> experience.
>
> I have a feeling that if all steps
> of the Dev process took a week in
> the field, We'd have a radio that
> had a GUI that responded instantly
> on any device, and radios that
> assembled and mounted (and
> unmounted) with 1 gloved hand.
>
> </rant>
> Nate
>
>
>
>

[Adam Moffett]

http://www.netmarketshare.com/browser-market-share.aspx?qprid=2&qpcustomd=0

According to that everyone still uses Internet Explorer. I promise I'm
as shocked as you are.

> Everyone uses Chrome nowadays.
>
>
> Josh Luthman
> Office: 937-552-2340
> Direct: 937-552-2343
> 1100 Wayne St
> Suite 1337
> Troy, OH 45373
>
> On Tue, Jan 20, 2015 at 2:05 PM, Jeremy <***@gmail.com
> <mailto:***@gmail.com>> wrote:
>
> Example: Powercode mostly loads and then seems to hang for quite
> awhile on Firefox, but loads fast on Chrome.
>
> On Tue, Jan 20, 2015 at 12:04 PM, Jeremy <***@gmail.com
> <mailto:***@gmail.com>> wrote:
>
> I've never used EPMP but I have noticed some interfaces lag on
> one browser and not on another. What browser is everyone
> using when they see lag? What browser are those of you who
> aren't seeing lag using?
>
> On Tue, Jan 20, 2015 at 11:59 AM, Ken Hohhof <***@kwisp.com
> <mailto:***@kwisp.com>> wrote:
>
> Good job of merging 2 threads! You win one free Internet!
> *From:* Chuck McCown <mailto:***@wbmfg.com>
> *Sent:* Tuesday, January 20, 2015 12:48 PM
> *To:* ***@afmug.com <mailto:***@afmug.com>
> *Subject:* Re: [AFMUG] EPMP Minimum System Specs <rant>
> Yeah but you bought the advantage GUI license, right?
> *From:* Sean Heskett <mailto:***@zirkel.us>
> *Sent:* Tuesday, January 20, 2015 11:45 AM
> *To:* ***@afmug.com <mailto:***@afmug.com>
> *Subject:* Re: [AFMUG] EPMP Minimum System Specs <rant>
> less than 5 seconds on my iPhone as well.
> On Tue, Jan 20, 2015 at 11:43 AM, Josh Luthman
> <***@imaginenetworksllc.com
> <mailto:***@imaginenetworksllc.com>> wrote:
>
> I doubt that 4 of my high end machines all have the
> same problem. The interface takes too long when it
> first shows up. Maybe it's because it gets all the
> information at once, maybe not. Don't care. I want
> it to be more smooth and faster.
> My phone (Droid Maxx) is one of the most recent models
> for Android. The interface is terribly slow and
> clumsy on that.
> Well if you feel a poor technology choice was the
> cause, that's fine, but it's just flat out wrong. I
> don't want to carry a big fat i7 laptop up the tower
> when I could just simply use my phone. It works with
> Ubiquiti, FSK Cambium, Tranzeo, Trango, Mikrotik, etc
> it should only make sense the one product with a
> clumsy interface needs fixed instead of changing my
> devices that work with the competitors products (as
> well as different products under their portfolio).
>
> Josh Luthman
> Office: 937-552-2340 <tel:[phone]>
> Direct: 937-552-2343 <tel:[phone]>
> 1100 Wayne St
> Suite 1337
> Troy, OH 45373
>
> On Tue, Jan 20, 2015 at 1:36 PM, Sean Heskett
> <***@zirkel.us <mailto:***@zirkel.us>> wrote:
>
> i'm just stating that on all of our computers i've
> never seen the ePMP page load slowly.
> maybe it's a computer problem and not a device
> problem, just trying to bring valid input to the
> discussion.
> On Tue, Jan 20, 2015 at 11:34 AM, Josh Luthman
> <***@imaginenetworksllc.com
> <mailto:***@imaginenetworksllc.com>> wrote:
>
> Why are you/others arguing that the speed is
> just fine? This doesn't even make sense.
> There are people with slower laptops that work
> with other modern devices and epmp is the only
> interface that loads slow. There's no point
> in arguing peoples valid complaints. Are you
> trying to direct the engineers attention to
> something else?
>
> Josh Luthman
> Office: 937-552-2340 <tel:[phone]>
> Direct: 937-552-2343 <tel:[phone]>
> 1100 Wayne St
> Suite 1337
> Troy, OH 45373
>
> On Tue, Jan 20, 2015 at 1:30 PM, Mike Hammett
> <***@ics-il.net <mailto:***@ics-il.net>>
> wrote:
>
> Three, maybe four seconds to load the
> initial screen and then two maybe three
> seconds to login. As I doubt a screen
> capture will work when I'm RDPed in, I'll
> record the entire login process when I get
> home and post it up on YouTube.
>
>
>
> -----
> Mike Hammett
> Intelligent Computing Solutions
> http://www.ics-il.com
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
> *From: *"Josh Luthman"
> <***@imaginenetworksllc.com
> <mailto:***@imaginenetworksllc.com>>
> *To: ****@afmug.com <mailto:***@afmug.com>
> *Sent: *Tuesday, January 20, 2015 12:26:09 PM
> *Subject: *Re: [AFMUG] EPMP Minimum System
> Specs <rant>
>
> Login takes forever. The first like 10-15
> seconds just load and load and load. Once
> you're in, it's acceptable in terms of
> page rendering.
> Josh Luthman
> Office: 937-552-2340 <tel:[phone]>
> Direct: 937-552-2343 <tel:[phone]>
> 1100 Wayne St
> Suite 1337
> Troy, OH 45373
> On Tue, Jan 20, 2015 at 1:22 PM, Sean
> Heskett <***@zirkel.us
> <mailto:***@zirkel.us>> wrote:
>
> we use macbook pro's and the ePMP GUI
> has never been slow for us. It was
> UGLY, but they fixed that with version
> 2.0 haha.
> not sure why everyone says it's slow
> tho because we've never seen it.
> 2 cents
> -sean
> On Tue, Jan 20, 2015 at 9:57 AM, Nate
> Burke <***@blastcomm.com
> <mailto:***@blastcomm.com>> wrote:
>
> Ok, Cambium, this is a little
> sad. My Field Laptop, a Lenovo
> S10-3t, Atom Processor with
> Windows 8.1 cannot load the EPMP
> WEB Pages in a timely manner.
> We're talking 40-60 seconds for
> initial load, and 20-30 seconds
> per screen refresh/menu change.
> Since I'm going to have to go to
> the boss, and tell him that I need
> a new laptop to do any field
> troubleshooting for these new
> radios, what are the minimum
> system specs for a machine to view
> the EPMP Screens? Unless Cambium
> is going to get their Web
> interface under control as of
> Yesterday.
>
> They still swear that the GUI was
> all developed in house and not
> purchased (something I still can't
> believe). I'd like to know who
> the engineers/managers are who
> signed off on that design. I can
> only imaging that there was a
> group of guys sitting around the
> conference table, watching the
> presentation on the GUI on the
> projector up front, all nodding
> their heads in agreement, "I think
> this is a wonderful layout, the
> field tech's won't mind waiting a
> couple extra minutes for the pages
> to load so they can look this
> pretty!!"
>
> I think that Cambium should step
> up and get engineers from ALL
> aspects of product development out
> into the field. 40 seconds
> waiting for the page to load is
> fine when you're sitting in the
> office, but not when you have the
> laptop balanced on a stack of
> firewood in the freezing rain
> trying to get to the monitoring
> page to see why a radio isn't
> linking up. I think that every
> WISP on this list would be more
> than happy to host an engineer for
> a day. Heck, even if they go into
> the parking lot and assemble it on
> the tailgate of someone's Pickup,
> they'll get some idea of what we
> experience.
>
> I have a feeling that if all steps
> of the Dev process took a week in
> the field, We'd have a radio that
> had a GUI that responded instantly
> on any device, and radios that
> assembled and mounted (and
> unmounted) with 1 gloved hand.
>
> </rant>
> Nate
>
>
>
>

[Josh Luthman]

Galaxy S4 First released 26 April 2013; 20 months ago

Isn't this right around the ePMP development time? Granted the phone is "a
whole generation" back but there's no excuse for something of that age to
have problems on a radio management page.


Josh Luthman
Office: 937-552-2340
Direct: 937-552-2343
1100 Wayne St
Suite 1337
Troy, OH 45373

On Tue, Jan 20, 2015 at 2:11 PM, Mathew Howard <***@gmail.com> wrote:

> okay... I just timed it, on my phone (Galaxy S4) it takes about 25 seconds
> to get to the login... to actually get logged in and the first page loaded
> took me a full minute - for comparison, I can log into a UBNT radio and get
> the main page loaded in under 15 seconds.
>
> It takes 4-5 seconds to get to the login on my desktop.
>
> On Tue, Jan 20, 2015 at 12:53 PM, Adam Moffett <***@gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
>> I don't know what makes the GUI slow for you or anybody else....I have
>> literally never seen it load slowly. Even on a crummy old Atom. Even on a
>> cell phone.
>>
>> I don't know what to say.
>>
>>
>> I doubt that 4 of my high end machines all have the same problem. The
>> interface takes too long when it first shows up. Maybe it's because it
>> gets all the information at once, maybe not. Don't care. I want it to be
>> more smooth and faster.
>>
>> My phone (Droid Maxx) is one of the most recent models for Android.
>> The interface is terribly slow and clumsy on that.
>>
>> Well if you feel a poor technology choice was the cause, that's fine,
>> but it's just flat out wrong. I don't want to carry a big fat i7 laptop up
>> the tower when I could just simply use my phone. It works with Ubiquiti,
>> FSK Cambium, Tranzeo, Trango, Mikrotik, etc it should only make sense the
>> one product with a clumsy interface needs fixed instead of changing my
>> devices that work with the competitors products (as well as different
>> products under their portfolio).
>>
>>
>> Josh Luthman
>> Office: 937-552-2340
>> Direct: 937-552-2343
>> 1100 Wayne St
>> Suite 1337
>> Troy, OH 45373
>>
>> On Tue, Jan 20, 2015 at 1:36 PM, Sean Heskett <***@zirkel.us> wrote:
>>
>>> i'm just stating that on all of our computers i've never seen the ePMP
>>> page load slowly.
>>>
>>> maybe it's a computer problem and not a device problem, just trying to
>>> bring valid input to the discussion.
>>>
>>> On Tue, Jan 20, 2015 at 11:34 AM, Josh Luthman <
>>> ***@imaginenetworksllc.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>> Why are you/others arguing that the speed is just fine? This doesn't
>>>> even make sense. There are people with slower laptops that work with other
>>>> modern devices and epmp is the only interface that loads slow. There's no
>>>> point in arguing peoples valid complaints. Are you trying to direct the
>>>> engineers attention to something else?
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Josh Luthman
>>>> Office: 937-552-2340
>>>> Direct: 937-552-2343
>>>> 1100 Wayne St
>>>> Suite 1337
>>>> Troy, OH 45373
>>>>
>>>> On Tue, Jan 20, 2015 at 1:30 PM, Mike Hammett <***@ics-il.net>
>>>> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> Three, maybe four seconds to load the initial screen and then two
>>>>> maybe three seconds to login. As I doubt a screen capture will work when
>>>>> I'm RDPed in, I'll record the entire login process when I get home and post
>>>>> it up on YouTube.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> -----
>>>>> Mike Hammett
>>>>> Intelligent Computing Solutions
>>>>> http://www.ics-il.com
>>>>>
>>>>> ------------------------------
>>>>> *From: *"Josh Luthman" <***@imaginenetworksllc.com>
>>>>> *To: ****@afmug.com
>>>>> *Sent: *Tuesday, January 20, 2015 12:26:09 PM
>>>>> *Subject: *Re: [AFMUG] EPMP Minimum System Specs <rant>
>>>>>
>>>>> Login takes forever. The first like 10-15 seconds just load and
>>>>> load and load. Once you're in, it's acceptable in terms of page rendering.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Josh Luthman
>>>>> Office: 937-552-2340
>>>>> Direct: 937-552-2343
>>>>> 1100 Wayne St
>>>>> Suite 1337
>>>>> Troy, OH 45373
>>>>>
>>>>> On Tue, Jan 20, 2015 at 1:22 PM, Sean Heskett <***@zirkel.us> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> we use macbook pro's and the ePMP GUI has never been slow for us. It
>>>>>> was UGLY, but they fixed that with version 2.0 haha.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> not sure why everyone says it's slow tho because we've never seen
>>>>>> it.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> 2 cents
>>>>>>
>>>>>> -sean
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> On Tue, Jan 20, 2015 at 9:57 AM, Nate Burke <***@blastcomm.com>
>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Ok, Cambium, this is a little sad. My Field Laptop, a Lenovo
>>>>>>> S10-3t, Atom Processor with Windows 8.1 cannot load the EPMP WEB Pages in a
>>>>>>> timely manner. We're talking 40-60 seconds for initial load, and 20-30
>>>>>>> seconds per screen refresh/menu change. Since I'm going to have to go to
>>>>>>> the boss, and tell him that I need a new laptop to do any field
>>>>>>> troubleshooting for these new radios, what are the minimum system specs for
>>>>>>> a machine to view the EPMP Screens? Unless Cambium is going to get their
>>>>>>> Web interface under control as of Yesterday.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> They still swear that the GUI was all developed in house and not
>>>>>>> purchased (something I still can't believe). I'd like to know who the
>>>>>>> engineers/managers are who signed off on that design. I can only imaging
>>>>>>> that there was a group of guys sitting around the conference table,
>>>>>>> watching the presentation on the GUI on the projector up front, all nodding
>>>>>>> their heads in agreement, "I think this is a wonderful layout, the field
>>>>>>> tech's won't mind waiting a couple extra minutes for the pages to load so
>>>>>>> they can look this pretty!!"
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> I think that Cambium should step up and get engineers from ALL
>>>>>>> aspects of product development out into the field. 40 seconds waiting for
>>>>>>> the page to load is fine when you're sitting in the office, but not when
>>>>>>> you have the laptop balanced on a stack of firewood in the freezing rain
>>>>>>> trying to get to the monitoring page to see why a radio isn't linking up.
>>>>>>> I think that every WISP on this list would be more than happy to host an
>>>>>>> engineer for a day. Heck, even if they go into the parking lot and assemble
>>>>>>> it on the tailgate of someone's Pickup, they'll get some idea of what we
>>>>>>> experience.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> I have a feeling that if all steps of the Dev process took a week in
>>>>>>> the field, We'd have a radio that had a GUI that responded instantly on any
>>>>>>> device, and radios that assembled and mounted (and unmounted) with 1 gloved
>>>>>>> hand.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> </rant>
>>>>>>> Nate
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>

[Josh Luthman]

Everyone who isn't no one =P


Josh Luthman
Office: 937-552-2340
Direct: 937-552-2343
1100 Wayne St
Suite 1337
Troy, OH 45373

On Tue, Jan 20, 2015 at 2:11 PM, Adam Moffett <***@gmail.com> wrote:

>
> Who's everyone?
>
> Everyone uses Chrome nowadays.
>
>
> Josh Luthman
> Office: 937-552-2340
> Direct: 937-552-2343
> 1100 Wayne St
> Suite 1337
> Troy, OH 45373
>
> On Tue, Jan 20, 2015 at 2:05 PM, Jeremy <***@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> Example: Powercode mostly loads and then seems to hang for quite awhile
>> on Firefox, but loads fast on Chrome.
>>
>> On Tue, Jan 20, 2015 at 12:04 PM, Jeremy <***@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>> I've never used EPMP but I have noticed some interfaces lag on one
>>> browser and not on another. What browser is everyone using when they see
>>> lag? What browser are those of you who aren't seeing lag using?
>>>
>>> On Tue, Jan 20, 2015 at 11:59 AM, Ken Hohhof <***@kwisp.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>> Good job of merging 2 threads! You win one free Internet!
>>>>
>>>> *From:* Chuck McCown <***@wbmfg.com>
>>>> *Sent:* Tuesday, January 20, 2015 12:48 PM
>>>> *To:* ***@afmug.com
>>>> *Subject:* Re: [AFMUG] EPMP Minimum System Specs <rant>
>>>>
>>>> Yeah but you bought the advantage GUI license, right?
>>>>
>>>> *From:* Sean Heskett <***@zirkel.us>
>>>> *Sent:* Tuesday, January 20, 2015 11:45 AM
>>>> *To:* ***@afmug.com
>>>> *Subject:* Re: [AFMUG] EPMP Minimum System Specs <rant>
>>>>
>>>> less than 5 seconds on my iPhone as well.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> On Tue, Jan 20, 2015 at 11:43 AM, Josh Luthman <
>>>> ***@imaginenetworksllc.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> I doubt that 4 of my high end machines all have the same problem. The
>>>>> interface takes too long when it first shows up. Maybe it's because it
>>>>> gets all the information at once, maybe not. Don't care. I want it to be
>>>>> more smooth and faster.
>>>>>
>>>>> My phone (Droid Maxx) is one of the most recent models for Android.
>>>>> The interface is terribly slow and clumsy on that.
>>>>>
>>>>> Well if you feel a poor technology choice was the cause, that's fine,
>>>>> but it's just flat out wrong. I don't want to carry a big fat i7 laptop up
>>>>> the tower when I could just simply use my phone. It works with Ubiquiti,
>>>>> FSK Cambium, Tranzeo, Trango, Mikrotik, etc it should only make sense the
>>>>> one product with a clumsy interface needs fixed instead of changing my
>>>>> devices that work with the competitors products (as well as different
>>>>> products under their portfolio).
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Josh Luthman
>>>>> Office: 937-552-2340
>>>>> Direct: 937-552-2343
>>>>> 1100 Wayne St
>>>>> Suite 1337
>>>>> Troy, OH 45373
>>>>>
>>>>> On Tue, Jan 20, 2015 at 1:36 PM, Sean Heskett <***@zirkel.us>
>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> i'm just stating that on all of our computers i've never seen the
>>>>>> ePMP page load slowly.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> maybe it's a computer problem and not a device problem, just trying
>>>>>> to bring valid input to the discussion.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> On Tue, Jan 20, 2015 at 11:34 AM, Josh Luthman <
>>>>>> ***@imaginenetworksllc.com> wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Why are you/others arguing that the speed is just fine? This
>>>>>>> doesn't even make sense. There are people with slower laptops that work
>>>>>>> with other modern devices and epmp is the only interface that loads slow.
>>>>>>> There's no point in arguing peoples valid complaints. Are you trying to
>>>>>>> direct the engineers attention to something else?
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Josh Luthman
>>>>>>> Office: 937-552-2340
>>>>>>> Direct: 937-552-2343
>>>>>>> 1100 Wayne St
>>>>>>> Suite 1337
>>>>>>> Troy, OH 45373
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> On Tue, Jan 20, 2015 at 1:30 PM, Mike Hammett <***@ics-il.net>
>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Three, maybe four seconds to load the initial screen and then two
>>>>>>>> maybe three seconds to login. As I doubt a screen capture will work when
>>>>>>>> I'm RDPed in, I'll record the entire login process when I get home and post
>>>>>>>> it up on YouTube.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> -----
>>>>>>>> Mike Hammett
>>>>>>>> Intelligent Computing Solutions
>>>>>>>> http://www.ics-il.com
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> ------------------------------
>>>>>>>> *From: *"Josh Luthman" <***@imaginenetworksllc.com>
>>>>>>>> *To: ****@afmug.com
>>>>>>>> *Sent: *Tuesday, January 20, 2015 12:26:09 PM
>>>>>>>> *Subject: *Re: [AFMUG] EPMP Minimum System Specs <rant>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Login takes forever. The first like 10-15 seconds just load
>>>>>>>> and load and load. Once you're in, it's acceptable in terms of page
>>>>>>>> rendering.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Josh Luthman
>>>>>>>> Office: 937-552-2340
>>>>>>>> Direct: 937-552-2343
>>>>>>>> 1100 Wayne St
>>>>>>>> Suite 1337
>>>>>>>> Troy, OH 45373
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> On Tue, Jan 20, 2015 at 1:22 PM, Sean Heskett <***@zirkel.us>
>>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> we use macbook pro's and the ePMP GUI has never been slow for us.
>>>>>>>>> It was UGLY, but they fixed that with version 2.0 haha.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> not sure why everyone says it's slow tho because we've never seen
>>>>>>>>> it.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> 2 cents
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> -sean
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> On Tue, Jan 20, 2015 at 9:57 AM, Nate Burke <***@blastcomm.com>
>>>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Ok, Cambium, this is a little sad. My Field Laptop, a Lenovo
>>>>>>>>>> S10-3t, Atom Processor with Windows 8.1 cannot load the EPMP WEB Pages in a
>>>>>>>>>> timely manner. We're talking 40-60 seconds for initial load, and 20-30
>>>>>>>>>> seconds per screen refresh/menu change. Since I'm going to have to go to
>>>>>>>>>> the boss, and tell him that I need a new laptop to do any field
>>>>>>>>>> troubleshooting for these new radios, what are the minimum system specs for
>>>>>>>>>> a machine to view the EPMP Screens? Unless Cambium is going to get their
>>>>>>>>>> Web interface under control as of Yesterday.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> They still swear that the GUI was all developed in house and not
>>>>>>>>>> purchased (something I still can't believe). I'd like to know who the
>>>>>>>>>> engineers/managers are who signed off on that design. I can only imaging
>>>>>>>>>> that there was a group of guys sitting around the conference table,
>>>>>>>>>> watching the presentation on the GUI on the projector up front, all nodding
>>>>>>>>>> their heads in agreement, "I think this is a wonderful layout, the field
>>>>>>>>>> tech's won't mind waiting a couple extra minutes for the pages to load so
>>>>>>>>>> they can look this pretty!!"
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> I think that Cambium should step up and get engineers from ALL
>>>>>>>>>> aspects of product development out into the field. 40 seconds waiting for
>>>>>>>>>> the page to load is fine when you're sitting in the office, but not when
>>>>>>>>>> you have the laptop balanced on a stack of firewood in the freezing rain
>>>>>>>>>> trying to get to the monitoring page to see why a radio isn't linking up.
>>>>>>>>>> I think that every WISP on this list would be more than happy to host an
>>>>>>>>>> engineer for a day. Heck, even if they go into the parking lot and assemble
>>>>>>>>>> it on the tailgate of someone's Pickup, they'll get some idea of what we
>>>>>>>>>> experience.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> I have a feeling that if all steps of the Dev process took a week
>>>>>>>>>> in the field, We'd have a radio that had a GUI that responded instantly on
>>>>>>>>>> any device, and radios that assembled and mounted (and unmounted) with 1
>>>>>>>>>> gloved hand.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> </rant>
>>>>>>>>>> Nate
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
>
>

[Mathew Howard]

So the fact that I use Chrome means I'm not no one? Yay! ...I think.

On Tue, Jan 20, 2015 at 1:14 PM, Josh Luthman <***@imaginenetworksllc.com>
wrote:

> Everyone who isn't no one =P
>
>
> Josh Luthman
> Office: 937-552-2340
> Direct: 937-552-2343
> 1100 Wayne St
> Suite 1337
> Troy, OH 45373
>
> On Tue, Jan 20, 2015 at 2:11 PM, Adam Moffett <***@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>>
>> Who's everyone?
>>
>> Everyone uses Chrome nowadays.
>>
>>
>> Josh Luthman
>> Office: 937-552-2340
>> Direct: 937-552-2343
>> 1100 Wayne St
>> Suite 1337
>> Troy, OH 45373
>>
>> On Tue, Jan 20, 2015 at 2:05 PM, Jeremy <***@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>> Example: Powercode mostly loads and then seems to hang for quite awhile
>>> on Firefox, but loads fast on Chrome.
>>>
>>> On Tue, Jan 20, 2015 at 12:04 PM, Jeremy <***@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>> I've never used EPMP but I have noticed some interfaces lag on one
>>>> browser and not on another. What browser is everyone using when they see
>>>> lag? What browser are those of you who aren't seeing lag using?
>>>>
>>>> On Tue, Jan 20, 2015 at 11:59 AM, Ken Hohhof <***@kwisp.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> Good job of merging 2 threads! You win one free Internet!
>>>>>
>>>>> *From:* Chuck McCown <***@wbmfg.com>
>>>>> *Sent:* Tuesday, January 20, 2015 12:48 PM
>>>>> *To:* ***@afmug.com
>>>>> *Subject:* Re: [AFMUG] EPMP Minimum System Specs <rant>
>>>>>
>>>>> Yeah but you bought the advantage GUI license, right?
>>>>>
>>>>> *From:* Sean Heskett <***@zirkel.us>
>>>>> *Sent:* Tuesday, January 20, 2015 11:45 AM
>>>>> *To:* ***@afmug.com
>>>>> *Subject:* Re: [AFMUG] EPMP Minimum System Specs <rant>
>>>>>
>>>>> less than 5 seconds on my iPhone as well.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> On Tue, Jan 20, 2015 at 11:43 AM, Josh Luthman <
>>>>> ***@imaginenetworksllc.com> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> I doubt that 4 of my high end machines all have the same problem.
>>>>>> The interface takes too long when it first shows up. Maybe it's because it
>>>>>> gets all the information at once, maybe not. Don't care. I want it to be
>>>>>> more smooth and faster.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> My phone (Droid Maxx) is one of the most recent models for Android.
>>>>>> The interface is terribly slow and clumsy on that.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Well if you feel a poor technology choice was the cause, that's fine,
>>>>>> but it's just flat out wrong. I don't want to carry a big fat i7 laptop up
>>>>>> the tower when I could just simply use my phone. It works with Ubiquiti,
>>>>>> FSK Cambium, Tranzeo, Trango, Mikrotik, etc it should only make sense the
>>>>>> one product with a clumsy interface needs fixed instead of changing my
>>>>>> devices that work with the competitors products (as well as different
>>>>>> products under their portfolio).
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Josh Luthman
>>>>>> Office: 937-552-2340
>>>>>> Direct: 937-552-2343
>>>>>> 1100 Wayne St
>>>>>> Suite 1337
>>>>>> Troy, OH 45373
>>>>>>
>>>>>> On Tue, Jan 20, 2015 at 1:36 PM, Sean Heskett <***@zirkel.us>
>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> i'm just stating that on all of our computers i've never seen the
>>>>>>> ePMP page load slowly.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> maybe it's a computer problem and not a device problem, just trying
>>>>>>> to bring valid input to the discussion.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> On Tue, Jan 20, 2015 at 11:34 AM, Josh Luthman <
>>>>>>> ***@imaginenetworksllc.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Why are you/others arguing that the speed is just fine? This
>>>>>>>> doesn't even make sense. There are people with slower laptops that work
>>>>>>>> with other modern devices and epmp is the only interface that loads slow.
>>>>>>>> There's no point in arguing peoples valid complaints. Are you trying to
>>>>>>>> direct the engineers attention to something else?
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Josh Luthman
>>>>>>>> Office: 937-552-2340
>>>>>>>> Direct: 937-552-2343
>>>>>>>> 1100 Wayne St
>>>>>>>> Suite 1337
>>>>>>>> Troy, OH 45373
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> On Tue, Jan 20, 2015 at 1:30 PM, Mike Hammett <***@ics-il.net>
>>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Three, maybe four seconds to load the initial screen and then
>>>>>>>>> two maybe three seconds to login. As I doubt a screen capture will work
>>>>>>>>> when I'm RDPed in, I'll record the entire login process when I get home and
>>>>>>>>> post it up on YouTube.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> -----
>>>>>>>>> Mike Hammett
>>>>>>>>> Intelligent Computing Solutions
>>>>>>>>> http://www.ics-il.com
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> ------------------------------
>>>>>>>>> *From: *"Josh Luthman" <***@imaginenetworksllc.com>
>>>>>>>>> *To: ****@afmug.com
>>>>>>>>> *Sent: *Tuesday, January 20, 2015 12:26:09 PM
>>>>>>>>> *Subject: *Re: [AFMUG] EPMP Minimum System Specs <rant>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Login takes forever. The first like 10-15 seconds just load
>>>>>>>>> and load and load. Once you're in, it's acceptable in terms of page
>>>>>>>>> rendering.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Josh Luthman
>>>>>>>>> Office: 937-552-2340
>>>>>>>>> Direct: 937-552-2343
>>>>>>>>> 1100 Wayne St
>>>>>>>>> Suite 1337
>>>>>>>>> Troy, OH 45373
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> On Tue, Jan 20, 2015 at 1:22 PM, Sean Heskett <***@zirkel.us>
>>>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> we use macbook pro's and the ePMP GUI has never been slow for
>>>>>>>>>> us. It was UGLY, but they fixed that with version 2.0 haha.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> not sure why everyone says it's slow tho because we've never seen
>>>>>>>>>> it.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> 2 cents
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> -sean
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> On Tue, Jan 20, 2015 at 9:57 AM, Nate Burke <***@blastcomm.com>
>>>>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> Ok, Cambium, this is a little sad. My Field Laptop, a Lenovo
>>>>>>>>>>> S10-3t, Atom Processor with Windows 8.1 cannot load the EPMP WEB Pages in a
>>>>>>>>>>> timely manner. We're talking 40-60 seconds for initial load, and 20-30
>>>>>>>>>>> seconds per screen refresh/menu change. Since I'm going to have to go to
>>>>>>>>>>> the boss, and tell him that I need a new laptop to do any field
>>>>>>>>>>> troubleshooting for these new radios, what are the minimum system specs for
>>>>>>>>>>> a machine to view the EPMP Screens? Unless Cambium is going to get their
>>>>>>>>>>> Web interface under control as of Yesterday.
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> They still swear that the GUI was all developed in house and not
>>>>>>>>>>> purchased (something I still can't believe). I'd like to know who the
>>>>>>>>>>> engineers/managers are who signed off on that design. I can only imaging
>>>>>>>>>>> that there was a group of guys sitting around the conference table,
>>>>>>>>>>> watching the presentation on the GUI on the projector up front, all nodding
>>>>>>>>>>> their heads in agreement, "I think this is a wonderful layout, the field
>>>>>>>>>>> tech's won't mind waiting a couple extra minutes for the pages to load so
>>>>>>>>>>> they can look this pretty!!"
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> I think that Cambium should step up and get engineers from ALL
>>>>>>>>>>> aspects of product development out into the field. 40 seconds waiting for
>>>>>>>>>>> the page to load is fine when you're sitting in the office, but not when
>>>>>>>>>>> you have the laptop balanced on a stack of firewood in the freezing rain
>>>>>>>>>>> trying to get to the monitoring page to see why a radio isn't linking up.
>>>>>>>>>>> I think that every WISP on this list would be more than happy to host an
>>>>>>>>>>> engineer for a day. Heck, even if they go into the parking lot and assemble
>>>>>>>>>>> it on the tailgate of someone's Pickup, they'll get some idea of what we
>>>>>>>>>>> experience.
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> I have a feeling that if all steps of the Dev process took a
>>>>>>>>>>> week in the field, We'd have a radio that had a GUI that responded
>>>>>>>>>>> instantly on any device, and radios that assembled and mounted (and
>>>>>>>>>>> unmounted) with 1 gloved hand.
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> </rant>
>>>>>>>>>>> Nate
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>

[Bill Prince]

What version of Android? Jelly Bean, Kit Kat, Lolly Pop?

bp
<part15sbs{at}gmail{dot}com>

On 1/20/2015 11:13 AM, Josh Luthman wrote:
> Galaxy S4 First released26 April 2013; 20 months ago
>
> Isn't this right around the ePMP development time? Granted the phone
> is "a whole generation" back but there's no excuse for something of
> that age to have problems on a radio management page.
>
>
> Josh Luthman
> Office: 937-552-2340
> Direct: 937-552-2343
> 1100 Wayne St
> Suite 1337
> Troy, OH 45373
>
> On Tue, Jan 20, 2015 at 2:11 PM, Mathew Howard <***@gmail.com
> <mailto:***@gmail.com>> wrote:
>
> okay... I just timed it, on my phone (Galaxy S4) it takes about 25
> seconds to get to the login... to actually get logged in and the
> first page loaded took me a full minute - for comparison, I can
> log into a UBNT radio and get the main page loaded in under 15
> seconds.
>
> It takes 4-5 seconds to get to the login on my desktop.
>
> On Tue, Jan 20, 2015 at 12:53 PM, Adam Moffett
> <***@gmail.com <mailto:***@gmail.com>> wrote:
>
> I don't know what makes the GUI slow for you or anybody
> else....I have literally never seen it load slowly. Even on a
> crummy old Atom. Even on a cell phone.
>
> I don't know what to say.
>
>
>> I doubt that 4 of my high end machines all have the same
>> problem. The interface takes too long when it first shows
>> up. Maybe it's because it gets all the information at once,
>> maybe not. Don't care. I want it to be more smooth and faster.
>>
>> My phone (Droid Maxx) is one of the most recent models for
>> Android. The interface is terribly slow and clumsy on that.
>>
>> Well if you feel a poor technology choice was the cause,
>> that's fine, but it's just flat out wrong. I don't want to
>> carry a big fat i7 laptop up the tower when I could just
>> simply use my phone. It works with Ubiquiti, FSK Cambium,
>> Tranzeo, Trango, Mikrotik, etc it should only make sense the
>> one product with a clumsy interface needs fixed instead of
>> changing my devices that work with the competitors products
>> (as well as different products under their portfolio).
>>
>>
>> Josh Luthman
>> Office: 937-552-2340 <tel:[phone]>
>> Direct: 937-552-2343 <tel:[phone]>
>> 1100 Wayne St
>> Suite 1337
>> Troy, OH 45373
>>
>> On Tue, Jan 20, 2015 at 1:36 PM, Sean Heskett
>> <***@zirkel.us <mailto:***@zirkel.us>> wrote:
>>
>> i'm just stating that on all of our computers i've never
>> seen the ePMP page load slowly.
>>
>> maybe it's a computer problem and not a device problem,
>> just trying to bring valid input to the discussion.
>>
>> On Tue, Jan 20, 2015 at 11:34 AM, Josh Luthman
>> <***@imaginenetworksllc.com
>> <mailto:***@imaginenetworksllc.com>> wrote:
>>
>> Why are you/others arguing that the speed is just
>> fine? This doesn't even make sense. There are people
>> with slower laptops that work with other modern
>> devices and epmp is the only interface that loads
>> slow. There's no point in arguing peoples valid
>> complaints. Are you trying to direct the engineers
>> attention to something else?
>>
>>
>> Josh Luthman
>> Office: 937-552-2340 <tel:[phone]>
>> Direct: 937-552-2343 <tel:[phone]>
>> 1100 Wayne St
>> Suite 1337
>> Troy, OH 45373
>>
>> On Tue, Jan 20, 2015 at 1:30 PM, Mike Hammett
>> <***@ics-il.net <mailto:***@ics-il.net>> wrote:
>>
>> Three, maybe four seconds to load the initial
>> screen and then two maybe three seconds to login.
>> As I doubt a screen capture will work when I'm
>> RDPed in, I'll record the entire login process
>> when I get home and post it up on YouTube.
>>
>>
>>
>> -----
>> Mike Hammett
>> Intelligent Computing Solutions
>> http://www.ics-il.com
>>
>> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>> *From: *"Josh Luthman"
>> <***@imaginenetworksllc.com
>> <mailto:***@imaginenetworksllc.com>>
>> *To: ****@afmug.com <mailto:***@afmug.com>
>> *Sent: *Tuesday, January 20, 2015 12:26:09 PM
>> *Subject: *Re: [AFMUG] EPMP Minimum System Specs
>> <rant>
>>
>> Login takes forever. The first like 10-15
>> seconds just load and load and load. Once you're
>> in, it's acceptable in terms of page rendering.
>>
>>
>> Josh Luthman
>> Office: 937-552-2340 <tel:[phone]>
>> Direct: 937-552-2343 <tel:[phone]>
>> 1100 Wayne St
>> Suite 1337
>> Troy, OH 45373
>>
>> On Tue, Jan 20, 2015 at 1:22 PM, Sean Heskett
>> <***@zirkel.us <mailto:***@zirkel.us>> wrote:
>>
>> we use macbook pro's and the ePMP GUI has
>> never been slow for us. It was UGLY, but they
>> fixed that with version 2.0 haha.
>>
>> not sure why everyone says it's slow tho
>> because we've never seen it.
>>
>> 2 cents
>>
>> -sean
>>
>>
>>
>> On Tue, Jan 20, 2015 at 9:57 AM, Nate Burke
>> <***@blastcomm.com
>> <mailto:***@blastcomm.com>> wrote:
>>
>> Ok, Cambium, this is a little sad. My
>> Field Laptop, a Lenovo S10-3t, Atom
>> Processor with Windows 8.1 cannot load
>> the EPMP WEB Pages in a timely manner.
>> We're talking 40-60 seconds for initial
>> load, and 20-30 seconds per screen
>> refresh/menu change. Since I'm going to
>> have to go to the boss, and tell him that
>> I need a new laptop to do any field
>> troubleshooting for these new radios,
>> what are the minimum system specs for a
>> machine to view the EPMP Screens? Unless
>> Cambium is going to get their Web
>> interface under control as of Yesterday.
>>
>> They still swear that the GUI was all
>> developed in house and not purchased
>> (something I still can't believe). I'd
>> like to know who the engineers/managers
>> are who signed off on that design. I can
>> only imaging that there was a group of
>> guys sitting around the conference table,
>> watching the presentation on the GUI on
>> the projector up front, all nodding their
>> heads in agreement, "I think this is a
>> wonderful layout, the field tech's won't
>> mind waiting a couple extra minutes for
>> the pages to load so they can look this
>> pretty!!"
>>
>> I think that Cambium should step up and
>> get engineers from ALL aspects of product
>> development out into the field. 40
>> seconds waiting for the page to load is
>> fine when you're sitting in the office,
>> but not when you have the laptop balanced
>> on a stack of firewood in the freezing
>> rain trying to get to the monitoring page
>> to see why a radio isn't linking up. I
>> think that every WISP on this list would
>> be more than happy to host an engineer
>> for a day. Heck, even if they go into the
>> parking lot and assemble it on the
>> tailgate of someone's Pickup, they'll get
>> some idea of what we experience.
>>
>> I have a feeling that if all steps of the
>> Dev process took a week in the field,
>> We'd have a radio that had a GUI that
>> responded instantly on any device, and
>> radios that assembled and mounted (and
>> unmounted) with 1 gloved hand.
>>
>> </rant>
>> Nate
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>
>
>

[Josh Luthman]

Droid Maxx 4.4.4 Kit Kat here


Josh Luthman
Office: 937-552-2340
Direct: 937-552-2343
1100 Wayne St
Suite 1337
Troy, OH 45373

On Tue, Jan 20, 2015 at 2:20 PM, Bill Prince <***@gmail.com> wrote:

> What version of Android? Jelly Bean, Kit Kat, Lolly Pop?
>
> bp
> <part15sbs{at}gmail{dot}com>
>
>
> On 1/20/2015 11:13 AM, Josh Luthman wrote:
>
> Galaxy S4 First released 26 April 2013; 20 months ago
>
> Isn't this right around the ePMP development time? Granted the phone is
> "a whole generation" back but there's no excuse for something of that age
> to have problems on a radio management page.
>
>
> Josh Luthman
> Office: 937-552-2340
> Direct: 937-552-2343
> 1100 Wayne St
> Suite 1337
> Troy, OH 45373
>
> On Tue, Jan 20, 2015 at 2:11 PM, Mathew Howard <***@gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
>> okay... I just timed it, on my phone (Galaxy S4) it takes about 25
>> seconds to get to the login... to actually get logged in and the first page
>> loaded took me a full minute - for comparison, I can log into a UBNT radio
>> and get the main page loaded in under 15 seconds.
>>
>> It takes 4-5 seconds to get to the login on my desktop.
>>
>> On Tue, Jan 20, 2015 at 12:53 PM, Adam Moffett <***@gmail.com>
>> wrote:
>>
>>> I don't know what makes the GUI slow for you or anybody else....I have
>>> literally never seen it load slowly. Even on a crummy old Atom. Even on a
>>> cell phone.
>>>
>>> I don't know what to say.
>>>
>>>
>>> I doubt that 4 of my high end machines all have the same problem. The
>>> interface takes too long when it first shows up. Maybe it's because it
>>> gets all the information at once, maybe not. Don't care. I want it to be
>>> more smooth and faster.
>>>
>>> My phone (Droid Maxx) is one of the most recent models for Android.
>>> The interface is terribly slow and clumsy on that.
>>>
>>> Well if you feel a poor technology choice was the cause, that's fine,
>>> but it's just flat out wrong. I don't want to carry a big fat i7 laptop up
>>> the tower when I could just simply use my phone. It works with Ubiquiti,
>>> FSK Cambium, Tranzeo, Trango, Mikrotik, etc it should only make sense the
>>> one product with a clumsy interface needs fixed instead of changing my
>>> devices that work with the competitors products (as well as different
>>> products under their portfolio).
>>>
>>>
>>> Josh Luthman
>>> Office: 937-552-2340
>>> Direct: 937-552-2343
>>> 1100 Wayne St
>>> Suite 1337
>>> Troy, OH 45373
>>>
>>> On Tue, Jan 20, 2015 at 1:36 PM, Sean Heskett <***@zirkel.us> wrote:
>>>
>>>> i'm just stating that on all of our computers i've never seen the ePMP
>>>> page load slowly.
>>>>
>>>> maybe it's a computer problem and not a device problem, just trying
>>>> to bring valid input to the discussion.
>>>>
>>>> On Tue, Jan 20, 2015 at 11:34 AM, Josh Luthman <
>>>> ***@imaginenetworksllc.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> Why are you/others arguing that the speed is just fine? This doesn't
>>>>> even make sense. There are people with slower laptops that work with other
>>>>> modern devices and epmp is the only interface that loads slow. There's no
>>>>> point in arguing peoples valid complaints. Are you trying to direct the
>>>>> engineers attention to something else?
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Josh Luthman
>>>>> Office: 937-552-2340
>>>>> Direct: 937-552-2343
>>>>> 1100 Wayne St
>>>>> Suite 1337
>>>>> Troy, OH 45373
>>>>>
>>>>> On Tue, Jan 20, 2015 at 1:30 PM, Mike Hammett <***@ics-il.net>
>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> Three, maybe four seconds to load the initial screen and then two
>>>>>> maybe three seconds to login. As I doubt a screen capture will work when
>>>>>> I'm RDPed in, I'll record the entire login process when I get home and post
>>>>>> it up on YouTube.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> -----
>>>>>> Mike Hammett
>>>>>> Intelligent Computing Solutions
>>>>>> http://www.ics-il.com
>>>>>>
>>>>>> ------------------------------
>>>>>> *From: *"Josh Luthman" <***@imaginenetworksllc.com>
>>>>>> *To: ****@afmug.com
>>>>>> *Sent: *Tuesday, January 20, 2015 12:26:09 PM
>>>>>> *Subject: *Re: [AFMUG] EPMP Minimum System Specs <rant>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Login takes forever. The first like 10-15 seconds just load and
>>>>>> load and load. Once you're in, it's acceptable in terms of page rendering.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Josh Luthman
>>>>>> Office: 937-552-2340
>>>>>> Direct: 937-552-2343
>>>>>> 1100 Wayne St
>>>>>> Suite 1337
>>>>>> Troy, OH 45373
>>>>>>
>>>>>> On Tue, Jan 20, 2015 at 1:22 PM, Sean Heskett <***@zirkel.us>
>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> we use macbook pro's and the ePMP GUI has never been slow for us.
>>>>>>> It was UGLY, but they fixed that with version 2.0 haha.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> not sure why everyone says it's slow tho because we've never seen
>>>>>>> it.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> 2 cents
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> -sean
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> On Tue, Jan 20, 2015 at 9:57 AM, Nate Burke <***@blastcomm.com>
>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Ok, Cambium, this is a little sad. My Field Laptop, a Lenovo
>>>>>>>> S10-3t, Atom Processor with Windows 8.1 cannot load the EPMP WEB Pages in a
>>>>>>>> timely manner. We're talking 40-60 seconds for initial load, and 20-30
>>>>>>>> seconds per screen refresh/menu change. Since I'm going to have to go to
>>>>>>>> the boss, and tell him that I need a new laptop to do any field
>>>>>>>> troubleshooting for these new radios, what are the minimum system specs for
>>>>>>>> a machine to view the EPMP Screens? Unless Cambium is going to get their
>>>>>>>> Web interface under control as of Yesterday.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> They still swear that the GUI was all developed in house and not
>>>>>>>> purchased (something I still can't believe). I'd like to know who the
>>>>>>>> engineers/managers are who signed off on that design. I can only imaging
>>>>>>>> that there was a group of guys sitting around the conference table,
>>>>>>>> watching the presentation on the GUI on the projector up front, all nodding
>>>>>>>> their heads in agreement, "I think this is a wonderful layout, the field
>>>>>>>> tech's won't mind waiting a couple extra minutes for the pages to load so
>>>>>>>> they can look this pretty!!"
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> I think that Cambium should step up and get engineers from ALL
>>>>>>>> aspects of product development out into the field. 40 seconds waiting for
>>>>>>>> the page to load is fine when you're sitting in the office, but not when
>>>>>>>> you have the laptop balanced on a stack of firewood in the freezing rain
>>>>>>>> trying to get to the monitoring page to see why a radio isn't linking up.
>>>>>>>> I think that every WISP on this list would be more than happy to host an
>>>>>>>> engineer for a day. Heck, even if they go into the parking lot and assemble
>>>>>>>> it on the tailgate of someone's Pickup, they'll get some idea of what we
>>>>>>>> experience.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> I have a feeling that if all steps of the Dev process took a week
>>>>>>>> in the field, We'd have a radio that had a GUI that responded instantly on
>>>>>>>> any device, and radios that assembled and mounted (and unmounted) with 1
>>>>>>>> gloved hand.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> </rant>
>>>>>>>> Nate
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
>
>

[Mathew Howard]

Kitkat - 4.4.2

I should mention that part of that time was waiting for the multiple drop
downs to open to actually get to the login.

On Tue, Jan 20, 2015 at 1:20 PM, Bill Prince <***@gmail.com> wrote:

> What version of Android? Jelly Bean, Kit Kat, Lolly Pop?
>
> bp
> <part15sbs{at}gmail{dot}com>
>
>
> On 1/20/2015 11:13 AM, Josh Luthman wrote:
>
> Galaxy S4 First released 26 April 2013; 20 months ago
>
> Isn't this right around the ePMP development time? Granted the phone is
> "a whole generation" back but there's no excuse for something of that age
> to have problems on a radio management page.
>
>
> Josh Luthman
> Office: 937-552-2340
> Direct: 937-552-2343
> 1100 Wayne St
> Suite 1337
> Troy, OH 45373
>
> On Tue, Jan 20, 2015 at 2:11 PM, Mathew Howard <***@gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
>> okay... I just timed it, on my phone (Galaxy S4) it takes about 25
>> seconds to get to the login... to actually get logged in and the first page
>> loaded took me a full minute - for comparison, I can log into a UBNT radio
>> and get the main page loaded in under 15 seconds.
>>
>> It takes 4-5 seconds to get to the login on my desktop.
>>
>> On Tue, Jan 20, 2015 at 12:53 PM, Adam Moffett <***@gmail.com>
>> wrote:
>>
>>> I don't know what makes the GUI slow for you or anybody else....I have
>>> literally never seen it load slowly. Even on a crummy old Atom. Even on a
>>> cell phone.
>>>
>>> I don't know what to say.
>>>
>>>
>>> I doubt that 4 of my high end machines all have the same problem. The
>>> interface takes too long when it first shows up. Maybe it's because it
>>> gets all the information at once, maybe not. Don't care. I want it to be
>>> more smooth and faster.
>>>
>>> My phone (Droid Maxx) is one of the most recent models for Android.
>>> The interface is terribly slow and clumsy on that.
>>>
>>> Well if you feel a poor technology choice was the cause, that's fine,
>>> but it's just flat out wrong. I don't want to carry a big fat i7 laptop up
>>> the tower when I could just simply use my phone. It works with Ubiquiti,
>>> FSK Cambium, Tranzeo, Trango, Mikrotik, etc it should only make sense the
>>> one product with a clumsy interface needs fixed instead of changing my
>>> devices that work with the competitors products (as well as different
>>> products under their portfolio).
>>>
>>>
>>> Josh Luthman
>>> Office: 937-552-2340
>>> Direct: 937-552-2343
>>> 1100 Wayne St
>>> Suite 1337
>>> Troy, OH 45373
>>>
>>> On Tue, Jan 20, 2015 at 1:36 PM, Sean Heskett <***@zirkel.us> wrote:
>>>
>>>> i'm just stating that on all of our computers i've never seen the ePMP
>>>> page load slowly.
>>>>
>>>> maybe it's a computer problem and not a device problem, just trying
>>>> to bring valid input to the discussion.
>>>>
>>>> On Tue, Jan 20, 2015 at 11:34 AM, Josh Luthman <
>>>> ***@imaginenetworksllc.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> Why are you/others arguing that the speed is just fine? This doesn't
>>>>> even make sense. There are people with slower laptops that work with other
>>>>> modern devices and epmp is the only interface that loads slow. There's no
>>>>> point in arguing peoples valid complaints. Are you trying to direct the
>>>>> engineers attention to something else?
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Josh Luthman
>>>>> Office: 937-552-2340
>>>>> Direct: 937-552-2343
>>>>> 1100 Wayne St
>>>>> Suite 1337
>>>>> Troy, OH 45373
>>>>>
>>>>> On Tue, Jan 20, 2015 at 1:30 PM, Mike Hammett <***@ics-il.net>
>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> Three, maybe four seconds to load the initial screen and then two
>>>>>> maybe three seconds to login. As I doubt a screen capture will work when
>>>>>> I'm RDPed in, I'll record the entire login process when I get home and post
>>>>>> it up on YouTube.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> -----
>>>>>> Mike Hammett
>>>>>> Intelligent Computing Solutions
>>>>>> http://www.ics-il.com
>>>>>>
>>>>>> ------------------------------
>>>>>> *From: *"Josh Luthman" <***@imaginenetworksllc.com>
>>>>>> *To: ****@afmug.com
>>>>>> *Sent: *Tuesday, January 20, 2015 12:26:09 PM
>>>>>> *Subject: *Re: [AFMUG] EPMP Minimum System Specs <rant>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Login takes forever. The first like 10-15 seconds just load and
>>>>>> load and load. Once you're in, it's acceptable in terms of page rendering.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Josh Luthman
>>>>>> Office: 937-552-2340
>>>>>> Direct: 937-552-2343
>>>>>> 1100 Wayne St
>>>>>> Suite 1337
>>>>>> Troy, OH 45373
>>>>>>
>>>>>> On Tue, Jan 20, 2015 at 1:22 PM, Sean Heskett <***@zirkel.us>
>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> we use macbook pro's and the ePMP GUI has never been slow for us.
>>>>>>> It was UGLY, but they fixed that with version 2.0 haha.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> not sure why everyone says it's slow tho because we've never seen
>>>>>>> it.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> 2 cents
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> -sean
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> On Tue, Jan 20, 2015 at 9:57 AM, Nate Burke <***@blastcomm.com>
>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Ok, Cambium, this is a little sad. My Field Laptop, a Lenovo
>>>>>>>> S10-3t, Atom Processor with Windows 8.1 cannot load the EPMP WEB Pages in a
>>>>>>>> timely manner. We're talking 40-60 seconds for initial load, and 20-30
>>>>>>>> seconds per screen refresh/menu change. Since I'm going to have to go to
>>>>>>>> the boss, and tell him that I need a new laptop to do any field
>>>>>>>> troubleshooting for these new radios, what are the minimum system specs for
>>>>>>>> a machine to view the EPMP Screens? Unless Cambium is going to get their
>>>>>>>> Web interface under control as of Yesterday.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> They still swear that the GUI was all developed in house and not
>>>>>>>> purchased (something I still can't believe). I'd like to know who the
>>>>>>>> engineers/managers are who signed off on that design. I can only imaging
>>>>>>>> that there was a group of guys sitting around the conference table,
>>>>>>>> watching the presentation on the GUI on the projector up front, all nodding
>>>>>>>> their heads in agreement, "I think this is a wonderful layout, the field
>>>>>>>> tech's won't mind waiting a couple extra minutes for the pages to load so
>>>>>>>> they can look this pretty!!"
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> I think that Cambium should step up and get engineers from ALL
>>>>>>>> aspects of product development out into the field. 40 seconds waiting for
>>>>>>>> the page to load is fine when you're sitting in the office, but not when
>>>>>>>> you have the laptop balanced on a stack of firewood in the freezing rain
>>>>>>>> trying to get to the monitoring page to see why a radio isn't linking up.
>>>>>>>> I think that every WISP on this list would be more than happy to host an
>>>>>>>> engineer for a day. Heck, even if they go into the parking lot and assemble
>>>>>>>> it on the tailgate of someone's Pickup, they'll get some idea of what we
>>>>>>>> experience.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> I have a feeling that if all steps of the Dev process took a week
>>>>>>>> in the field, We'd have a radio that had a GUI that responded instantly on
>>>>>>>> any device, and radios that assembled and mounted (and unmounted) with 1
>>>>>>>> gloved hand.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> </rant>
>>>>>>>> Nate
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
>
>

[Josh Reynolds]

http://www.w3schools.com/browsers/browsers_stats.asp

Chrome (no version attached) has 61% market share

On January 20, 2015 10:31:25 AM AKST, Ken Hohhof <***@kwisp.com> wrote:
>But wait until Windows 10 comes out with the Spartan browser.
>
>From: Adam Moffett
>Sent: Tuesday, January 20, 2015 1:13 PM
>To: ***@afmug.com
>Subject: Re: [AFMUG] EPMP Minimum System Specs <rant>
>
>
>http://www.netmarketshare.com/browser-market-share.aspx?qprid=2&qpcustomd=0
>
>According to that everyone still uses Internet Explorer. I promise I'm
>as shocked as you are.
>
>
> Everyone uses Chrome nowadays.
>
>
> Josh Luthman
> Office: 937-552-2340
> Direct: 937-552-2343
> 1100 Wayne St
> Suite 1337
> Troy, OH 45373
>
>On Tue, Jan 20, 2015 at 2:05 PM, Jeremy <***@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>Example: Powercode mostly loads and then seems to hang for quite
>awhile on Firefox, but loads fast on Chrome.
>
>On Tue, Jan 20, 2015 at 12:04 PM, Jeremy <***@gmail.com>
>wrote:
>
>I've never used EPMP but I have noticed some interfaces lag on one
>browser and not on another. What browser is everyone using when they
>see lag? What browser are those of you who aren't seeing lag using?
>
> On Tue, Jan 20, 2015 at 11:59 AM, Ken Hohhof <***@kwisp.com> wrote:
>
> Good job of merging 2 threads! You win one free Internet!
>
> From: Chuck McCown
> Sent: Tuesday, January 20, 2015 12:48 PM
> To: ***@afmug.com
> Subject: Re: [AFMUG] EPMP Minimum System Specs <rant>
>
> Yeah but you bought the advantage GUI license, right?
>
> From: Sean Heskett
> Sent: Tuesday, January 20, 2015 11:45 AM
> To: ***@afmug.com
> Subject: Re: [AFMUG] EPMP Minimum System Specs <rant>
>
> less than 5 seconds on my iPhone as well.
>
>
>
>On Tue, Jan 20, 2015 at 11:43 AM, Josh Luthman
><***@imaginenetworksllc.com> wrote:
>
>I doubt that 4 of my high end machines all have the same problem. The
>interface takes too long when it first shows up. Maybe it's because it
>gets all the information at once, maybe not. Don't care. I want it to
>be more smooth and faster.
>
>My phone (Droid Maxx) is one of the most recent models for Android.
>The interface is terribly slow and clumsy on that.
>
>Well if you feel a poor technology choice was the cause, that's fine,
>but it's just flat out wrong. I don't want to carry a big fat i7
>laptop up the tower when I could just simply use my phone. It works
>with Ubiquiti, FSK Cambium, Tranzeo, Trango, Mikrotik, etc it should
>only make sense the one product with a clumsy interface needs fixed
>instead of changing my devices that work with the competitors products
>(as well as different products under their portfolio).
>
>
>
> Josh Luthman
> Office: 937-552-2340
> Direct: 937-552-2343
> 1100 Wayne St
> Suite 1337
> Troy, OH 45373
>
>
> On Tue, Jan 20, 2015 at 1:36 PM, Sean Heskett <***@zirkel.us> wrote:
>
>i'm just stating that on all of our computers i've never seen the ePMP
>page load slowly.
>
>maybe it's a computer problem and not a device problem, just trying to
>bring valid input to the discussion.
>
>On Tue, Jan 20, 2015 at 11:34 AM, Josh Luthman
><***@imaginenetworksllc.com> wrote:
>
>Why are you/others arguing that the speed is just fine? This doesn't
>even make sense. There are people with slower laptops that work with
>other modern devices and epmp is the only interface that loads slow.
>There's no point in arguing peoples valid complaints. Are you trying
>to direct the engineers attention to something else?
>
>
>
> Josh Luthman
> Office: 937-552-2340
> Direct: 937-552-2343
> 1100 Wayne St
> Suite 1337
> Troy, OH 45373
>
>
>On Tue, Jan 20, 2015 at 1:30 PM, Mike Hammett <***@ics-il.net> wrote:
>
>Three, maybe four seconds to load the initial screen and then two maybe
>three seconds to login. As I doubt a screen capture will work when I'm
>RDPed in, I'll record the entire login process when I get home and post
>it up on YouTube.
>
>
>
>
> -----
> Mike Hammett
> Intelligent Computing Solutions
> http://www.ics-il.com
>
>
>
>----------------------------------------------------------------
>
> From: "Josh Luthman" <***@imaginenetworksllc.com>
> To: ***@afmug.com
> Sent: Tuesday, January 20, 2015 12:26:09 PM
> Subject: Re: [AFMUG] EPMP Minimum System Specs <rant>
>
>
>Login takes forever. The first like 10-15 seconds just load and load
>and load. Once you're in, it's acceptable in terms of page rendering.
>
>
> Josh Luthman
> Office: 937-552-2340
> Direct: 937-552-2343
> 1100 Wayne St
> Suite 1337
> Troy, OH 45373
>
> On Tue, Jan 20, 2015 at 1:22 PM, Sean Heskett <***@zirkel.us> wrote:
>
>we use macbook pro's and the ePMP GUI has never been slow for us. It
>was UGLY, but they fixed that with version 2.0 haha.
>
> not sure why everyone says it's slow tho because we've never seen it.
>
> 2 cents
>
> -sean
>
>
>
>On Tue, Jan 20, 2015 at 9:57 AM, Nate Burke <***@blastcomm.com> wrote:
>
>Ok, Cambium, this is a little sad. My Field Laptop, a Lenovo S10-3t,
>Atom Processor with Windows 8.1 cannot load the EPMP WEB Pages in a
>timely manner. We're talking 40-60 seconds for initial load, and 20-30
>seconds per screen refresh/menu change. Since I'm going to have to go
>to the boss, and tell him that I need a new laptop to do any field
>troubleshooting for these new radios, what are the minimum system specs
>for a machine to view the EPMP Screens? Unless Cambium is going to get
>their Web interface under control as of Yesterday.
>
>They still swear that the GUI was all developed in house and not
>purchased (something I still can't believe). I'd like to know who the
>engineers/managers are who signed off on that design. I can only
>imaging that there was a group of guys sitting around the conference
>table, watching the presentation on the GUI on the projector up front,
>all nodding their heads in agreement, "I think this is a wonderful
>layout, the field tech's won't mind waiting a couple extra minutes for
>the pages to load so they can look this pretty!!"
>
>I think that Cambium should step up and get engineers from ALL aspects
>of product development out into the field. 40 seconds waiting for the
>page to load is fine when you're sitting in the office, but not when
>you have the laptop balanced on a stack of firewood in the freezing
>rain trying to get to the monitoring page to see why a radio isn't
>linking up. I think that every WISP on this list would be more than
>happy to host an engineer for a day. Heck, even if they go into the
>parking lot and assemble it on the tailgate of someone's Pickup,
>they'll get some idea of what we experience.
>
>I have a feeling that if all steps of the Dev process took a week in
>the field, We'd have a radio that had a GUI that responded instantly on
>any device, and radios that assembled and mounted (and unmounted) with
>1 gloved hand.
>
> </rant>
> Nate

--
Sent from my Android device with K-9 Mail. Please excuse my brevity.

[Josh Luthman]

User base is CLEARLY an important key!!!

collected from W3Schools' log-files since 2002


Josh Luthman
Office: 937-552-2340
Direct: 937-552-2343
1100 Wayne St
Suite 1337
Troy, OH 45373

On Tue, Jan 20, 2015 at 2:37 PM, Josh Reynolds <***@spitwspots.com> wrote:

> http://www.w3schools.com/browsers/browsers_stats.asp
>
> Chrome (no version attached) has 61% market share
>
> On January 20, 2015 10:31:25 AM AKST, Ken Hohhof <***@kwisp.com> wrote:
>>
>> But wait until Windows 10 comes out with the Spartan browser.
>>
>> *From:* Adam Moffett <***@gmail.com>
>> *Sent:* Tuesday, January 20, 2015 1:13 PM
>> *To:* ***@afmug.com
>> *Subject:* Re: [AFMUG] EPMP Minimum System Specs <rant>
>>
>>
>>
>> http://www.netmarketshare.com/browser-market-share.aspx?qprid=2&qpcustomd=0
>>
>> According to that everyone still uses Internet Explorer. I promise I'm
>> as shocked as you are.
>>
>> Everyone uses Chrome nowadays.
>>
>>
>> Josh Luthman
>> Office: 937-552-2340
>> Direct: 937-552-2343
>> 1100 Wayne St
>> Suite 1337
>> Troy, OH 45373
>>
>> On Tue, Jan 20, 2015 at 2:05 PM, Jeremy <***@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>> Example: Powercode mostly loads and then seems to hang for quite awhile
>>> on Firefox, but loads fast on Chrome.
>>>
>>> On Tue, Jan 20, 2015 at 12:04 PM, Jeremy <***@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>> I've never used EPMP but I have noticed some interfaces lag on one
>>>> browser and not on another. What browser is everyone using when they see
>>>> lag? What browser are those of you who aren't seeing lag using?
>>>>
>>>> On Tue, Jan 20, 2015 at 11:59 AM, Ken Hohhof <***@kwisp.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> Good job of merging 2 threads! You win one free Internet!
>>>>>
>>>>> *From:* Chuck McCown <***@wbmfg.com>
>>>>> *Sent:* Tuesday, January 20, 2015 12:48 PM
>>>>> *To:* ***@afmug.com
>>>>> *Subject:* Re: [AFMUG] EPMP Minimum System Specs <rant>
>>>>>
>>>>> Yeah but you bought the advantage GUI license, right?
>>>>>
>>>>> *From:* Sean Heskett <***@zirkel.us>
>>>>> *Sent:* Tuesday, January 20, 2015 11:45 AM
>>>>> *To:* ***@afmug.com
>>>>> *Subject:* Re: [AFMUG] EPMP Minimum System Specs <rant>
>>>>>
>>>>> less than 5 seconds on my iPhone as well.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> On Tue, Jan 20, 2015 at 11:43 AM, Josh Luthman <
>>>>> ***@imaginenetworksllc.com> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> I doubt that 4 of my high end machines all have the same problem.
>>>>>> The interface takes too long when it first shows up. Maybe it's because it
>>>>>> gets all the information at once, maybe not. Don't care. I want it to be
>>>>>> more smooth and faster.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> My phone (Droid Maxx) is one of the most recent models for Android.
>>>>>> The interface is terribly slow and clumsy on that.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Well if you feel a poor technology choice was the cause, that's fine,
>>>>>> but it's just flat out wrong. I don't want to carry a big fat i7 laptop up
>>>>>> the tower when I could just simply use my phone. It works with Ubiquiti,
>>>>>> FSK Cambium, Tranzeo, Trango, Mikrotik, etc it should only make sense the
>>>>>> one product with a clumsy interface needs fixed instead of changing my
>>>>>> devices that work with the competitors products (as well as different
>>>>>> products under their portfolio).
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Josh Luthman
>>>>>> Office: 937-552-2340
>>>>>> Direct: 937-552-2343
>>>>>> 1100 Wayne St
>>>>>> Suite 1337
>>>>>> Troy, OH 45373
>>>>>>
>>>>>> On Tue, Jan 20, 2015 at 1:36 PM, Sean Heskett <***@zirkel.us>
>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> i'm just stating that on all of our computers i've never seen the
>>>>>>> ePMP page load slowly.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> maybe it's a computer problem and not a device problem, just trying
>>>>>>> to bring valid input to the discussion.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> On Tue, Jan 20, 2015 at 11:34 AM, Josh Luthman <
>>>>>>> ***@imaginenetworksllc.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Why are you/others arguing that the speed is just fine? This
>>>>>>>> doesn't even make sense. There are people with slower laptops that work
>>>>>>>> with other modern devices and epmp is the only interface that loads slow.
>>>>>>>> There's no point in arguing peoples valid complaints. Are you trying to
>>>>>>>> direct the engineers attention to something else?
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Josh Luthman
>>>>>>>> Office: 937-552-2340
>>>>>>>> Direct: 937-552-2343
>>>>>>>> 1100 Wayne St
>>>>>>>> Suite 1337
>>>>>>>> Troy, OH 45373
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> On Tue, Jan 20, 2015 at 1:30 PM, Mike Hammett <***@ics-il.net>
>>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Three, maybe four seconds to load the initial screen and then
>>>>>>>>> two maybe three seconds to login. As I doubt a screen capture will work
>>>>>>>>> when I'm RDPed in, I'll record the entire login process when I get home and
>>>>>>>>> post it up on YouTube.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> -----
>>>>>>>>> Mike Hammett
>>>>>>>>> Intelligent Computing Solutions
>>>>>>>>> http://www.ics-il.com
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> ------------------------------
>>>>>>>>> *From: *"Josh Luthman" <***@imaginenetworksllc.com>
>>>>>>>>> *To: ****@afmug.com
>>>>>>>>> *Sent: *Tuesday, January 20, 2015 12:26:09 PM
>>>>>>>>> *Subject: *Re: [AFMUG] EPMP Minimum System Specs <rant>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Login takes forever. The first like 10-15 seconds just load
>>>>>>>>> and load and load. Once you're in, it's acceptable in terms of page
>>>>>>>>> rendering.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Josh Luthman
>>>>>>>>> Office: 937-552-2340
>>>>>>>>> Direct: 937-552-2343
>>>>>>>>> 1100 Wayne St
>>>>>>>>> Suite 1337
>>>>>>>>> Troy, OH 45373
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> On Tue, Jan 20, 2015 at 1:22 PM, Sean Heskett <***@zirkel.us>
>>>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> we use macbook pro's and the ePMP GUI has never been slow for
>>>>>>>>>> us. It was UGLY, but they fixed that with version 2.0 haha.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> not sure why everyone says it's slow tho because we've never seen
>>>>>>>>>> it.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> 2 cents
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> -sean
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> On Tue, Jan 20, 2015 at 9:57 AM, Nate Burke <***@blastcomm.com>
>>>>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> Ok, Cambium, this is a little sad. My Field Laptop, a Lenovo
>>>>>>>>>>> S10-3t, Atom Processor with Windows 8.1 cannot load the EPMP WEB Pages in a
>>>>>>>>>>> timely manner. We're talking 40-60 seconds for initial load, and 20-30
>>>>>>>>>>> seconds per screen refresh/menu change. Since I'm going to have to go to
>>>>>>>>>>> the boss, and tell him that I need a new laptop to do any field
>>>>>>>>>>> troubleshooting for these new radios, what are the minimum system specs for
>>>>>>>>>>> a machine to view the EPMP Screens? Unless Cambium is going to get their
>>>>>>>>>>> Web interface under control as of Yesterday.
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> They still swear that the GUI was all developed in house and not
>>>>>>>>>>> purchased (something I still can't believe). I'd like to know who the
>>>>>>>>>>> engineers/managers are who signed off on that design. I can only imaging
>>>>>>>>>>> that there was a group of guys sitting around the conference table,
>>>>>>>>>>> watching the presentation on the GUI on the projector up front, all nodding
>>>>>>>>>>> their heads in agreement, "I think this is a wonderful layout, the field
>>>>>>>>>>> tech's won't mind waiting a couple extra minutes for the pages to load so
>>>>>>>>>>> they can look this pretty!!"
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> I think that Cambium should step up and get engineers from ALL
>>>>>>>>>>> aspects of product development out into the field. 40 seconds waiting for
>>>>>>>>>>> the page to load is fine when you're sitting in the office, but not when
>>>>>>>>>>> you have the laptop balanced on a stack of firewood in the freezing rain
>>>>>>>>>>> trying to get to the monitoring page to see why a radio isn't linking up.
>>>>>>>>>>> I think that every WISP on this list would be more than happy to host an
>>>>>>>>>>> engineer for a day. Heck, even if they go into the parking lot and assemble
>>>>>>>>>>> it on the tailgate of someone's Pickup, they'll get some idea of what we
>>>>>>>>>>> experience.
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> I have a feeling that if all steps of the Dev process took a
>>>>>>>>>>> week in the field, We'd have a radio that had a GUI that responded
>>>>>>>>>>> instantly on any device, and radios that assembled and mounted (and
>>>>>>>>>>> unmounted) with 1 gloved hand.
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> </rant>
>>>>>>>>>>> Nate
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
> --
> Sent from my Android device with K-9 Mail. Please excuse my brevity.
>

[Jeremy]

I used to use Chrome. A few versions back they made it so that you cannot
save passwords for SSL exceptions, and cannot add permanent exceptions. We
use SSL on all of our APs, and according to chrome our Billing server cert
is incorrect, even though we have triple checked the install and no other
browsers flag it as insecure. This leaves us tapping away super long and
complicated passwords (what else would we use??) out in the field in
Chrome, or we use Firefox and deal with a bit of lag in Powercode. I find
that the small amount of lag is far better than constantly trying to tap
out passwords on a tablet. Ok, not trying to derail this too far OT. Have
those of you who are experiencing the lag with EPMP tried another browser?

On Tue, Jan 20, 2015 at 12:41 PM, Josh Luthman <***@imaginenetworksllc.com>
wrote:

> User base is CLEARLY an important key!!!
>
> collected from W3Schools' log-files since 2002
>
>
> Josh Luthman
> Office: 937-552-2340
> Direct: 937-552-2343
> 1100 Wayne St
> Suite 1337
> Troy, OH 45373
>
> On Tue, Jan 20, 2015 at 2:37 PM, Josh Reynolds <***@spitwspots.com>
> wrote:
>
>> http://www.w3schools.com/browsers/browsers_stats.asp
>>
>> Chrome (no version attached) has 61% market share
>>
>> On January 20, 2015 10:31:25 AM AKST, Ken Hohhof <***@kwisp.com> wrote:
>>>
>>> But wait until Windows 10 comes out with the Spartan browser.
>>>
>>> *From:* Adam Moffett <***@gmail.com>
>>> *Sent:* Tuesday, January 20, 2015 1:13 PM
>>> *To:* ***@afmug.com
>>> *Subject:* Re: [AFMUG] EPMP Minimum System Specs <rant>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> http://www.netmarketshare.com/browser-market-share.aspx?qprid=2&qpcustomd=0
>>>
>>> According to that everyone still uses Internet Explorer. I promise I'm
>>> as shocked as you are.
>>>
>>> Everyone uses Chrome nowadays.
>>>
>>>
>>> Josh Luthman
>>> Office: 937-552-2340
>>> Direct: 937-552-2343
>>> 1100 Wayne St
>>> Suite 1337
>>> Troy, OH 45373
>>>
>>> On Tue, Jan 20, 2015 at 2:05 PM, Jeremy <***@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>> Example: Powercode mostly loads and then seems to hang for quite
>>>> awhile on Firefox, but loads fast on Chrome.
>>>>
>>>> On Tue, Jan 20, 2015 at 12:04 PM, Jeremy <***@gmail.com>
>>>> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> I've never used EPMP but I have noticed some interfaces lag on one
>>>>> browser and not on another. What browser is everyone using when they see
>>>>> lag? What browser are those of you who aren't seeing lag using?
>>>>>
>>>>> On Tue, Jan 20, 2015 at 11:59 AM, Ken Hohhof <***@kwisp.com> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> Good job of merging 2 threads! You win one free Internet!
>>>>>>
>>>>>> *From:* Chuck McCown <***@wbmfg.com>
>>>>>> *Sent:* Tuesday, January 20, 2015 12:48 PM
>>>>>> *To:* ***@afmug.com
>>>>>> *Subject:* Re: [AFMUG] EPMP Minimum System Specs <rant>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Yeah but you bought the advantage GUI license, right?
>>>>>>
>>>>>> *From:* Sean Heskett <***@zirkel.us>
>>>>>> *Sent:* Tuesday, January 20, 2015 11:45 AM
>>>>>> *To:* ***@afmug.com
>>>>>> *Subject:* Re: [AFMUG] EPMP Minimum System Specs <rant>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> less than 5 seconds on my iPhone as well.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> On Tue, Jan 20, 2015 at 11:43 AM, Josh Luthman <
>>>>>> ***@imaginenetworksllc.com> wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> I doubt that 4 of my high end machines all have the same problem.
>>>>>>> The interface takes too long when it first shows up. Maybe it's because it
>>>>>>> gets all the information at once, maybe not. Don't care. I want it to be
>>>>>>> more smooth and faster.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> My phone (Droid Maxx) is one of the most recent models for Android.
>>>>>>> The interface is terribly slow and clumsy on that.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Well if you feel a poor technology choice was the cause, that's
>>>>>>> fine, but it's just flat out wrong. I don't want to carry a big fat i7
>>>>>>> laptop up the tower when I could just simply use my phone. It works with
>>>>>>> Ubiquiti, FSK Cambium, Tranzeo, Trango, Mikrotik, etc it should only make
>>>>>>> sense the one product with a clumsy interface needs fixed instead of
>>>>>>> changing my devices that work with the competitors products (as well as
>>>>>>> different products under their portfolio).
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Josh Luthman
>>>>>>> Office: 937-552-2340
>>>>>>> Direct: 937-552-2343
>>>>>>> 1100 Wayne St
>>>>>>> Suite 1337
>>>>>>> Troy, OH 45373
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> On Tue, Jan 20, 2015 at 1:36 PM, Sean Heskett <***@zirkel.us>
>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> i'm just stating that on all of our computers i've never seen the
>>>>>>>> ePMP page load slowly.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> maybe it's a computer problem and not a device problem, just trying
>>>>>>>> to bring valid input to the discussion.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> On Tue, Jan 20, 2015 at 11:34 AM, Josh Luthman <
>>>>>>>> ***@imaginenetworksllc.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Why are you/others arguing that the speed is just fine? This
>>>>>>>>> doesn't even make sense. There are people with slower laptops that work
>>>>>>>>> with other modern devices and epmp is the only interface that loads slow.
>>>>>>>>> There's no point in arguing peoples valid complaints. Are you trying to
>>>>>>>>> direct the engineers attention to something else?
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Josh Luthman
>>>>>>>>> Office: 937-552-2340
>>>>>>>>> Direct: 937-552-2343
>>>>>>>>> 1100 Wayne St
>>>>>>>>> Suite 1337
>>>>>>>>> Troy, OH 45373
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> On Tue, Jan 20, 2015 at 1:30 PM, Mike Hammett <***@ics-il.net>
>>>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Three, maybe four seconds to load the initial screen and then
>>>>>>>>>> two maybe three seconds to login. As I doubt a screen capture will work
>>>>>>>>>> when I'm RDPed in, I'll record the entire login process when I get home and
>>>>>>>>>> post it up on YouTube.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> -----
>>>>>>>>>> Mike Hammett
>>>>>>>>>> Intelligent Computing Solutions
>>>>>>>>>> http://www.ics-il.com
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> ------------------------------
>>>>>>>>>> *From: *"Josh Luthman" <***@imaginenetworksllc.com>
>>>>>>>>>> *To: ****@afmug.com
>>>>>>>>>> *Sent: *Tuesday, January 20, 2015 12:26:09 PM
>>>>>>>>>> *Subject: *Re: [AFMUG] EPMP Minimum System Specs <rant>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Login takes forever. The first like 10-15 seconds just load
>>>>>>>>>> and load and load. Once you're in, it's acceptable in terms of page
>>>>>>>>>> rendering.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Josh Luthman
>>>>>>>>>> Office: 937-552-2340
>>>>>>>>>> Direct: 937-552-2343
>>>>>>>>>> 1100 Wayne St
>>>>>>>>>> Suite 1337
>>>>>>>>>> Troy, OH 45373
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> On Tue, Jan 20, 2015 at 1:22 PM, Sean Heskett <***@zirkel.us>
>>>>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> we use macbook pro's and the ePMP GUI has never been slow for
>>>>>>>>>>> us. It was UGLY, but they fixed that with version 2.0 haha.
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> not sure why everyone says it's slow tho because we've never
>>>>>>>>>>> seen it.
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> 2 cents
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> -sean
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> On Tue, Jan 20, 2015 at 9:57 AM, Nate Burke <***@blastcomm.com>
>>>>>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> Ok, Cambium, this is a little sad. My Field Laptop, a Lenovo
>>>>>>>>>>>> S10-3t, Atom Processor with Windows 8.1 cannot load the EPMP WEB Pages in a
>>>>>>>>>>>> timely manner. We're talking 40-60 seconds for initial load, and 20-30
>>>>>>>>>>>> seconds per screen refresh/menu change. Since I'm going to have to go to
>>>>>>>>>>>> the boss, and tell him that I need a new laptop to do any field
>>>>>>>>>>>> troubleshooting for these new radios, what are the minimum system specs for
>>>>>>>>>>>> a machine to view the EPMP Screens? Unless Cambium is going to get their
>>>>>>>>>>>> Web interface under control as of Yesterday.
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> They still swear that the GUI was all developed in house and
>>>>>>>>>>>> not purchased (something I still can't believe). I'd like to know who the
>>>>>>>>>>>> engineers/managers are who signed off on that design. I can only imaging
>>>>>>>>>>>> that there was a group of guys sitting around the conference table,
>>>>>>>>>>>> watching the presentation on the GUI on the projector up front, all nodding
>>>>>>>>>>>> their heads in agreement, "I think this is a wonderful layout, the field
>>>>>>>>>>>> tech's won't mind waiting a couple extra minutes for the pages to load so
>>>>>>>>>>>> they can look this pretty!!"
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> I think that Cambium should step up and get engineers from ALL
>>>>>>>>>>>> aspects of product development out into the field. 40 seconds waiting for
>>>>>>>>>>>> the page to load is fine when you're sitting in the office, but not when
>>>>>>>>>>>> you have the laptop balanced on a stack of firewood in the freezing rain
>>>>>>>>>>>> trying to get to the monitoring page to see why a radio isn't linking up.
>>>>>>>>>>>> I think that every WISP on this list would be more than happy to host an
>>>>>>>>>>>> engineer for a day. Heck, even if they go into the parking lot and assemble
>>>>>>>>>>>> it on the tailgate of someone's Pickup, they'll get some idea of what we
>>>>>>>>>>>> experience.
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> I have a feeling that if all steps of the Dev process took a
>>>>>>>>>>>> week in the field, We'd have a radio that had a GUI that responded
>>>>>>>>>>>> instantly on any device, and radios that assembled and mounted (and
>>>>>>>>>>>> unmounted) with 1 gloved hand.
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> </rant>
>>>>>>>>>>>> Nate
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>> --
>> Sent from my Android device with K-9 Mail. Please excuse my brevity.
>>
>
>

[Josh Luthman]

What's your Powercode address? Who does your SSL cert?

Josh Luthman
Office: 937-552-2340
Direct: 937-552-2343
1100 Wayne St
Suite 1337
Troy, OH 45373
On Jan 20, 2015 4:45 PM, "Jeremy" <***@gmail.com> wrote:

> I used to use Chrome. A few versions back they made it so that you cannot
> save passwords for SSL exceptions, and cannot add permanent exceptions. We
> use SSL on all of our APs, and according to chrome our Billing server cert
> is incorrect, even though we have triple checked the install and no other
> browsers flag it as insecure. This leaves us tapping away super long and
> complicated passwords (what else would we use??) out in the field in
> Chrome, or we use Firefox and deal with a bit of lag in Powercode. I find
> that the small amount of lag is far better than constantly trying to tap
> out passwords on a tablet. Ok, not trying to derail this too far OT. Have
> those of you who are experiencing the lag with EPMP tried another browser?
>
> On Tue, Jan 20, 2015 at 12:41 PM, Josh Luthman <
> ***@imaginenetworksllc.com> wrote:
>
>> User base is CLEARLY an important key!!!
>>
>> collected from W3Schools' log-files since 2002
>>
>>
>> Josh Luthman
>> Office: 937-552-2340
>> Direct: 937-552-2343
>> 1100 Wayne St
>> Suite 1337
>> Troy, OH 45373
>>
>> On Tue, Jan 20, 2015 at 2:37 PM, Josh Reynolds <***@spitwspots.com>
>> wrote:
>>
>>> http://www.w3schools.com/browsers/browsers_stats.asp
>>>
>>> Chrome (no version attached) has 61% market share
>>>
>>> On January 20, 2015 10:31:25 AM AKST, Ken Hohhof <***@kwisp.com>
>>> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> But wait until Windows 10 comes out with the Spartan browser.
>>>>
>>>> *From:* Adam Moffett <***@gmail.com>
>>>> *Sent:* Tuesday, January 20, 2015 1:13 PM
>>>> *To:* ***@afmug.com
>>>> *Subject:* Re: [AFMUG] EPMP Minimum System Specs <rant>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> http://www.netmarketshare.com/browser-market-share.aspx?qprid=2&qpcustomd=0
>>>>
>>>> According to that everyone still uses Internet Explorer. I promise I'm
>>>> as shocked as you are.
>>>>
>>>> Everyone uses Chrome nowadays.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Josh Luthman
>>>> Office: 937-552-2340
>>>> Direct: 937-552-2343
>>>> 1100 Wayne St
>>>> Suite 1337
>>>> Troy, OH 45373
>>>>
>>>> On Tue, Jan 20, 2015 at 2:05 PM, Jeremy <***@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> Example: Powercode mostly loads and then seems to hang for quite
>>>>> awhile on Firefox, but loads fast on Chrome.
>>>>>
>>>>> On Tue, Jan 20, 2015 at 12:04 PM, Jeremy <***@gmail.com>
>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> I've never used EPMP but I have noticed some interfaces lag on one
>>>>>> browser and not on another. What browser is everyone using when they see
>>>>>> lag? What browser are those of you who aren't seeing lag using?
>>>>>>
>>>>>> On Tue, Jan 20, 2015 at 11:59 AM, Ken Hohhof <***@kwisp.com> wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Good job of merging 2 threads! You win one free Internet!
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> *From:* Chuck McCown <***@wbmfg.com>
>>>>>>> *Sent:* Tuesday, January 20, 2015 12:48 PM
>>>>>>> *To:* ***@afmug.com
>>>>>>> *Subject:* Re: [AFMUG] EPMP Minimum System Specs <rant>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Yeah but you bought the advantage GUI license, right?
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> *From:* Sean Heskett <***@zirkel.us>
>>>>>>> *Sent:* Tuesday, January 20, 2015 11:45 AM
>>>>>>> *To:* ***@afmug.com
>>>>>>> *Subject:* Re: [AFMUG] EPMP Minimum System Specs <rant>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> less than 5 seconds on my iPhone as well.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> On Tue, Jan 20, 2015 at 11:43 AM, Josh Luthman <
>>>>>>> ***@imaginenetworksllc.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> I doubt that 4 of my high end machines all have the same problem.
>>>>>>>> The interface takes too long when it first shows up. Maybe it's because it
>>>>>>>> gets all the information at once, maybe not. Don't care. I want it to be
>>>>>>>> more smooth and faster.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> My phone (Droid Maxx) is one of the most recent models for
>>>>>>>> Android. The interface is terribly slow and clumsy on that.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Well if you feel a poor technology choice was the cause, that's
>>>>>>>> fine, but it's just flat out wrong. I don't want to carry a big fat i7
>>>>>>>> laptop up the tower when I could just simply use my phone. It works with
>>>>>>>> Ubiquiti, FSK Cambium, Tranzeo, Trango, Mikrotik, etc it should only make
>>>>>>>> sense the one product with a clumsy interface needs fixed instead of
>>>>>>>> changing my devices that work with the competitors products (as well as
>>>>>>>> different products under their portfolio).
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Josh Luthman
>>>>>>>> Office: 937-552-2340
>>>>>>>> Direct: 937-552-2343
>>>>>>>> 1100 Wayne St
>>>>>>>> Suite 1337
>>>>>>>> Troy, OH 45373
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> On Tue, Jan 20, 2015 at 1:36 PM, Sean Heskett <***@zirkel.us>
>>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> i'm just stating that on all of our computers i've never seen the
>>>>>>>>> ePMP page load slowly.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> maybe it's a computer problem and not a device problem, just
>>>>>>>>> trying to bring valid input to the discussion.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> On Tue, Jan 20, 2015 at 11:34 AM, Josh Luthman <
>>>>>>>>> ***@imaginenetworksllc.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Why are you/others arguing that the speed is just fine? This
>>>>>>>>>> doesn't even make sense. There are people with slower laptops that work
>>>>>>>>>> with other modern devices and epmp is the only interface that loads slow.
>>>>>>>>>> There's no point in arguing peoples valid complaints. Are you trying to
>>>>>>>>>> direct the engineers attention to something else?
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Josh Luthman
>>>>>>>>>> Office: 937-552-2340
>>>>>>>>>> Direct: 937-552-2343
>>>>>>>>>> 1100 Wayne St
>>>>>>>>>> Suite 1337
>>>>>>>>>> Troy, OH 45373
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> On Tue, Jan 20, 2015 at 1:30 PM, Mike Hammett <***@ics-il.net>
>>>>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> Three, maybe four seconds to load the initial screen and then
>>>>>>>>>>> two maybe three seconds to login. As I doubt a screen capture will work
>>>>>>>>>>> when I'm RDPed in, I'll record the entire login process when I get home and
>>>>>>>>>>> post it up on YouTube.
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> -----
>>>>>>>>>>> Mike Hammett
>>>>>>>>>>> Intelligent Computing Solutions
>>>>>>>>>>> http://www.ics-il.com
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> ------------------------------
>>>>>>>>>>> *From: *"Josh Luthman" <***@imaginenetworksllc.com>
>>>>>>>>>>> *To: ****@afmug.com
>>>>>>>>>>> *Sent: *Tuesday, January 20, 2015 12:26:09 PM
>>>>>>>>>>> *Subject: *Re: [AFMUG] EPMP Minimum System Specs <rant>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> Login takes forever. The first like 10-15 seconds just load
>>>>>>>>>>> and load and load. Once you're in, it's acceptable in terms of page
>>>>>>>>>>> rendering.
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> Josh Luthman
>>>>>>>>>>> Office: 937-552-2340
>>>>>>>>>>> Direct: 937-552-2343
>>>>>>>>>>> 1100 Wayne St
>>>>>>>>>>> Suite 1337
>>>>>>>>>>> Troy, OH 45373
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> On Tue, Jan 20, 2015 at 1:22 PM, Sean Heskett <***@zirkel.us>
>>>>>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> we use macbook pro's and the ePMP GUI has never been slow for
>>>>>>>>>>>> us. It was UGLY, but they fixed that with version 2.0 haha.
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> not sure why everyone says it's slow tho because we've never
>>>>>>>>>>>> seen it.
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> 2 cents
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> -sean
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> On Tue, Jan 20, 2015 at 9:57 AM, Nate Burke <***@blastcomm.com
>>>>>>>>>>>> > wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> Ok, Cambium, this is a little sad. My Field Laptop, a Lenovo
>>>>>>>>>>>>> S10-3t, Atom Processor with Windows 8.1 cannot load the EPMP WEB Pages in a
>>>>>>>>>>>>> timely manner. We're talking 40-60 seconds for initial load, and 20-30
>>>>>>>>>>>>> seconds per screen refresh/menu change. Since I'm going to have to go to
>>>>>>>>>>>>> the boss, and tell him that I need a new laptop to do any field
>>>>>>>>>>>>> troubleshooting for these new radios, what are the minimum system specs for
>>>>>>>>>>>>> a machine to view the EPMP Screens? Unless Cambium is going to get their
>>>>>>>>>>>>> Web interface under control as of Yesterday.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> They still swear that the GUI was all developed in house and
>>>>>>>>>>>>> not purchased (something I still can't believe). I'd like to know who the
>>>>>>>>>>>>> engineers/managers are who signed off on that design. I can only imaging
>>>>>>>>>>>>> that there was a group of guys sitting around the conference table,
>>>>>>>>>>>>> watching the presentation on the GUI on the projector up front, all nodding
>>>>>>>>>>>>> their heads in agreement, "I think this is a wonderful layout, the field
>>>>>>>>>>>>> tech's won't mind waiting a couple extra minutes for the pages to load so
>>>>>>>>>>>>> they can look this pretty!!"
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> I think that Cambium should step up and get engineers from ALL
>>>>>>>>>>>>> aspects of product development out into the field. 40 seconds waiting for
>>>>>>>>>>>>> the page to load is fine when you're sitting in the office, but not when
>>>>>>>>>>>>> you have the laptop balanced on a stack of firewood in the freezing rain
>>>>>>>>>>>>> trying to get to the monitoring page to see why a radio isn't linking up.
>>>>>>>>>>>>> I think that every WISP on this list would be more than happy to host an
>>>>>>>>>>>>> engineer for a day. Heck, even if they go into the parking lot and assemble
>>>>>>>>>>>>> it on the tailgate of someone's Pickup, they'll get some idea of what we
>>>>>>>>>>>>> experience.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> I have a feeling that if all steps of the Dev process took a
>>>>>>>>>>>>> week in the field, We'd have a radio that had a GUI that responded
>>>>>>>>>>>>> instantly on any device, and radios that assembled and mounted (and
>>>>>>>>>>>>> unmounted) with 1 gloved hand.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> </rant>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> Nate
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>> --
>>> Sent from my Android device with K-9 Mail. Please excuse my brevity.
>>>
>>
>>
>

[Jeremy]

GoDaddy

On Tue, Jan 20, 2015 at 2:51 PM, Josh Luthman <***@imaginenetworksllc.com>
wrote:

> What's your Powercode address? Who does your SSL cert?
>
> Josh Luthman
> Office: 937-552-2340
> Direct: 937-552-2343
> 1100 Wayne St
> Suite 1337
> Troy, OH 45373
> On Jan 20, 2015 4:45 PM, "Jeremy" <***@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> I used to use Chrome. A few versions back they made it so that you
>> cannot save passwords for SSL exceptions, and cannot add permanent
>> exceptions. We use SSL on all of our APs, and according to chrome our
>> Billing server cert is incorrect, even though we have triple checked the
>> install and no other browsers flag it as insecure. This leaves us tapping
>> away super long and complicated passwords (what else would we use??) out in
>> the field in Chrome, or we use Firefox and deal with a bit of lag in
>> Powercode. I find that the small amount of lag is far better than
>> constantly trying to tap out passwords on a tablet. Ok, not trying to
>> derail this too far OT. Have those of you who are experiencing the lag
>> with EPMP tried another browser?
>>
>> On Tue, Jan 20, 2015 at 12:41 PM, Josh Luthman <
>> ***@imaginenetworksllc.com> wrote:
>>
>>> User base is CLEARLY an important key!!!
>>>
>>> collected from W3Schools' log-files since 2002
>>>
>>>
>>> Josh Luthman
>>> Office: 937-552-2340
>>> Direct: 937-552-2343
>>> 1100 Wayne St
>>> Suite 1337
>>> Troy, OH 45373
>>>
>>> On Tue, Jan 20, 2015 at 2:37 PM, Josh Reynolds <***@spitwspots.com>
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>>> http://www.w3schools.com/browsers/browsers_stats.asp
>>>>
>>>> Chrome (no version attached) has 61% market share
>>>>
>>>> On January 20, 2015 10:31:25 AM AKST, Ken Hohhof <***@kwisp.com>
>>>> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> But wait until Windows 10 comes out with the Spartan browser.
>>>>>
>>>>> *From:* Adam Moffett <***@gmail.com>
>>>>> *Sent:* Tuesday, January 20, 2015 1:13 PM
>>>>> *To:* ***@afmug.com
>>>>> *Subject:* Re: [AFMUG] EPMP Minimum System Specs <rant>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> http://www.netmarketshare.com/browser-market-share.aspx?qprid=2&qpcustomd=0
>>>>>
>>>>> According to that everyone still uses Internet Explorer. I promise
>>>>> I'm as shocked as you are.
>>>>>
>>>>> Everyone uses Chrome nowadays.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Josh Luthman
>>>>> Office: 937-552-2340
>>>>> Direct: 937-552-2343
>>>>> 1100 Wayne St
>>>>> Suite 1337
>>>>> Troy, OH 45373
>>>>>
>>>>> On Tue, Jan 20, 2015 at 2:05 PM, Jeremy <***@gmail.com>
>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> Example: Powercode mostly loads and then seems to hang for quite
>>>>>> awhile on Firefox, but loads fast on Chrome.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> On Tue, Jan 20, 2015 at 12:04 PM, Jeremy <***@gmail.com>
>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> I've never used EPMP but I have noticed some interfaces lag on one
>>>>>>> browser and not on another. What browser is everyone using when they see
>>>>>>> lag? What browser are those of you who aren't seeing lag using?
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> On Tue, Jan 20, 2015 at 11:59 AM, Ken Hohhof <***@kwisp.com>
>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Good job of merging 2 threads! You win one free Internet!
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> *From:* Chuck McCown <***@wbmfg.com>
>>>>>>>> *Sent:* Tuesday, January 20, 2015 12:48 PM
>>>>>>>> *To:* ***@afmug.com
>>>>>>>> *Subject:* Re: [AFMUG] EPMP Minimum System Specs <rant>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Yeah but you bought the advantage GUI license, right?
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> *From:* Sean Heskett <***@zirkel.us>
>>>>>>>> *Sent:* Tuesday, January 20, 2015 11:45 AM
>>>>>>>> *To:* ***@afmug.com
>>>>>>>> *Subject:* Re: [AFMUG] EPMP Minimum System Specs <rant>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> less than 5 seconds on my iPhone as well.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> On Tue, Jan 20, 2015 at 11:43 AM, Josh Luthman <
>>>>>>>> ***@imaginenetworksllc.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> I doubt that 4 of my high end machines all have the same problem.
>>>>>>>>> The interface takes too long when it first shows up. Maybe it's because it
>>>>>>>>> gets all the information at once, maybe not. Don't care. I want it to be
>>>>>>>>> more smooth and faster.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> My phone (Droid Maxx) is one of the most recent models for
>>>>>>>>> Android. The interface is terribly slow and clumsy on that.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Well if you feel a poor technology choice was the cause, that's
>>>>>>>>> fine, but it's just flat out wrong. I don't want to carry a big fat i7
>>>>>>>>> laptop up the tower when I could just simply use my phone. It works with
>>>>>>>>> Ubiquiti, FSK Cambium, Tranzeo, Trango, Mikrotik, etc it should only make
>>>>>>>>> sense the one product with a clumsy interface needs fixed instead of
>>>>>>>>> changing my devices that work with the competitors products (as well as
>>>>>>>>> different products under their portfolio).
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Josh Luthman
>>>>>>>>> Office: 937-552-2340
>>>>>>>>> Direct: 937-552-2343
>>>>>>>>> 1100 Wayne St
>>>>>>>>> Suite 1337
>>>>>>>>> Troy, OH 45373
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> On Tue, Jan 20, 2015 at 1:36 PM, Sean Heskett <***@zirkel.us>
>>>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> i'm just stating that on all of our computers i've never seen the
>>>>>>>>>> ePMP page load slowly.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> maybe it's a computer problem and not a device problem, just
>>>>>>>>>> trying to bring valid input to the discussion.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> On Tue, Jan 20, 2015 at 11:34 AM, Josh Luthman <
>>>>>>>>>> ***@imaginenetworksllc.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> Why are you/others arguing that the speed is just fine? This
>>>>>>>>>>> doesn't even make sense. There are people with slower laptops that work
>>>>>>>>>>> with other modern devices and epmp is the only interface that loads slow.
>>>>>>>>>>> There's no point in arguing peoples valid complaints. Are you trying to
>>>>>>>>>>> direct the engineers attention to something else?
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> Josh Luthman
>>>>>>>>>>> Office: 937-552-2340
>>>>>>>>>>> Direct: 937-552-2343
>>>>>>>>>>> 1100 Wayne St
>>>>>>>>>>> Suite 1337
>>>>>>>>>>> Troy, OH 45373
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> On Tue, Jan 20, 2015 at 1:30 PM, Mike Hammett <***@ics-il.net>
>>>>>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> Three, maybe four seconds to load the initial screen and then
>>>>>>>>>>>> two maybe three seconds to login. As I doubt a screen capture will work
>>>>>>>>>>>> when I'm RDPed in, I'll record the entire login process when I get home and
>>>>>>>>>>>> post it up on YouTube.
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> -----
>>>>>>>>>>>> Mike Hammett
>>>>>>>>>>>> Intelligent Computing Solutions
>>>>>>>>>>>> http://www.ics-il.com
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> ------------------------------
>>>>>>>>>>>> *From: *"Josh Luthman" <***@imaginenetworksllc.com>
>>>>>>>>>>>> *To: ****@afmug.com
>>>>>>>>>>>> *Sent: *Tuesday, January 20, 2015 12:26:09 PM
>>>>>>>>>>>> *Subject: *Re: [AFMUG] EPMP Minimum System Specs <rant>
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> Login takes forever. The first like 10-15 seconds just load
>>>>>>>>>>>> and load and load. Once you're in, it's acceptable in terms of page
>>>>>>>>>>>> rendering.
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> Josh Luthman
>>>>>>>>>>>> Office: 937-552-2340
>>>>>>>>>>>> Direct: 937-552-2343
>>>>>>>>>>>> 1100 Wayne St
>>>>>>>>>>>> Suite 1337
>>>>>>>>>>>> Troy, OH 45373
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> On Tue, Jan 20, 2015 at 1:22 PM, Sean Heskett <***@zirkel.us>
>>>>>>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> we use macbook pro's and the ePMP GUI has never been slow for
>>>>>>>>>>>>> us. It was UGLY, but they fixed that with version 2.0 haha.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> not sure why everyone says it's slow tho because we've never
>>>>>>>>>>>>> seen it.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> 2 cents
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> -sean
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Tue, Jan 20, 2015 at 9:57 AM, Nate Burke <
>>>>>>>>>>>>> ***@blastcomm.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Ok, Cambium, this is a little sad. My Field Laptop, a Lenovo
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> S10-3t, Atom Processor with Windows 8.1 cannot load the EPMP WEB Pages in a
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> timely manner. We're talking 40-60 seconds for initial load, and 20-30
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> seconds per screen refresh/menu change. Since I'm going to have to go to
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> the boss, and tell him that I need a new laptop to do any field
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> troubleshooting for these new radios, what are the minimum system specs for
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> a machine to view the EPMP Screens? Unless Cambium is going to get their
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Web interface under control as of Yesterday.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> They still swear that the GUI was all developed in house and
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> not purchased (something I still can't believe). I'd like to know who the
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> engineers/managers are who signed off on that design. I can only imaging
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> that there was a group of guys sitting around the conference table,
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> watching the presentation on the GUI on the projector up front, all nodding
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> their heads in agreement, "I think this is a wonderful layout, the field
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> tech's won't mind waiting a couple extra minutes for the pages to load so
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> they can look this pretty!!"
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I think that Cambium should step up and get engineers from
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> ALL aspects of product development out into the field. 40 seconds waiting
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> for the page to load is fine when you're sitting in the office, but not
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> when you have the laptop balanced on a stack of firewood in the freezing
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> rain trying to get to the monitoring page to see why a radio isn't linking
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> up. I think that every WISP on this list would be more than happy to host
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> an engineer for a day. Heck, even if they go into the parking lot and
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> assemble it on the tailgate of someone's Pickup, they'll get some idea of
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> what we experience.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I have a feeling that if all steps of the Dev process took a
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> week in the field, We'd have a radio that had a GUI that responded
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> instantly on any device, and radios that assembled and mounted (and
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> unmounted) with 1 gloved hand.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> </rant>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Nate
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>> --
>>>> Sent from my Android device with K-9 Mail. Please excuse my brevity.
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>

[Josh Luthman]

Did you include the second cert file? Mine works (also Godaddy).

Josh Luthman
Office: 937-552-2340
Direct: 937-552-2343
1100 Wayne St
Suite 1337
Troy, OH 45373
On Jan 20, 2015 4:56 PM, "Jeremy" <***@gmail.com> wrote:

> GoDaddy
>
> On Tue, Jan 20, 2015 at 2:51 PM, Josh Luthman <***@imaginenetworksllc.com
> > wrote:
>
>> What's your Powercode address? Who does your SSL cert?
>>
>> Josh Luthman
>> Office: 937-552-2340
>> Direct: 937-552-2343
>> 1100 Wayne St
>> Suite 1337
>> Troy, OH 45373
>> On Jan 20, 2015 4:45 PM, "Jeremy" <***@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>> I used to use Chrome. A few versions back they made it so that you
>>> cannot save passwords for SSL exceptions, and cannot add permanent
>>> exceptions. We use SSL on all of our APs, and according to chrome our
>>> Billing server cert is incorrect, even though we have triple checked the
>>> install and no other browsers flag it as insecure. This leaves us tapping
>>> away super long and complicated passwords (what else would we use??) out in
>>> the field in Chrome, or we use Firefox and deal with a bit of lag in
>>> Powercode. I find that the small amount of lag is far better than
>>> constantly trying to tap out passwords on a tablet. Ok, not trying to
>>> derail this too far OT. Have those of you who are experiencing the lag
>>> with EPMP tried another browser?
>>>
>>> On Tue, Jan 20, 2015 at 12:41 PM, Josh Luthman <
>>> ***@imaginenetworksllc.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>> User base is CLEARLY an important key!!!
>>>>
>>>> collected from W3Schools' log-files since 2002
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Josh Luthman
>>>> Office: 937-552-2340
>>>> Direct: 937-552-2343
>>>> 1100 Wayne St
>>>> Suite 1337
>>>> Troy, OH 45373
>>>>
>>>> On Tue, Jan 20, 2015 at 2:37 PM, Josh Reynolds <***@spitwspots.com>
>>>> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> http://www.w3schools.com/browsers/browsers_stats.asp
>>>>>
>>>>> Chrome (no version attached) has 61% market share
>>>>>
>>>>> On January 20, 2015 10:31:25 AM AKST, Ken Hohhof <***@kwisp.com>
>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> But wait until Windows 10 comes out with the Spartan browser.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> *From:* Adam Moffett <***@gmail.com>
>>>>>> *Sent:* Tuesday, January 20, 2015 1:13 PM
>>>>>> *To:* ***@afmug.com
>>>>>> *Subject:* Re: [AFMUG] EPMP Minimum System Specs <rant>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> http://www.netmarketshare.com/browser-market-share.aspx?qprid=2&qpcustomd=0
>>>>>>
>>>>>> According to that everyone still uses Internet Explorer. I promise
>>>>>> I'm as shocked as you are.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Everyone uses Chrome nowadays.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Josh Luthman
>>>>>> Office: 937-552-2340
>>>>>> Direct: 937-552-2343
>>>>>> 1100 Wayne St
>>>>>> Suite 1337
>>>>>> Troy, OH 45373
>>>>>>
>>>>>> On Tue, Jan 20, 2015 at 2:05 PM, Jeremy <***@gmail.com>
>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Example: Powercode mostly loads and then seems to hang for quite
>>>>>>> awhile on Firefox, but loads fast on Chrome.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> On Tue, Jan 20, 2015 at 12:04 PM, Jeremy <***@gmail.com>
>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> I've never used EPMP but I have noticed some interfaces lag on one
>>>>>>>> browser and not on another. What browser is everyone using when they see
>>>>>>>> lag? What browser are those of you who aren't seeing lag using?
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> On Tue, Jan 20, 2015 at 11:59 AM, Ken Hohhof <***@kwisp.com>
>>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Good job of merging 2 threads! You win one free Internet!
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> *From:* Chuck McCown <***@wbmfg.com>
>>>>>>>>> *Sent:* Tuesday, January 20, 2015 12:48 PM
>>>>>>>>> *To:* ***@afmug.com
>>>>>>>>> *Subject:* Re: [AFMUG] EPMP Minimum System Specs <rant>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Yeah but you bought the advantage GUI license, right?
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> *From:* Sean Heskett <***@zirkel.us>
>>>>>>>>> *Sent:* Tuesday, January 20, 2015 11:45 AM
>>>>>>>>> *To:* ***@afmug.com
>>>>>>>>> *Subject:* Re: [AFMUG] EPMP Minimum System Specs <rant>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> less than 5 seconds on my iPhone as well.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> On Tue, Jan 20, 2015 at 11:43 AM, Josh Luthman <
>>>>>>>>> ***@imaginenetworksllc.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> I doubt that 4 of my high end machines all have the same
>>>>>>>>>> problem. The interface takes too long when it first shows up. Maybe it's
>>>>>>>>>> because it gets all the information at once, maybe not. Don't care. I
>>>>>>>>>> want it to be more smooth and faster.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> My phone (Droid Maxx) is one of the most recent models for
>>>>>>>>>> Android. The interface is terribly slow and clumsy on that.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Well if you feel a poor technology choice was the cause, that's
>>>>>>>>>> fine, but it's just flat out wrong. I don't want to carry a big fat i7
>>>>>>>>>> laptop up the tower when I could just simply use my phone. It works with
>>>>>>>>>> Ubiquiti, FSK Cambium, Tranzeo, Trango, Mikrotik, etc it should only make
>>>>>>>>>> sense the one product with a clumsy interface needs fixed instead of
>>>>>>>>>> changing my devices that work with the competitors products (as well as
>>>>>>>>>> different products under their portfolio).
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Josh Luthman
>>>>>>>>>> Office: 937-552-2340
>>>>>>>>>> Direct: 937-552-2343
>>>>>>>>>> 1100 Wayne St
>>>>>>>>>> Suite 1337
>>>>>>>>>> Troy, OH 45373
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> On Tue, Jan 20, 2015 at 1:36 PM, Sean Heskett <***@zirkel.us>
>>>>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> i'm just stating that on all of our computers i've never seen
>>>>>>>>>>> the ePMP page load slowly.
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> maybe it's a computer problem and not a device problem, just
>>>>>>>>>>> trying to bring valid input to the discussion.
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> On Tue, Jan 20, 2015 at 11:34 AM, Josh Luthman <
>>>>>>>>>>> ***@imaginenetworksllc.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> Why are you/others arguing that the speed is just fine? This
>>>>>>>>>>>> doesn't even make sense. There are people with slower laptops that work
>>>>>>>>>>>> with other modern devices and epmp is the only interface that loads slow.
>>>>>>>>>>>> There's no point in arguing peoples valid complaints. Are you trying to
>>>>>>>>>>>> direct the engineers attention to something else?
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> Josh Luthman
>>>>>>>>>>>> Office: 937-552-2340
>>>>>>>>>>>> Direct: 937-552-2343
>>>>>>>>>>>> 1100 Wayne St
>>>>>>>>>>>> Suite 1337
>>>>>>>>>>>> Troy, OH 45373
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> On Tue, Jan 20, 2015 at 1:30 PM, Mike Hammett <***@ics-il.net
>>>>>>>>>>>> > wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> Three, maybe four seconds to load the initial screen and
>>>>>>>>>>>>> then two maybe three seconds to login. As I doubt a screen capture will
>>>>>>>>>>>>> work when I'm RDPed in, I'll record the entire login process when I get
>>>>>>>>>>>>> home and post it up on YouTube.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> -----
>>>>>>>>>>>>> Mike Hammett
>>>>>>>>>>>>> Intelligent Computing Solutions
>>>>>>>>>>>>> http://www.ics-il.com
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> ------------------------------
>>>>>>>>>>>>> *From: *"Josh Luthman" <***@imaginenetworksllc.com>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> *To: ****@afmug.com
>>>>>>>>>>>>> *Sent: *Tuesday, January 20, 2015 12:26:09 PM
>>>>>>>>>>>>> *Subject: *Re: [AFMUG] EPMP Minimum System Specs <rant>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> Login takes forever. The first like 10-15 seconds just
>>>>>>>>>>>>> load and load and load. Once you're in, it's acceptable in terms of page
>>>>>>>>>>>>> rendering.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> Josh Luthman
>>>>>>>>>>>>> Office: 937-552-2340
>>>>>>>>>>>>> Direct: 937-552-2343
>>>>>>>>>>>>> 1100 Wayne St
>>>>>>>>>>>>> Suite 1337
>>>>>>>>>>>>> Troy, OH 45373
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Tue, Jan 20, 2015 at 1:22 PM, Sean Heskett <***@zirkel.us
>>>>>>>>>>>>> > wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> we use macbook pro's and the ePMP GUI has never been slow for
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> us. It was UGLY, but they fixed that with version 2.0 haha.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> not sure why everyone says it's slow tho because we've never
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> seen it.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 2 cents
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> -sean
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Tue, Jan 20, 2015 at 9:57 AM, Nate Burke <
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> ***@blastcomm.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Ok, Cambium, this is a little sad. My Field Laptop, a
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Lenovo S10-3t, Atom Processor with Windows 8.1 cannot load the EPMP WEB
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Pages in a timely manner. We're talking 40-60 seconds for initial load,
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> and 20-30 seconds per screen refresh/menu change. Since I'm going to have
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> to go to the boss, and tell him that I need a new laptop to do any field
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> troubleshooting for these new radios, what are the minimum system specs for
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> a machine to view the EPMP Screens? Unless Cambium is going to get their
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Web interface under control as of Yesterday.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> They still swear that the GUI was all developed in house and
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> not purchased (something I still can't believe). I'd like to know who the
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> engineers/managers are who signed off on that design. I can only imaging
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> that there was a group of guys sitting around the conference table,
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> watching the presentation on the GUI on the projector up front, all nodding
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> their heads in agreement, "I think this is a wonderful layout, the field
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> tech's won't mind waiting a couple extra minutes for the pages to load so
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> they can look this pretty!!"
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I think that Cambium should step up and get engineers from
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> ALL aspects of product development out into the field. 40 seconds waiting
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> for the page to load is fine when you're sitting in the office, but not
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> when you have the laptop balanced on a stack of firewood in the freezing
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> rain trying to get to the monitoring page to see why a radio isn't linking
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> up. I think that every WISP on this list would be more than happy to host
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> an engineer for a day. Heck, even if they go into the parking lot and
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> assemble it on the tailgate of someone's Pickup, they'll get some idea of
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> what we experience.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I have a feeling that if all steps of the Dev process took a
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> week in the field, We'd have a radio that had a GUI that responded
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> instantly on any device, and radios that assembled and mounted (and
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> unmounted) with 1 gloved hand.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> </rant>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Nate
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>> --
>>>>> Sent from my Android device with K-9 Mail. Please excuse my brevity.
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>

[Jay Weekley]

For me my reloaded my old reliable Acer and the only browser that works
is Chrome and it's tolerable. Firefox, Sea Monkey and Internet Explorer
are way too slow. I'm with Josh; my field laptop works with every other
radio I've used it on. Even PTP 450. It's when I got to ePMP that I
wanted to pull my hair out.

Jeremy wrote:
> I've never used EPMP but I have noticed some interfaces lag on one
> browser and not on another. What browser is everyone using when they
> see lag? What browser are those of you who aren't seeing lag using?
>
> On Tue, Jan 20, 2015 at 11:59 AM, Ken Hohhof <***@kwisp.com
> <mailto:***@kwisp.com>> wrote:
>
> Good job of merging 2 threads! You win one free Internet!
> *From:* Chuck McCown <mailto:***@wbmfg.com>
> *Sent:* Tuesday, January 20, 2015 12:48 PM
> *To:* ***@afmug.com <mailto:***@afmug.com>
> *Subject:* Re: [AFMUG] EPMP Minimum System Specs <rant>
> Yeah but you bought the advantage GUI license, right?
> *From:* Sean Heskett <mailto:***@zirkel.us>
> *Sent:* Tuesday, January 20, 2015 11:45 AM
> *To:* ***@afmug.com <mailto:***@afmug.com>
> *Subject:* Re: [AFMUG] EPMP Minimum System Specs <rant>
> less than 5 seconds on my iPhone as well.
> On Tue, Jan 20, 2015 at 11:43 AM, Josh Luthman
> <***@imaginenetworksllc.com <mailto:***@imaginenetworksllc.com>>
> wrote:
>
> I doubt that 4 of my high end machines all have the same
> problem. The interface takes too long when it first shows up.
> Maybe it's because it gets all the information at once, maybe
> not. Don't care. I want it to be more smooth and faster.
> My phone (Droid Maxx) is one of the most recent models for
> Android. The interface is terribly slow and clumsy on that.
> Well if you feel a poor technology choice was the cause,
> that's fine, but it's just flat out wrong. I don't want to
> carry a big fat i7 laptop up the tower when I could just
> simply use my phone. It works with Ubiquiti, FSK Cambium,
> Tranzeo, Trango, Mikrotik, etc it should only make sense the
> one product with a clumsy interface needs fixed instead of
> changing my devices that work with the competitors products
> (as well as different products under their portfolio).
>
> Josh Luthman
> Office: 937-552-2340 <tel:[phone]>
> Direct: 937-552-2343 <tel:[phone]>
> 1100 Wayne St
> Suite 1337
> Troy, OH 45373
>
> On Tue, Jan 20, 2015 at 1:36 PM, Sean Heskett <***@zirkel.us
> <mailto:***@zirkel.us>> wrote:
>
> i'm just stating that on all of our computers i've never
> seen the ePMP page load slowly.
> maybe it's a computer problem and not a device problem,
> just trying to bring valid input to the discussion.
> On Tue, Jan 20, 2015 at 11:34 AM, Josh Luthman
> <***@imaginenetworksllc.com
> <mailto:***@imaginenetworksllc.com>> wrote:
>
> Why are you/others arguing that the speed is just
> fine? This doesn't even make sense. There are people
> with slower laptops that work with other modern
> devices and epmp is the only interface that loads
> slow. There's no point in arguing peoples valid
> complaints. Are you trying to direct the engineers
> attention to something else?
>
> Josh Luthman
> Office: 937-552-2340 <tel:[phone]>
> Direct: 937-552-2343 <tel:[phone]>
> 1100 Wayne St
> Suite 1337
> Troy, OH 45373
>
> On Tue, Jan 20, 2015 at 1:30 PM, Mike Hammett
> <***@ics-il.net <mailto:***@ics-il.net>> wrote:
>
> Three, maybe four seconds to load the initial
> screen and then two maybe three seconds to login.
> As I doubt a screen capture will work when I'm
> RDPed in, I'll record the entire login process
> when I get home and post it up on YouTube.
>
>
>
> -----
> Mike Hammett
> Intelligent Computing Solutions
> http://www.ics-il.com
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
> *From: *"Josh Luthman"
> <***@imaginenetworksllc.com
> <mailto:***@imaginenetworksllc.com>>
> *To: ****@afmug.com <mailto:***@afmug.com>
> *Sent: *Tuesday, January 20, 2015 12:26:09 PM
> *Subject: *Re: [AFMUG] EPMP Minimum System Specs
> <rant>
>
> Login takes forever. The first like 10-15 seconds
> just load and load and load. Once you're in, it's
> acceptable in terms of page rendering.
> Josh Luthman
> Office: 937-552-2340 <tel:[phone]>
> Direct: 937-552-2343 <tel:[phone]>
> 1100 Wayne St
> Suite 1337
> Troy, OH 45373
> On Tue, Jan 20, 2015 at 1:22 PM, Sean Heskett
> <***@zirkel.us <mailto:***@zirkel.us>> wrote:
>
> we use macbook pro's and the ePMP GUI has
> never been slow for us. It was UGLY, but they
> fixed that with version 2.0 haha.
> not sure why everyone says it's slow tho
> because we've never seen it.
> 2 cents
> -sean
> On Tue, Jan 20, 2015 at 9:57 AM, Nate Burke
> <***@blastcomm.com
> <mailto:***@blastcomm.com>> wrote:
>
> Ok, Cambium, this is a little sad. My
> Field Laptop, a Lenovo S10-3t, Atom
> Processor with Windows 8.1 cannot load the
> EPMP WEB Pages in a timely manner. We're
> talking 40-60 seconds for initial load,
> and 20-30 seconds per screen refresh/menu
> change. Since I'm going to have to go to
> the boss, and tell him that I need a new
> laptop to do any field troubleshooting for
> these new radios, what are the minimum
> system specs for a machine to view the
> EPMP Screens? Unless Cambium is going to
> get their Web interface under control as
> of Yesterday.
>
> They still swear that the GUI was all
> developed in house and not purchased
> (something I still can't believe). I'd
> like to know who the engineers/managers
> are who signed off on that design. I can
> only imaging that there was a group of
> guys sitting around the conference table,
> watching the presentation on the GUI on
> the projector up front, all nodding their
> heads in agreement, "I think this is a
> wonderful layout, the field tech's won't
> mind waiting a couple extra minutes for
> the pages to load so they can look this
> pretty!!"
>
> I think that Cambium should step up and
> get engineers from ALL aspects of product
> development out into the field. 40
> seconds waiting for the page to load is
> fine when you're sitting in the office,
> but not when you have the laptop balanced
> on a stack of firewood in the freezing
> rain trying to get to the monitoring page
> to see why a radio isn't linking up. I
> think that every WISP on this list would
> be more than happy to host an engineer for
> a day. Heck, even if they go into the
> parking lot and assemble it on the
> tailgate of someone's Pickup, they'll get
> some idea of what we experience.
>
> I have a feeling that if all steps of the
> Dev process took a week in the field, We'd
> have a radio that had a GUI that responded
> instantly on any device, and radios that
> assembled and mounted (and unmounted) with
> 1 gloved hand.
>
> </rant>
> Nate
>
>

[Jeremy]

I did, but I think that may be where the problem lies. I think that the
instructions that I was following had me put it in the wrong place. That
is the next thing I was going to check. I just don't have much time for
extra projects and for now Firefox works. I need to figure out how to
generate my own SSL certs for all of our infrastructure gear so that I can
store them on the machine.

On Tue, Jan 20, 2015 at 3:04 PM, Josh Luthman <***@imaginenetworksllc.com>
wrote:

> Did you include the second cert file? Mine works (also Godaddy).
>
> Josh Luthman
> Office: 937-552-2340
> Direct: 937-552-2343
> 1100 Wayne St
> Suite 1337
> Troy, OH 45373
> On Jan 20, 2015 4:56 PM, "Jeremy" <***@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> GoDaddy
>>
>> On Tue, Jan 20, 2015 at 2:51 PM, Josh Luthman <
>> ***@imaginenetworksllc.com> wrote:
>>
>>> What's your Powercode address? Who does your SSL cert?
>>>
>>> Josh Luthman
>>> Office: 937-552-2340
>>> Direct: 937-552-2343
>>> 1100 Wayne St
>>> Suite 1337
>>> Troy, OH 45373
>>> On Jan 20, 2015 4:45 PM, "Jeremy" <***@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>> I used to use Chrome. A few versions back they made it so that you
>>>> cannot save passwords for SSL exceptions, and cannot add permanent
>>>> exceptions. We use SSL on all of our APs, and according to chrome our
>>>> Billing server cert is incorrect, even though we have triple checked the
>>>> install and no other browsers flag it as insecure. This leaves us tapping
>>>> away super long and complicated passwords (what else would we use??) out in
>>>> the field in Chrome, or we use Firefox and deal with a bit of lag in
>>>> Powercode. I find that the small amount of lag is far better than
>>>> constantly trying to tap out passwords on a tablet. Ok, not trying to
>>>> derail this too far OT. Have those of you who are experiencing the lag
>>>> with EPMP tried another browser?
>>>>
>>>> On Tue, Jan 20, 2015 at 12:41 PM, Josh Luthman <
>>>> ***@imaginenetworksllc.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> User base is CLEARLY an important key!!!
>>>>>
>>>>> collected from W3Schools' log-files since 2002
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Josh Luthman
>>>>> Office: 937-552-2340
>>>>> Direct: 937-552-2343
>>>>> 1100 Wayne St
>>>>> Suite 1337
>>>>> Troy, OH 45373
>>>>>
>>>>> On Tue, Jan 20, 2015 at 2:37 PM, Josh Reynolds <***@spitwspots.com>
>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> http://www.w3schools.com/browsers/browsers_stats.asp
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Chrome (no version attached) has 61% market share
>>>>>>
>>>>>> On January 20, 2015 10:31:25 AM AKST, Ken Hohhof <***@kwisp.com>
>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> But wait until Windows 10 comes out with the Spartan browser.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> *From:* Adam Moffett <***@gmail.com>
>>>>>>> *Sent:* Tuesday, January 20, 2015 1:13 PM
>>>>>>> *To:* ***@afmug.com
>>>>>>> *Subject:* Re: [AFMUG] EPMP Minimum System Specs <rant>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> http://www.netmarketshare.com/browser-market-share.aspx?qprid=2&qpcustomd=0
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> According to that everyone still uses Internet Explorer. I promise
>>>>>>> I'm as shocked as you are.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Everyone uses Chrome nowadays.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Josh Luthman
>>>>>>> Office: 937-552-2340
>>>>>>> Direct: 937-552-2343
>>>>>>> 1100 Wayne St
>>>>>>> Suite 1337
>>>>>>> Troy, OH 45373
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> On Tue, Jan 20, 2015 at 2:05 PM, Jeremy <***@gmail.com>
>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Example: Powercode mostly loads and then seems to hang for quite
>>>>>>>> awhile on Firefox, but loads fast on Chrome.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> On Tue, Jan 20, 2015 at 12:04 PM, Jeremy <***@gmail.com>
>>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> I've never used EPMP but I have noticed some interfaces lag on one
>>>>>>>>> browser and not on another. What browser is everyone using when they see
>>>>>>>>> lag? What browser are those of you who aren't seeing lag using?
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> On Tue, Jan 20, 2015 at 11:59 AM, Ken Hohhof <***@kwisp.com>
>>>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Good job of merging 2 threads! You win one free Internet!
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> *From:* Chuck McCown <***@wbmfg.com>
>>>>>>>>>> *Sent:* Tuesday, January 20, 2015 12:48 PM
>>>>>>>>>> *To:* ***@afmug.com
>>>>>>>>>> *Subject:* Re: [AFMUG] EPMP Minimum System Specs <rant>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Yeah but you bought the advantage GUI license, right?
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> *From:* Sean Heskett <***@zirkel.us>
>>>>>>>>>> *Sent:* Tuesday, January 20, 2015 11:45 AM
>>>>>>>>>> *To:* ***@afmug.com
>>>>>>>>>> *Subject:* Re: [AFMUG] EPMP Minimum System Specs <rant>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> less than 5 seconds on my iPhone as well.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> On Tue, Jan 20, 2015 at 11:43 AM, Josh Luthman <
>>>>>>>>>> ***@imaginenetworksllc.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> I doubt that 4 of my high end machines all have the same
>>>>>>>>>>> problem. The interface takes too long when it first shows up. Maybe it's
>>>>>>>>>>> because it gets all the information at once, maybe not. Don't care. I
>>>>>>>>>>> want it to be more smooth and faster.
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> My phone (Droid Maxx) is one of the most recent models for
>>>>>>>>>>> Android. The interface is terribly slow and clumsy on that.
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> Well if you feel a poor technology choice was the cause, that's
>>>>>>>>>>> fine, but it's just flat out wrong. I don't want to carry a big fat i7
>>>>>>>>>>> laptop up the tower when I could just simply use my phone. It works with
>>>>>>>>>>> Ubiquiti, FSK Cambium, Tranzeo, Trango, Mikrotik, etc it should only make
>>>>>>>>>>> sense the one product with a clumsy interface needs fixed instead of
>>>>>>>>>>> changing my devices that work with the competitors products (as well as
>>>>>>>>>>> different products under their portfolio).
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> Josh Luthman
>>>>>>>>>>> Office: 937-552-2340
>>>>>>>>>>> Direct: 937-552-2343
>>>>>>>>>>> 1100 Wayne St
>>>>>>>>>>> Suite 1337
>>>>>>>>>>> Troy, OH 45373
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> On Tue, Jan 20, 2015 at 1:36 PM, Sean Heskett <***@zirkel.us>
>>>>>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> i'm just stating that on all of our computers i've never seen
>>>>>>>>>>>> the ePMP page load slowly.
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> maybe it's a computer problem and not a device problem, just
>>>>>>>>>>>> trying to bring valid input to the discussion.
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> On Tue, Jan 20, 2015 at 11:34 AM, Josh Luthman <
>>>>>>>>>>>> ***@imaginenetworksllc.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> Why are you/others arguing that the speed is just fine? This
>>>>>>>>>>>>> doesn't even make sense. There are people with slower laptops that work
>>>>>>>>>>>>> with other modern devices and epmp is the only interface that loads slow.
>>>>>>>>>>>>> There's no point in arguing peoples valid complaints. Are you trying to
>>>>>>>>>>>>> direct the engineers attention to something else?
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> Josh Luthman
>>>>>>>>>>>>> Office: 937-552-2340
>>>>>>>>>>>>> Direct: 937-552-2343
>>>>>>>>>>>>> 1100 Wayne St
>>>>>>>>>>>>> Suite 1337
>>>>>>>>>>>>> Troy, OH 45373
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Tue, Jan 20, 2015 at 1:30 PM, Mike Hammett <
>>>>>>>>>>>>> ***@ics-il.net> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Three, maybe four seconds to load the initial screen and
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> then two maybe three seconds to login. As I doubt a screen capture will
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> work when I'm RDPed in, I'll record the entire login process when I get
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> home and post it up on YouTube.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> -----
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Mike Hammett
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Intelligent Computing Solutions
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> http://www.ics-il.com
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> ------------------------------
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> *From: *"Josh Luthman" <***@imaginenetworksllc.com>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> *To: ****@afmug.com
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> *Sent: *Tuesday, January 20, 2015 12:26:09 PM
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> *Subject: *Re: [AFMUG] EPMP Minimum System Specs <rant>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Login takes forever. The first like 10-15 seconds just
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> load and load and load. Once you're in, it's acceptable in terms of page
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> rendering.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Josh Luthman
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Office: 937-552-2340
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Direct: 937-552-2343
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 1100 Wayne St
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Suite 1337
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Troy, OH 45373
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Tue, Jan 20, 2015 at 1:22 PM, Sean Heskett <
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> ***@zirkel.us> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> we use macbook pro's and the ePMP GUI has never been slow
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> for us. It was UGLY, but they fixed that with version 2.0 haha.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> not sure why everyone says it's slow tho because we've never
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> seen it.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 2 cents
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> -sean
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Tue, Jan 20, 2015 at 9:57 AM, Nate Burke <
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> ***@blastcomm.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Ok, Cambium, this is a little sad. My Field Laptop, a
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Lenovo S10-3t, Atom Processor with Windows 8.1 cannot load the EPMP WEB
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Pages in a timely manner. We're talking 40-60 seconds for initial load,
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> and 20-30 seconds per screen refresh/menu change. Since I'm going to have
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> to go to the boss, and tell him that I need a new laptop to do any field
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> troubleshooting for these new radios, what are the minimum system specs for
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> a machine to view the EPMP Screens? Unless Cambium is going to get their
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Web interface under control as of Yesterday.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> They still swear that the GUI was all developed in house
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> and not purchased (something I still can't believe). I'd like to know who
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> the engineers/managers are who signed off on that design. I can only
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> imaging that there was a group of guys sitting around the conference table,
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> watching the presentation on the GUI on the projector up front, all nodding
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> their heads in agreement, "I think this is a wonderful layout, the field
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> tech's won't mind waiting a couple extra minutes for the pages to load so
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> they can look this pretty!!"
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I think that Cambium should step up and get engineers from
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> ALL aspects of product development out into the field. 40 seconds waiting
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> for the page to load is fine when you're sitting in the office, but not
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> when you have the laptop balanced on a stack of firewood in the freezing
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> rain trying to get to the monitoring page to see why a radio isn't linking
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> up. I think that every WISP on this list would be more than happy to host
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> an engineer for a day. Heck, even if they go into the parking lot and
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> assemble it on the tailgate of someone's Pickup, they'll get some idea of
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> what we experience.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I have a feeling that if all steps of the Dev process took
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> a week in the field, We'd have a radio that had a GUI that responded
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> instantly on any device, and radios that assembled and mounted (and
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> unmounted) with 1 gloved hand.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> </rant>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Nate
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>> --
>>>>>> Sent from my Android device with K-9 Mail. Please excuse my brevity.
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>
>>

[George Skorup (Cyber Broadcasting)]

I have an original/Gen-I Moto X and the ePMP GUI is somewhat annoyingly
slow. It's maybe 10-12 seconds of "please wait" and then another 4-5
seconds of "getting dashboard" messages. Once I'm logged in, it seems
fine. But the auto refresh scrolling pages all on its own is very
annoying. I'm sure they will improve it. One thing they definitely need
to fix is that for whatever reason, I do not get the "save this
username/password" option. No idea why that is.

And yeah, that's Chrome. Chrome everywhere, because all of my bookmarks
and passwords are sync'd. Even though Chrome's cache pisses me off to no
end, and you wake up one morning and Google moved shit around.. I gots
to have my bookmarks.

On 1/20/2015 1:13 PM, Josh Luthman wrote:
> Galaxy S4 First released26 April 2013; 20 months ago
>
> Isn't this right around the ePMP development time? Granted the phone
> is "a whole generation" back but there's no excuse for something of
> that age to have problems on a radio management page.
>
>
> Josh Luthman
> Office: 937-552-2340
> Direct: 937-552-2343
> 1100 Wayne St
> Suite 1337
> Troy, OH 45373
>
> On Tue, Jan 20, 2015 at 2:11 PM, Mathew Howard <***@gmail.com
> <mailto:***@gmail.com>> wrote:
>
> okay... I just timed it, on my phone (Galaxy S4) it takes about 25
> seconds to get to the login... to actually get logged in and the
> first page loaded took me a full minute - for comparison, I can
> log into a UBNT radio and get the main page loaded in under 15
> seconds.
>
> It takes 4-5 seconds to get to the login on my desktop.
>
> On Tue, Jan 20, 2015 at 12:53 PM, Adam Moffett
> <***@gmail.com <mailto:***@gmail.com>> wrote:
>
> I don't know what makes the GUI slow for you or anybody
> else....I have literally never seen it load slowly. Even on a
> crummy old Atom. Even on a cell phone.
>
> I don't know what to say.
>
>
>> I doubt that 4 of my high end machines all have the same
>> problem. The interface takes too long when it first shows
>> up. Maybe it's because it gets all the information at once,
>> maybe not. Don't care. I want it to be more smooth and faster.
>>
>> My phone (Droid Maxx) is one of the most recent models for
>> Android. The interface is terribly slow and clumsy on that.
>>
>> Well if you feel a poor technology choice was the cause,
>> that's fine, but it's just flat out wrong. I don't want to
>> carry a big fat i7 laptop up the tower when I could just
>> simply use my phone. It works with Ubiquiti, FSK Cambium,
>> Tranzeo, Trango, Mikrotik, etc it should only make sense the
>> one product with a clumsy interface needs fixed instead of
>> changing my devices that work with the competitors products
>> (as well as different products under their portfolio).
>>
>>
>> Josh Luthman
>> Office: 937-552-2340 <tel:[phone]>
>> Direct: 937-552-2343 <tel:[phone]>
>> 1100 Wayne St
>> Suite 1337
>> Troy, OH 45373
>>
>> On Tue, Jan 20, 2015 at 1:36 PM, Sean Heskett
>> <***@zirkel.us <mailto:***@zirkel.us>> wrote:
>>
>> i'm just stating that on all of our computers i've never
>> seen the ePMP page load slowly.
>>
>> maybe it's a computer problem and not a device problem,
>> just trying to bring valid input to the discussion.
>>
>> On Tue, Jan 20, 2015 at 11:34 AM, Josh Luthman
>> <***@imaginenetworksllc.com
>> <mailto:***@imaginenetworksllc.com>> wrote:
>>
>> Why are you/others arguing that the speed is just
>> fine? This doesn't even make sense. There are people
>> with slower laptops that work with other modern
>> devices and epmp is the only interface that loads
>> slow. There's no point in arguing peoples valid
>> complaints. Are you trying to direct the engineers
>> attention to something else?
>>
>>
>> Josh Luthman
>> Office: 937-552-2340 <tel:[phone]>
>> Direct: 937-552-2343 <tel:[phone]>
>> 1100 Wayne St
>> Suite 1337
>> Troy, OH 45373
>>
>> On Tue, Jan 20, 2015 at 1:30 PM, Mike Hammett
>> <***@ics-il.net <mailto:***@ics-il.net>> wrote:
>>
>> Three, maybe four seconds to load the initial
>> screen and then two maybe three seconds to login.
>> As I doubt a screen capture will work when I'm
>> RDPed in, I'll record the entire login process
>> when I get home and post it up on YouTube.
>>
>>
>>
>> -----
>> Mike Hammett
>> Intelligent Computing Solutions
>> http://www.ics-il.com
>>
>> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>> *From: *"Josh Luthman"
>> <***@imaginenetworksllc.com
>> <mailto:***@imaginenetworksllc.com>>
>> *To: ****@afmug.com <mailto:***@afmug.com>
>> *Sent: *Tuesday, January 20, 2015 12:26:09 PM
>> *Subject: *Re: [AFMUG] EPMP Minimum System Specs
>> <rant>
>>
>> Login takes forever. The first like 10-15
>> seconds just load and load and load. Once you're
>> in, it's acceptable in terms of page rendering.
>>
>>
>> Josh Luthman
>> Office: 937-552-2340 <tel:[phone]>
>> Direct: 937-552-2343 <tel:[phone]>
>> 1100 Wayne St
>> Suite 1337
>> Troy, OH 45373
>>
>> On Tue, Jan 20, 2015 at 1:22 PM, Sean Heskett
>> <***@zirkel.us <mailto:***@zirkel.us>> wrote:
>>
>> we use macbook pro's and the ePMP GUI has
>> never been slow for us. It was UGLY, but they
>> fixed that with version 2.0 haha.
>>
>> not sure why everyone says it's slow tho
>> because we've never seen it.
>>
>> 2 cents
>>
>> -sean
>>
>>
>>
>> On Tue, Jan 20, 2015 at 9:57 AM, Nate Burke
>> <***@blastcomm.com
>> <mailto:***@blastcomm.com>> wrote:
>>
>> Ok, Cambium, this is a little sad. My
>> Field Laptop, a Lenovo S10-3t, Atom
>> Processor with Windows 8.1 cannot load
>> the EPMP WEB Pages in a timely manner.
>> We're talking 40-60 seconds for initial
>> load, and 20-30 seconds per screen
>> refresh/menu change. Since I'm going to
>> have to go to the boss, and tell him that
>> I need a new laptop to do any field
>> troubleshooting for these new radios,
>> what are the minimum system specs for a
>> machine to view the EPMP Screens? Unless
>> Cambium is going to get their Web
>> interface under control as of Yesterday.
>>
>> They still swear that the GUI was all
>> developed in house and not purchased
>> (something I still can't believe). I'd
>> like to know who the engineers/managers
>> are who signed off on that design. I can
>> only imaging that there was a group of
>> guys sitting around the conference table,
>> watching the presentation on the GUI on
>> the projector up front, all nodding their
>> heads in agreement, "I think this is a
>> wonderful layout, the field tech's won't
>> mind waiting a couple extra minutes for
>> the pages to load so they can look this
>> pretty!!"
>>
>> I think that Cambium should step up and
>> get engineers from ALL aspects of product
>> development out into the field. 40
>> seconds waiting for the page to load is
>> fine when you're sitting in the office,
>> but not when you have the laptop balanced
>> on a stack of firewood in the freezing
>> rain trying to get to the monitoring page
>> to see why a radio isn't linking up. I
>> think that every WISP on this list would
>> be more than happy to host an engineer
>> for a day. Heck, even if they go into the
>> parking lot and assemble it on the
>> tailgate of someone's Pickup, they'll get
>> some idea of what we experience.
>>
>> I have a feeling that if all steps of the
>> Dev process took a week in the field,
>> We'd have a radio that had a GUI that
>> responded instantly on any device, and
>> radios that assembled and mounted (and
>> unmounted) with 1 gloved hand.
>>
>> </rant>
>> Nate
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>
>
>

[Jeremy]

Firefox also has a sync feature for passwords and bookmarks. Does the EPMP
give you the option to save pass in Firefox? Do they use SSL? If so, that
is why Chrome won't offer to save.
On Jan 20, 2015 7:07 PM, "George Skorup (Cyber Broadcasting)" <
***@cbcast.com> wrote:

> I have an original/Gen-I Moto X and the ePMP GUI is somewhat annoyingly
> slow. It's maybe 10-12 seconds of "please wait" and then another 4-5
> seconds of "getting dashboard" messages. Once I'm logged in, it seems fine.
> But the auto refresh scrolling pages all on its own is very annoying. I'm
> sure they will improve it. One thing they definitely need to fix is that
> for whatever reason, I do not get the "save this username/password" option.
> No idea why that is.
>
> And yeah, that's Chrome. Chrome everywhere, because all of my bookmarks
> and passwords are sync'd. Even though Chrome's cache pisses me off to no
> end, and you wake up one morning and Google moved shit around.. I gots to
> have my bookmarks.
>
> On 1/20/2015 1:13 PM, Josh Luthman wrote:
>
> Galaxy S4 First released 26 April 2013; 20 months ago
>
> Isn't this right around the ePMP development time? Granted the phone is
> "a whole generation" back but there's no excuse for something of that age
> to have problems on a radio management page.
>
>
> Josh Luthman
> Office: 937-552-2340
> Direct: 937-552-2343
> 1100 Wayne St
> Suite 1337
> Troy, OH 45373
>
> On Tue, Jan 20, 2015 at 2:11 PM, Mathew Howard <***@gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
>> okay... I just timed it, on my phone (Galaxy S4) it takes about 25
>> seconds to get to the login... to actually get logged in and the first page
>> loaded took me a full minute - for comparison, I can log into a UBNT radio
>> and get the main page loaded in under 15 seconds.
>>
>> It takes 4-5 seconds to get to the login on my desktop.
>>
>> On Tue, Jan 20, 2015 at 12:53 PM, Adam Moffett <***@gmail.com>
>> wrote:
>>
>>> I don't know what makes the GUI slow for you or anybody else....I have
>>> literally never seen it load slowly. Even on a crummy old Atom. Even on a
>>> cell phone.
>>>
>>> I don't know what to say.
>>>
>>>
>>> I doubt that 4 of my high end machines all have the same problem. The
>>> interface takes too long when it first shows up. Maybe it's because it
>>> gets all the information at once, maybe not. Don't care. I want it to be
>>> more smooth and faster.
>>>
>>> My phone (Droid Maxx) is one of the most recent models for Android.
>>> The interface is terribly slow and clumsy on that.
>>>
>>> Well if you feel a poor technology choice was the cause, that's fine,
>>> but it's just flat out wrong. I don't want to carry a big fat i7 laptop up
>>> the tower when I could just simply use my phone. It works with Ubiquiti,
>>> FSK Cambium, Tranzeo, Trango, Mikrotik, etc it should only make sense the
>>> one product with a clumsy interface needs fixed instead of changing my
>>> devices that work with the competitors products (as well as different
>>> products under their portfolio).
>>>
>>>
>>> Josh Luthman
>>> Office: 937-552-2340
>>> Direct: 937-552-2343
>>> 1100 Wayne St
>>> Suite 1337
>>> Troy, OH 45373
>>>
>>> On Tue, Jan 20, 2015 at 1:36 PM, Sean Heskett <***@zirkel.us> wrote:
>>>
>>>> i'm just stating that on all of our computers i've never seen the ePMP
>>>> page load slowly.
>>>>
>>>> maybe it's a computer problem and not a device problem, just trying
>>>> to bring valid input to the discussion.
>>>>
>>>> On Tue, Jan 20, 2015 at 11:34 AM, Josh Luthman <
>>>> ***@imaginenetworksllc.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> Why are you/others arguing that the speed is just fine? This doesn't
>>>>> even make sense. There are people with slower laptops that work with other
>>>>> modern devices and epmp is the only interface that loads slow. There's no
>>>>> point in arguing peoples valid complaints. Are you trying to direct the
>>>>> engineers attention to something else?
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Josh Luthman
>>>>> Office: 937-552-2340
>>>>> Direct: 937-552-2343
>>>>> 1100 Wayne St
>>>>> Suite 1337
>>>>> Troy, OH 45373
>>>>>
>>>>> On Tue, Jan 20, 2015 at 1:30 PM, Mike Hammett <***@ics-il.net>
>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> Three, maybe four seconds to load the initial screen and then two
>>>>>> maybe three seconds to login. As I doubt a screen capture will work when
>>>>>> I'm RDPed in, I'll record the entire login process when I get home and post
>>>>>> it up on YouTube.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> -----
>>>>>> Mike Hammett
>>>>>> Intelligent Computing Solutions
>>>>>> http://www.ics-il.com
>>>>>>
>>>>>> ------------------------------
>>>>>> *From: *"Josh Luthman" <***@imaginenetworksllc.com>
>>>>>> *To: ****@afmug.com
>>>>>> *Sent: *Tuesday, January 20, 2015 12:26:09 PM
>>>>>> *Subject: *Re: [AFMUG] EPMP Minimum System Specs <rant>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Login takes forever. The first like 10-15 seconds just load and
>>>>>> load and load. Once you're in, it's acceptable in terms of page rendering.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Josh Luthman
>>>>>> Office: 937-552-2340
>>>>>> Direct: 937-552-2343
>>>>>> 1100 Wayne St
>>>>>> Suite 1337
>>>>>> Troy, OH 45373
>>>>>>
>>>>>> On Tue, Jan 20, 2015 at 1:22 PM, Sean Heskett <***@zirkel.us>
>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> we use macbook pro's and the ePMP GUI has never been slow for us.
>>>>>>> It was UGLY, but they fixed that with version 2.0 haha.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> not sure why everyone says it's slow tho because we've never seen
>>>>>>> it.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> 2 cents
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> -sean
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> On Tue, Jan 20, 2015 at 9:57 AM, Nate Burke <***@blastcomm.com>
>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Ok, Cambium, this is a little sad. My Field Laptop, a Lenovo
>>>>>>>> S10-3t, Atom Processor with Windows 8.1 cannot load the EPMP WEB Pages in a
>>>>>>>> timely manner. We're talking 40-60 seconds for initial load, and 20-30
>>>>>>>> seconds per screen refresh/menu change. Since I'm going to have to go to
>>>>>>>> the boss, and tell him that I need a new laptop to do any field
>>>>>>>> troubleshooting for these new radios, what are the minimum system specs for
>>>>>>>> a machine to view the EPMP Screens? Unless Cambium is going to get their
>>>>>>>> Web interface under control as of Yesterday.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> They still swear that the GUI was all developed in house and not
>>>>>>>> purchased (something I still can't believe). I'd like to know who the
>>>>>>>> engineers/managers are who signed off on that design. I can only imaging
>>>>>>>> that there was a group of guys sitting around the conference table,
>>>>>>>> watching the presentation on the GUI on the projector up front, all nodding
>>>>>>>> their heads in agreement, "I think this is a wonderful layout, the field
>>>>>>>> tech's won't mind waiting a couple extra minutes for the pages to load so
>>>>>>>> they can look this pretty!!"
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> I think that Cambium should step up and get engineers from ALL
>>>>>>>> aspects of product development out into the field. 40 seconds waiting for
>>>>>>>> the page to load is fine when you're sitting in the office, but not when
>>>>>>>> you have the laptop balanced on a stack of firewood in the freezing rain
>>>>>>>> trying to get to the monitoring page to see why a radio isn't linking up.
>>>>>>>> I think that every WISP on this list would be more than happy to host an
>>>>>>>> engineer for a day. Heck, even if they go into the parking lot and assemble
>>>>>>>> it on the tailgate of someone's Pickup, they'll get some idea of what we
>>>>>>>> experience.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> I have a feeling that if all steps of the Dev process took a week
>>>>>>>> in the field, We'd have a radio that had a GUI that responded instantly on
>>>>>>>> any device, and radios that assembled and mounted (and unmounted) with 1
>>>>>>>> gloved hand.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> </rant>
>>>>>>>> Nate
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
>
>

[CBB - Jay Fuller]

not i. i'm too paranoid google will catalog everything i see and do.
i still enjoy using an old netscape clone (seamoney) although chrome is loaded for certain tasks.
FYI - seamonkey is 3-5 seconds to load (sitting at "loading dashboard parms" ) ; followed by a normal login.
no complaints - ok , min complaints.

----- Original Message -----
From: Josh Luthman
To: ***@afmug.com
Sent: Tuesday, January 20, 2015 1:08 PM
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] EPMP Minimum System Specs <rant>


Everyone uses Chrome nowadays.




Josh Luthman
Office: 937-552-2340
Direct: 937-552-2343
1100 Wayne St
Suite 1337
Troy, OH 45373


On Tue, Jan 20, 2015 at 2:05 PM, Jeremy <***@gmail.com> wrote:

Example: Powercode mostly loads and then seems to hang for quite awhile on Firefox, but loads fast on Chrome.


On Tue, Jan 20, 2015 at 12:04 PM, Jeremy <***@gmail.com> wrote:

I've never used EPMP but I have noticed some interfaces lag on one browser and not on another. What browser is everyone using when they see lag? What browser are those of you who aren't seeing lag using?


On Tue, Jan 20, 2015 at 11:59 AM, Ken Hohhof <***@kwisp.com> wrote:

Good job of merging 2 threads! You win one free Internet!

From: Chuck McCown
Sent: Tuesday, January 20, 2015 12:48 PM
To: ***@afmug.com
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] EPMP Minimum System Specs <rant>

Yeah but you bought the advantage GUI license, right?

From: Sean Heskett
Sent: Tuesday, January 20, 2015 11:45 AM
To: ***@afmug.com
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] EPMP Minimum System Specs <rant>

less than 5 seconds on my iPhone as well.



On Tue, Jan 20, 2015 at 11:43 AM, Josh Luthman <***@imaginenetworksllc.com> wrote:

I doubt that 4 of my high end machines all have the same problem. The interface takes too long when it first shows up. Maybe it's because it gets all the information at once, maybe not. Don't care. I want it to be more smooth and faster.

My phone (Droid Maxx) is one of the most recent models for Android. The interface is terribly slow and clumsy on that.

Well if you feel a poor technology choice was the cause, that's fine, but it's just flat out wrong. I don't want to carry a big fat i7 laptop up the tower when I could just simply use my phone. It works with Ubiquiti, FSK Cambium, Tranzeo, Trango, Mikrotik, etc it should only make sense the one product with a clumsy interface needs fixed instead of changing my devices that work with the competitors products (as well as different products under their portfolio).



Josh Luthman
Office: 937-552-2340
Direct: 937-552-2343
1100 Wayne St
Suite 1337
Troy, OH 45373


On Tue, Jan 20, 2015 at 1:36 PM, Sean Heskett <***@zirkel.us> wrote:

i'm just stating that on all of our computers i've never seen the ePMP page load slowly.

maybe it's a computer problem and not a device problem, just trying to bring valid input to the discussion.

On Tue, Jan 20, 2015 at 11:34 AM, Josh Luthman <***@imaginenetworksllc.com> wrote:

Why are you/others arguing that the speed is just fine? This doesn't even make sense. There are people with slower laptops that work with other modern devices and epmp is the only interface that loads slow. There's no point in arguing peoples valid complaints. Are you trying to direct the engineers attention to something else?



Josh Luthman
Office: 937-552-2340
Direct: 937-552-2343
1100 Wayne St
Suite 1337
Troy, OH 45373


On Tue, Jan 20, 2015 at 1:30 PM, Mike Hammett <***@ics-il.net> wrote:

Three, maybe four seconds to load the initial screen and then two maybe three seconds to login. As I doubt a screen capture will work when I'm RDPed in, I'll record the entire login process when I get home and post it up on YouTube.




-----
Mike Hammett
Intelligent Computing Solutions
http://www.ics-il.com



----------------------------------------------------------------

From: "Josh Luthman" <***@imaginenetworksllc.com>
To: ***@afmug.com
Sent: Tuesday, January 20, 2015 12:26:09 PM
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] EPMP Minimum System Specs <rant>


Login takes forever. The first like 10-15 seconds just load and load and load. Once you're in, it's acceptable in terms of page rendering.


Josh Luthman
Office: 937-552-2340
Direct: 937-552-2343
1100 Wayne St
Suite 1337
Troy, OH 45373

On Tue, Jan 20, 2015 at 1:22 PM, Sean Heskett <***@zirkel.us> wrote:

we use macbook pro's and the ePMP GUI has never been slow for us. It was UGLY, but they fixed that with version 2.0 haha.

not sure why everyone says it's slow tho because we've never seen it.

2 cents

-sean



On Tue, Jan 20, 2015 at 9:57 AM, Nate Burke <***@blastcomm.com> wrote:

Ok, Cambium, this is a little sad. My Field Laptop, a Lenovo S10-3t, Atom Processor with Windows 8.1 cannot load the EPMP WEB Pages in a timely manner. We're talking 40-60 seconds for initial load, and 20-30 seconds per screen refresh/menu change. Since I'm going to have to go to the boss, and tell him that I need a new laptop to do any field troubleshooting for these new radios, what are the minimum system specs for a machine to view the EPMP Screens? Unless Cambium is going to get their Web interface under control as of Yesterday.

They still swear that the GUI was all developed in house and not purchased (something I still can't believe). I'd like to know who the engineers/managers are who signed off on that design. I can only imaging that there was a group of guys sitting around the conference table, watching the presentation on the GUI on the projector up front, all nodding their heads in agreement, "I think this is a wonderful layout, the field tech's won't mind waiting a couple extra minutes for the pages to load so they can look this pretty!!"

I think that Cambium should step up and get engineers from ALL aspects of product development out into the field. 40 seconds waiting for the page to load is fine when you're sitting in the office, but not when you have the laptop balanced on a stack of firewood in the freezing rain trying to get to the monitoring page to see why a radio isn't linking up. I think that every WISP on this list would be more than happy to host an engineer for a day. Heck, even if they go into the parking lot and assemble it on the tailgate of someone's Pickup, they'll get some idea of what we experience.

I have a feeling that if all steps of the Dev process took a week in the field, We'd have a radio that had a GUI that responded instantly on any device, and radios that assembled and mounted (and unmounted) with 1 gloved hand.

</rant>
Nate

[CBB - Jay Fuller]

if i remember correctly your netbook is windows xp which means IE is capped....i believe at version 8 ?
it's pretty much useless for anything new (browser wise)

----- Original Message -----
From: Jay Weekley
To: ***@afmug.com
Sent: Tuesday, January 20, 2015 4:06 PM
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] EPMP Minimum System Specs <rant>


For me my reloaded my old reliable Acer and the only browser that works
is Chrome and it's tolerable. Firefox, Sea Monkey and Internet Explorer
are way too slow. I'm with Josh; my field laptop works with every other
radio I've used it on. Even PTP 450. It's when I got to ePMP that I
wanted to pull my hair out.

Jeremy wrote:
> I've never used EPMP but I have noticed some interfaces lag on one
> browser and not on another. What browser is everyone using when they
> see lag? What browser are those of you who aren't seeing lag using?
>
> On Tue, Jan 20, 2015 at 11:59 AM, Ken Hohhof <***@kwisp.com
> <mailto:***@kwisp.com>> wrote:
>
> Good job of merging 2 threads! You win one free Internet!
> *From:* Chuck McCown <mailto:***@wbmfg.com>
> *Sent:* Tuesday, January 20, 2015 12:48 PM
> *To:* ***@afmug.com <mailto:***@afmug.com>
> *Subject:* Re: [AFMUG] EPMP Minimum System Specs <rant>
> Yeah but you bought the advantage GUI license, right?
> *From:* Sean Heskett <mailto:***@zirkel.us>
> *Sent:* Tuesday, January 20, 2015 11:45 AM
> *To:* ***@afmug.com <mailto:***@afmug.com>
> *Subject:* Re: [AFMUG] EPMP Minimum System Specs <rant>
> less than 5 seconds on my iPhone as well.
> On Tue, Jan 20, 2015 at 11:43 AM, Josh Luthman
> <***@imaginenetworksllc.com <mailto:***@imaginenetworksllc.com>>
> wrote:
>
> I doubt that 4 of my high end machines all have the same
> problem. The interface takes too long when it first shows up.
> Maybe it's because it gets all the information at once, maybe
> not. Don't care. I want it to be more smooth and faster.
> My phone (Droid Maxx) is one of the most recent models for
> Android. The interface is terribly slow and clumsy on that.
> Well if you feel a poor technology choice was the cause,
> that's fine, but it's just flat out wrong. I don't want to
> carry a big fat i7 laptop up the tower when I could just
> simply use my phone. It works with Ubiquiti, FSK Cambium,
> Tranzeo, Trango, Mikrotik, etc it should only make sense the
> one product with a clumsy interface needs fixed instead of
> changing my devices that work with the competitors products
> (as well as different products under their portfolio).
>
> Josh Luthman
> Office: 937-552-2340 <tel:[phone]>
> Direct: 937-552-2343 <tel:[phone]>
> 1100 Wayne St
> Suite 1337
> Troy, OH 45373
>
> On Tue, Jan 20, 2015 at 1:36 PM, Sean Heskett <***@zirkel.us
> <mailto:***@zirkel.us>> wrote:
>
> i'm just stating that on all of our computers i've never
> seen the ePMP page load slowly.
> maybe it's a computer problem and not a device problem,
> just trying to bring valid input to the discussion.
> On Tue, Jan 20, 2015 at 11:34 AM, Josh Luthman
> <***@imaginenetworksllc.com
> <mailto:***@imaginenetworksllc.com>> wrote:
>
> Why are you/others arguing that the speed is just
> fine? This doesn't even make sense. There are people
> with slower laptops that work with other modern
> devices and epmp is the only interface that loads
> slow. There's no point in arguing peoples valid
> complaints. Are you trying to direct the engineers
> attention to something else?
>
> Josh Luthman
> Office: 937-552-2340 <tel:[phone]>
> Direct: 937-552-2343 <tel:[phone]>
> 1100 Wayne St
> Suite 1337
> Troy, OH 45373
>
> On Tue, Jan 20, 2015 at 1:30 PM, Mike Hammett
> <***@ics-il.net <mailto:***@ics-il.net>> wrote:
>
> Three, maybe four seconds to load the initial
> screen and then two maybe three seconds to login.
> As I doubt a screen capture will work when I'm
> RDPed in, I'll record the entire login process
> when I get home and post it up on YouTube.
>
>
>
> -----
> Mike Hammett
> Intelligent Computing Solutions
> http://www.ics-il.com
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
> *From: *"Josh Luthman"
> <***@imaginenetworksllc.com
> <mailto:***@imaginenetworksllc.com>>
> *To: ****@afmug.com <mailto:***@afmug.com>
> *Sent: *Tuesday, January 20, 2015 12:26:09 PM
> *Subject: *Re: [AFMUG] EPMP Minimum System Specs
> <rant>
>
> Login takes forever. The first like 10-15 seconds
> just load and load and load. Once you're in, it's
> acceptable in terms of page rendering.
> Josh Luthman
> Office: 937-552-2340 <tel:[phone]>
> Direct: 937-552-2343 <tel:[phone]>
> 1100 Wayne St
> Suite 1337
> Troy, OH 45373
> On Tue, Jan 20, 2015 at 1:22 PM, Sean Heskett
> <***@zirkel.us <mailto:***@zirkel.us>> wrote:
>
> we use macbook pro's and the ePMP GUI has
> never been slow for us. It was UGLY, but they
> fixed that with version 2.0 haha.
> not sure why everyone says it's slow tho
> because we've never seen it.
> 2 cents
> -sean
> On Tue, Jan 20, 2015 at 9:57 AM, Nate Burke
> <***@blastcomm.com
> <mailto:***@blastcomm.com>> wrote:
>
> Ok, Cambium, this is a little sad. My
> Field Laptop, a Lenovo S10-3t, Atom
> Processor with Windows 8.1 cannot load the
> EPMP WEB Pages in a timely manner. We're
> talking 40-60 seconds for initial load,
> and 20-30 seconds per screen refresh/menu
> change. Since I'm going to have to go to
> the boss, and tell him that I need a new
> laptop to do any field troubleshooting for
> these new radios, what are the minimum
> system specs for a machine to view the
> EPMP Screens? Unless Cambium is going to
> get their Web interface under control as
> of Yesterday.
>
> They still swear that the GUI was all
> developed in house and not purchased
> (something I still can't believe). I'd
> like to know who the engineers/managers
> are who signed off on that design. I can
> only imaging that there was a group of
> guys sitting around the conference table,
> watching the presentation on the GUI on
> the projector up front, all nodding their
> heads in agreement, "I think this is a
> wonderful layout, the field tech's won't
> mind waiting a couple extra minutes for
> the pages to load so they can look this
> pretty!!"
>
> I think that Cambium should step up and
> get engineers from ALL aspects of product
> development out into the field. 40
> seconds waiting for the page to load is
> fine when you're sitting in the office,
> but not when you have the laptop balanced
> on a stack of firewood in the freezing
> rain trying to get to the monitoring page
> to see why a radio isn't linking up. I
> think that every WISP on this list would
> be more than happy to host an engineer for
> a day. Heck, even if they go into the
> parking lot and assemble it on the
> tailgate of someone's Pickup, they'll get
> some idea of what we experience.
>
> I have a feeling that if all steps of the
> Dev process took a week in the field, We'd
> have a radio that had a GUI that responded
> instantly on any device, and radios that
> assembled and mounted (and unmounted) with
> 1 gloved hand.
>
> </rant>
> Nate
>
>

[Josh Reynolds]

*everybody*, from the NSA, FBI, DEA, <insert agency here> knows
everything you do already.

josh reynolds :: chief information officer
spitwspots :: www.spitwspots.com

On 01/20/2015 10:35 PM, CBB - Jay Fuller wrote:
> not i. i'm too paranoid google will catalog everything i see and do.
> i still enjoy using an old netscape clone (seamoney) although chrome is loaded for certain tasks.
> FYI - seamonkey is 3-5 seconds to load (sitting at "loading dashboard parms" ) ; followed by a normal login.
> no complaints - ok , min complaints.
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: Josh Luthman
> To: ***@afmug.com
> Sent: Tuesday, January 20, 2015 1:08 PM
> Subject: Re: [AFMUG] EPMP Minimum System Specs <rant>
>
>
> Everyone uses Chrome nowadays.
>
>
>
>
> Josh Luthman
> Office: 937-552-2340
> Direct: 937-552-2343
> 1100 Wayne St
> Suite 1337
> Troy, OH 45373
>
>
> On Tue, Jan 20, 2015 at 2:05 PM, Jeremy <***@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> Example: Powercode mostly loads and then seems to hang for quite awhile on Firefox, but loads fast on Chrome.
>
>
> On Tue, Jan 20, 2015 at 12:04 PM, Jeremy <***@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> I've never used EPMP but I have noticed some interfaces lag on one browser and not on another. What browser is everyone using when they see lag? What browser are those of you who aren't seeing lag using?
>
>
> On Tue, Jan 20, 2015 at 11:59 AM, Ken Hohhof <***@kwisp.com> wrote:
>
> Good job of merging 2 threads! You win one free Internet!
>
> From: Chuck McCown
> Sent: Tuesday, January 20, 2015 12:48 PM
> To: ***@afmug.com
> Subject: Re: [AFMUG] EPMP Minimum System Specs <rant>
>
> Yeah but you bought the advantage GUI license, right?
>
> From: Sean Heskett
> Sent: Tuesday, January 20, 2015 11:45 AM
> To: ***@afmug.com
> Subject: Re: [AFMUG] EPMP Minimum System Specs <rant>
>
> less than 5 seconds on my iPhone as well.
>
>
>
> On Tue, Jan 20, 2015 at 11:43 AM, Josh Luthman <***@imaginenetworksllc.com> wrote:
>
> I doubt that 4 of my high end machines all have the same problem. The interface takes too long when it first shows up. Maybe it's because it gets all the information at once, maybe not. Don't care. I want it to be more smooth and faster.
>
> My phone (Droid Maxx) is one of the most recent models for Android. The interface is terribly slow and clumsy on that.
>
> Well if you feel a poor technology choice was the cause, that's fine, but it's just flat out wrong. I don't want to carry a big fat i7 laptop up the tower when I could just simply use my phone. It works with Ubiquiti, FSK Cambium, Tranzeo, Trango, Mikrotik, etc it should only make sense the one product with a clumsy interface needs fixed instead of changing my devices that work with the competitors products (as well as different products under their portfolio).
>
>
>
> Josh Luthman
> Office: 937-552-2340
> Direct: 937-552-2343
> 1100 Wayne St
> Suite 1337
> Troy, OH 45373
>
>
> On Tue, Jan 20, 2015 at 1:36 PM, Sean Heskett <***@zirkel.us> wrote:
>
> i'm just stating that on all of our computers i've never seen the ePMP page load slowly.
>
> maybe it's a computer problem and not a device problem, just trying to bring valid input to the discussion.
>
> On Tue, Jan 20, 2015 at 11:34 AM, Josh Luthman <***@imaginenetworksllc.com> wrote:
>
> Why are you/others arguing that the speed is just fine? This doesn't even make sense. There are people with slower laptops that work with other modern devices and epmp is the only interface that loads slow. There's no point in arguing peoples valid complaints. Are you trying to direct the engineers attention to something else?
>
>
>
> Josh Luthman
> Office: 937-552-2340
> Direct: 937-552-2343
> 1100 Wayne St
> Suite 1337
> Troy, OH 45373
>
>
> On Tue, Jan 20, 2015 at 1:30 PM, Mike Hammett <***@ics-il.net> wrote:
>
> Three, maybe four seconds to load the initial screen and then two maybe three seconds to login. As I doubt a screen capture will work when I'm RDPed in, I'll record the entire login process when I get home and post it up on YouTube.
>
>
>
>
> -----
> Mike Hammett
> Intelligent Computing Solutions
> http://www.ics-il.com
>
>
>
> ----------------------------------------------------------------
>
> From: "Josh Luthman" <***@imaginenetworksllc.com>
> To: ***@afmug.com
> Sent: Tuesday, January 20, 2015 12:26:09 PM
> Subject: Re: [AFMUG] EPMP Minimum System Specs <rant>
>
>
> Login takes forever. The first like 10-15 seconds just load and load and load. Once you're in, it's acceptable in terms of page rendering.
>
>
> Josh Luthman
> Office: 937-552-2340
> Direct: 937-552-2343
> 1100 Wayne St
> Suite 1337
> Troy, OH 45373
>
> On Tue, Jan 20, 2015 at 1:22 PM, Sean Heskett <***@zirkel.us> wrote:
>
> we use macbook pro's and the ePMP GUI has never been slow for us. It was UGLY, but they fixed that with version 2.0 haha.
>
> not sure why everyone says it's slow tho because we've never seen it.
>
> 2 cents
>
> -sean
>
>
>
> On Tue, Jan 20, 2015 at 9:57 AM, Nate Burke <***@blastcomm.com> wrote:
>
> Ok, Cambium, this is a little sad. My Field Laptop, a Lenovo S10-3t, Atom Processor with Windows 8.1 cannot load the EPMP WEB Pages in a timely manner. We're talking 40-60 seconds for initial load, and 20-30 seconds per screen refresh/menu change. Since I'm going to have to go to the boss, and tell him that I need a new laptop to do any field troubleshooting for these new radios, what are the minimum system specs for a machine to view the EPMP Screens? Unless Cambium is going to get their Web interface under control as of Yesterday.
>
> They still swear that the GUI was all developed in house and not purchased (something I still can't believe). I'd like to know who the engineers/managers are who signed off on that design. I can only imaging that there was a group of guys sitting around the conference table, watching the presentation on the GUI on the projector up front, all nodding their heads in agreement, "I think this is a wonderful layout, the field tech's won't mind waiting a couple extra minutes for the pages to load so they can look this pretty!!"
>
> I think that Cambium should step up and get engineers from ALL aspects of product development out into the field. 40 seconds waiting for the page to load is fine when you're sitting in the office, but not when you have the laptop balanced on a stack of firewood in the freezing rain trying to get to the monitoring page to see why a radio isn't linking up. I think that every WISP on this list would be more than happy to host an engineer for a day. Heck, even if they go into the parking lot and assemble it on the tailgate of someone's Pickup, they'll get some idea of what we experience.
>
> I have a feeling that if all steps of the Dev process took a week in the field, We'd have a radio that had a GUI that responded instantly on any device, and radios that assembled and mounted (and unmounted) with 1 gloved hand.
>
> </rant>
> Nate
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>

[CBB - Jay Fuller]

I do recall they did completely redesign the interface, due to our request, after the initial complaints of v1.... : /

----- Original Message -----
From: Vlad Sedov
To: ***@afmug.com
Sent: Tuesday, January 20, 2015 11:15 AM
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] EPMP Minimum System Specs <rant>


This has been one of our biggest complaints from day one.
The interface, while it has gotten slightly more usable, is still
complete garbage. It's unpredictable, slow, and inconsistent.. Let alone
the features that just don't work.

Why on earth did they not just stick with a field-tested, fast, usable
interface from the Canopy line? Nobody buys a radio for it's slide-out
menus and pretty HTML5 crap.
We need, fast, intuitive, consistent.. Forget the shiny.

grr

Vlad


On 1/20/2015 10:57 AM, Nate Burke wrote:
> Ok, Cambium, this is a little sad. My Field Laptop, a Lenovo S10-3t,
> Atom Processor with Windows 8.1 cannot load the EPMP WEB Pages in a
> timely manner. We're talking 40-60 seconds for initial load, and
> 20-30 seconds per screen refresh/menu change. Since I'm going to have
> to go to the boss, and tell him that I need a new laptop to do any
> field troubleshooting for these new radios, what are the minimum
> system specs for a machine to view the EPMP Screens? Unless Cambium
> is going to get their Web interface under control as of Yesterday.
>
> They still swear that the GUI was all developed in house and not
> purchased (something I still can't believe). I'd like to know who the
> engineers/managers are who signed off on that design. I can only
> imaging that there was a group of guys sitting around the conference
> table, watching the presentation on the GUI on the projector up front,
> all nodding their heads in agreement, "I think this is a wonderful
> layout, the field tech's won't mind waiting a couple extra minutes for
> the pages to load so they can look this pretty!!"
>
> I think that Cambium should step up and get engineers from ALL aspects
> of product development out into the field. 40 seconds waiting for the
> page to load is fine when you're sitting in the office, but not when
> you have the laptop balanced on a stack of firewood in the freezing
> rain trying to get to the monitoring page to see why a radio isn't
> linking up. I think that every WISP on this list would be more than
> happy to host an engineer for a day. Heck, even if they go into the
> parking lot and assemble it on the tailgate of someone's Pickup,
> they'll get some idea of what we experience.
>
> I have a feeling that if all steps of the Dev process took a week in
> the field, We'd have a radio that had a GUI that responded instantly
> on any device, and radios that assembled and mounted (and unmounted)
> with 1 gloved hand.
>
> </rant>
> Nate

[CBB - Jay Fuller]

Similar experience here ; 4-5 seconds for initial screen to load, read all the stuff, another 2-3 seconds to login.
I can't say i'm complaining, but sure, there is room for improvement.

----- Original Message -----
From: Mike Hammett
To: ***@afmug.com
Sent: Tuesday, January 20, 2015 12:30 PM
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] EPMP Minimum System Specs <rant>


Three, maybe four seconds to load the initial screen and then two maybe three seconds to login. As I doubt a screen capture will work when I'm RDPed in, I'll record the entire login process when I get home and post it up on YouTube.




-----
Mike Hammett
Intelligent Computing Solutions
http://www.ics-il.com



------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: "Josh Luthman" <***@imaginenetworksllc.com>
To: ***@afmug.com
Sent: Tuesday, January 20, 2015 12:26:09 PM
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] EPMP Minimum System Specs <rant>


Login takes forever. The first like 10-15 seconds just load and load and load. Once you're in, it's acceptable in terms of page rendering.




Josh Luthman
Office: 937-552-2340
Direct: 937-552-2343
1100 Wayne St
Suite 1337
Troy, OH 45373


On Tue, Jan 20, 2015 at 1:22 PM, Sean Heskett <***@zirkel.us> wrote:

we use macbook pro's and the ePMP GUI has never been slow for us. It was UGLY, but they fixed that with version 2.0 haha.


not sure why everyone says it's slow tho because we've never seen it.


2 cents


-sean






On Tue, Jan 20, 2015 at 9:57 AM, Nate Burke <***@blastcomm.com> wrote:

Ok, Cambium, this is a little sad. My Field Laptop, a Lenovo S10-3t, Atom Processor with Windows 8.1 cannot load the EPMP WEB Pages in a timely manner. We're talking 40-60 seconds for initial load, and 20-30 seconds per screen refresh/menu change. Since I'm going to have to go to the boss, and tell him that I need a new laptop to do any field troubleshooting for these new radios, what are the minimum system specs for a machine to view the EPMP Screens? Unless Cambium is going to get their Web interface under control as of Yesterday.

They still swear that the GUI was all developed in house and not purchased (something I still can't believe). I'd like to know who the engineers/managers are who signed off on that design. I can only imaging that there was a group of guys sitting around the conference table, watching the presentation on the GUI on the projector up front, all nodding their heads in agreement, "I think this is a wonderful layout, the field tech's won't mind waiting a couple extra minutes for the pages to load so they can look this pretty!!"

I think that Cambium should step up and get engineers from ALL aspects of product development out into the field. 40 seconds waiting for the page to load is fine when you're sitting in the office, but not when you have the laptop balanced on a stack of firewood in the freezing rain trying to get to the monitoring page to see why a radio isn't linking up. I think that every WISP on this list would be more than happy to host an engineer for a day. Heck, even if they go into the parking lot and assemble it on the tailgate of someone's Pickup, they'll get some idea of what we experience.

I have a feeling that if all steps of the Dev process took a week in the field, We'd have a radio that had a GUI that responded instantly on any device, and radios that assembled and mounted (and unmounted) with 1 gloved hand.

</rant>
Nate

[CBB - Jay Fuller]

yah, if it's a school, someone ELSE selected what browser they use...

----- Original Message -----
From: Josh Luthman
To: ***@afmug.com
Sent: Tuesday, January 20, 2015 1:41 PM
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] EPMP Minimum System Specs <rant>


User base is CLEARLY an important key!!!


collected from W3Schools' log-files since 2002





Josh Luthman
Office: 937-552-2340
Direct: 937-552-2343
1100 Wayne St
Suite 1337
Troy, OH 45373


On Tue, Jan 20, 2015 at 2:37 PM, Josh Reynolds <***@spitwspots.com> wrote:

http://www.w3schools.com/browsers/browsers_stats.asp

Chrome (no version attached) has 61% market share


On January 20, 2015 10:31:25 AM AKST, Ken Hohhof <***@kwisp.com> wrote:
But wait until Windows 10 comes out with the Spartan browser.

From: Adam Moffett
Sent: Tuesday, January 20, 2015 1:13 PM
To: ***@afmug.com
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] EPMP Minimum System Specs <rant>


http://www.netmarketshare.com/browser-market-share.aspx?qprid=2&qpcustomd=0

According to that everyone still uses Internet Explorer. I promise I'm as shocked as you are.


Everyone uses Chrome nowadays.


Josh Luthman
Office: 937-552-2340
Direct: 937-552-2343
1100 Wayne St
Suite 1337
Troy, OH 45373

On Tue, Jan 20, 2015 at 2:05 PM, Jeremy <***@gmail.com> wrote:

Example: Powercode mostly loads and then seems to hang for quite awhile on Firefox, but loads fast on Chrome.

On Tue, Jan 20, 2015 at 12:04 PM, Jeremy <***@gmail.com> wrote:

I've never used EPMP but I have noticed some interfaces lag on one browser and not on another. What browser is everyone using when they see lag? What browser are those of you who aren't seeing lag using?

On Tue, Jan 20, 2015 at 11:59 AM, Ken Hohhof <***@kwisp.com> wrote:

Good job of merging 2 threads! You win one free Internet!

From: Chuck McCown
Sent: Tuesday, January 20, 2015 12:48 PM
To: ***@afmug.com
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] EPMP Minimum System Specs <rant>

Yeah but you bought the advantage GUI license, right?

From: Sean Heskett
Sent: Tuesday, January 20, 2015 11:45 AM
To: ***@afmug.com
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] EPMP Minimum System Specs <rant>

less than 5 seconds on my iPhone as well.



On Tue, Jan 20, 2015 at 11:43 AM, Josh Luthman <***@imaginenetworksllc.com> wrote:

I doubt that 4 of my high end machines all have the same problem. The interface takes too long when it first shows up. Maybe it's because it gets all the information at once, maybe not. Don't care. I want it to be more smooth and faster.

My phone (Droid Maxx) is one of the most recent models for Android. The interface is terribly slow and clumsy on that.

Well if you feel a poor technology choice was the cause, that's fine, but it's just flat out wrong. I don't want to carry a big fat i7 laptop up the tower when I could just simply use my phone. It works with Ubiquiti, FSK Cambium, Tranzeo, Trango, Mikrotik, etc it should only make sense the one product with a clumsy interface needs fixed instead of changing my devices that work with the competitors products (as well as different products under their portfolio).



Josh Luthman
Office: 937-552-2340
Direct: 937-552-2343
1100 Wayne St
Suite 1337
Troy, OH 45373


On Tue, Jan 20, 2015 at 1:36 PM, Sean Heskett <***@zirkel.us> wrote:

i'm just stating that on all of our computers i've never seen the ePMP page load slowly.

maybe it's a computer problem and not a device problem, just trying to bring valid input to the discussion.

On Tue, Jan 20, 2015 at 11:34 AM, Josh Luthman <***@imaginenetworksllc.com> wrote:

Why are you/others arguing that the speed is just fine? This doesn't even make sense. There are people with slower laptops that work with other modern devices and epmp is the only interface that loads slow. There's no point in arguing peoples valid complaints. Are you trying to direct the engineers attention to something else?



Josh Luthman
Office: 937-552-2340
Direct: 937-552-2343
1100 Wayne St
Suite 1337
Troy, OH 45373


On Tue, Jan 20, 2015 at 1:30 PM, Mike Hammett <***@ics-il.net> wrote:

Three, maybe four seconds to load the initial screen and then two maybe three seconds to login. As I doubt a screen capture will work when I'm RDPed in, I'll record the entire login process when I get home and post it up on YouTube.




-----
Mike Hammett
Intelligent Computing Solutions
http://www.ics-il.com



----------------------------------------------------------

From: "Josh Luthman" <***@imaginenetworksllc.com>
To: ***@afmug.com
Sent: Tuesday, January 20, 2015 12:26:09 PM
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] EPMP Minimum System Specs <rant>


Login takes forever. The first like 10-15 seconds just load and load and load. Once you're in, it's acceptable in terms of page rendering.


Josh Luthman
Office: 937-552-2340
Direct: 937-552-2343
1100 Wayne St
Suite 1337
Troy, OH 45373

On Tue, Jan 20, 2015 at 1:22 PM, Sean Heskett <***@zirkel.us> wrote:

we use macbook pro's and the ePMP GUI has never been slow for us. It was UGLY, but they fixed that with version 2.0 haha.

not sure why everyone says it's slow tho because we've never seen it.

2 cents

-sean



On Tue, Jan 20, 2015 at 9:57 AM, Nate Burke <***@blastcomm.com> wrote:

Ok, Cambium, this is a little sad. My Field Laptop, a Lenovo S10-3t, Atom Processor with Windows 8.1 cannot load the EPMP WEB Pages in a timely manner. We're talking 40-60 seconds for initial load, and 20-30 seconds per screen refresh/menu change. Since I'm going to have to go to the boss, and tell him that I need a new laptop to do any field troubleshooting for these new radios, what are the minimum system specs for a machine to view the EPMP Screens? Unless Cambium is going to get their Web interface under control as of Yesterday.

They still swear that the GUI was all developed in house and not purchased (something I still can't believe). I'd like to know who the engineers/managers are who signed off on that design. I can only imaging that there was a group of guys sitting around the conference table, watching the presentation on the GUI on the projector up front, all nodding their heads in agreement, "I think this is a wonderful layout, the field tech's won't mind waiting a couple extra minutes for the pages to load so they can look this pretty!!"

I think that Cambium should step up and get engineers from ALL aspects of product development out into the field. 40 seconds waiting for the page to load is fine when you're sitting in the office, but not when you have the laptop balanced on a stack of firewood in the freezing rain trying to get to the monitoring page to see why a radio isn't linking up. I think that every WISP on this list would be more than happy to host an engineer for a day. Heck, even if they go into the parking lot and assemble it on the tailgate of someone's Pickup, they'll get some idea of what we experience.

I have a feeling that if all steps of the Dev process took a week in the field, We'd have a radio that had a GUI that responded instantly on any device, and radios that assembled and mounted (and unmounted) with 1 gloved hand.

</rant>
Nate














--
Sent from my Android device with K-9 Mail. Please excuse my brevity.

[CBB - Jay Fuller]

sure they do. but i don't have to make it easy for them :)

----- Original Message -----
From: Josh Reynolds
To: ***@afmug.com
Sent: Wednesday, January 21, 2015 1:58 AM
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] EPMP Minimum System Specs <rant>


*everybody*, from the NSA, FBI, DEA, <insert agency here> knows everything you do already.

josh reynolds :: chief information officer
spitwspots :: www.spitwspots.comOn 01/20/2015 10:35 PM, CBB - Jay Fuller wrote:

not i. i'm too paranoid google will catalog everything i see and do.
i still enjoy using an old netscape clone (seamoney) although chrome is loaded for certain tasks.
FYI - seamonkey is 3-5 seconds to load (sitting at "loading dashboard parms" ) ; followed by a normal login.
no complaints - ok , min complaints.

----- Original Message -----
From: Josh Luthman
To: ***@afmug.com
Sent: Tuesday, January 20, 2015 1:08 PM
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] EPMP Minimum System Specs <rant>


Everyone uses Chrome nowadays.




Josh Luthman
Office: 937-552-2340
Direct: 937-552-2343
1100 Wayne St
Suite 1337
Troy, OH 45373


On Tue, Jan 20, 2015 at 2:05 PM, Jeremy <***@gmail.com> wrote:

Example: Powercode mostly loads and then seems to hang for quite awhile on Firefox, but loads fast on Chrome.


On Tue, Jan 20, 2015 at 12:04 PM, Jeremy <***@gmail.com> wrote:

I've never used EPMP but I have noticed some interfaces lag on one browser and not on another. What browser is everyone using when they see lag? What browser are those of you who aren't seeing lag using?


On Tue, Jan 20, 2015 at 11:59 AM, Ken Hohhof <***@kwisp.com> wrote:

Good job of merging 2 threads! You win one free Internet!

From: Chuck McCown
Sent: Tuesday, January 20, 2015 12:48 PM
To: ***@afmug.com
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] EPMP Minimum System Specs <rant>

Yeah but you bought the advantage GUI license, right?

From: Sean Heskett
Sent: Tuesday, January 20, 2015 11:45 AM
To: ***@afmug.com
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] EPMP Minimum System Specs <rant>

less than 5 seconds on my iPhone as well.



On Tue, Jan 20, 2015 at 11:43 AM, Josh Luthman <***@imaginenetworksllc.com> wrote:

I doubt that 4 of my high end machines all have the same problem. The interface takes too long when it first shows up. Maybe it's because it gets all the information at once, maybe not. Don't care. I want it to be more smooth and faster.

My phone (Droid Maxx) is one of the most recent models for Android. The interface is terribly slow and clumsy on that.

Well if you feel a poor technology choice was the cause, that's fine, but it's just flat out wrong. I don't want to carry a big fat i7 laptop up the tower when I could just simply use my phone. It works with Ubiquiti, FSK Cambium, Tranzeo, Trango, Mikrotik, etc it should only make sense the one product with a clumsy interface needs fixed instead of changing my devices that work with the competitors products (as well as different products under their portfolio).



Josh Luthman
Office: 937-552-2340
Direct: 937-552-2343
1100 Wayne St
Suite 1337
Troy, OH 45373


On Tue, Jan 20, 2015 at 1:36 PM, Sean Heskett <***@zirkel.us> wrote:

i'm just stating that on all of our computers i've never seen the ePMP page load slowly.

maybe it's a computer problem and not a device problem, just trying to bring valid input to the discussion.

On Tue, Jan 20, 2015 at 11:34 AM, Josh Luthman <***@imaginenetworksllc.com> wrote:

Why are you/others arguing that the speed is just fine? This doesn't even make sense. There are people with slower laptops that work with other modern devices and epmp is the only interface that loads slow. There's no point in arguing peoples valid complaints. Are you trying to direct the engineers attention to something else?



Josh Luthman
Office: 937-552-2340
Direct: 937-552-2343
1100 Wayne St
Suite 1337
Troy, OH 45373


On Tue, Jan 20, 2015 at 1:30 PM, Mike Hammett <***@ics-il.net> wrote:

Three, maybe four seconds to load the initial screen and then two maybe three seconds to login. As I doubt a screen capture will work when I'm RDPed in, I'll record the entire login process when I get home and post it up on YouTube.




-----
Mike Hammett
Intelligent Computing Solutions
http://www.ics-il.com



----------------------------------------------------------------

From: "Josh Luthman" <***@imaginenetworksllc.com>
To: ***@afmug.com
Sent: Tuesday, January 20, 2015 12:26:09 PM
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] EPMP Minimum System Specs <rant>


Login takes forever. The first like 10-15 seconds just load and load and load. Once you're in, it's acceptable in terms of page rendering.


Josh Luthman
Office: 937-552-2340
Direct: 937-552-2343
1100 Wayne St
Suite 1337
Troy, OH 45373

On Tue, Jan 20, 2015 at 1:22 PM, Sean Heskett <***@zirkel.us> wrote:

we use macbook pro's and the ePMP GUI has never been slow for us. It was UGLY, but they fixed that with version 2.0 haha.

not sure why everyone says it's slow tho because we've never seen it.

2 cents

-sean



On Tue, Jan 20, 2015 at 9:57 AM, Nate Burke <***@blastcomm.com> wrote:

Ok, Cambium, this is a little sad. My Field Laptop, a Lenovo S10-3t, Atom Processor with Windows 8.1 cannot load the EPMP WEB Pages in a timely manner. We're talking 40-60 seconds for initial load, and 20-30 seconds per screen refresh/menu change. Since I'm going to have to go to the boss, and tell him that I need a new laptop to do any field troubleshooting for these new radios, what are the minimum system specs for a machine to view the EPMP Screens? Unless Cambium is going to get their Web interface under control as of Yesterday.

They still swear that the GUI was all developed in house and not purchased (something I still can't believe). I'd like to know who the engineers/managers are who signed off on that design. I can only imaging that there was a group of guys sitting around the conference table, watching the presentation on the GUI on the projector up front, all nodding their heads in agreement, "I think this is a wonderful layout, the field tech's won't mind waiting a couple extra minutes for the pages to load so they can look this pretty!!"

I think that Cambium should step up and get engineers from ALL aspects of product development out into the field. 40 seconds waiting for the page to load is fine when you're sitting in the office, but not when you have the laptop balanced on a stack of firewood in the freezing rain trying to get to the monitoring page to see why a radio isn't linking up. I think that every WISP on this list would be more than happy to host an engineer for a day. Heck, even if they go into the parking lot and assemble it on the tailgate of someone's Pickup, they'll get some idea of what we experience.

I have a feeling that if all steps of the Dev process took a week in the field, We'd have a radio that had a GUI that responded instantly on any device, and radios that assembled and mounted (and unmounted) with 1 gloved hand.

</rant>
Nate

[Josh Reynolds]

What you do is pretty irrelevant. I don't know if you've been paying
attention lately, but...

http://yro.slashdot.org/story/14/12/04/1823255/how-the-nsa-is-spying-on-everyone-more-revelations
http://politics.slashdot.org/story/15/01/18/202220/nsa-prepares-for-future-techno-battles-by-plotting-network-takedowns
http://yro.slashdot.org/story/14/12/26/1442220/nsa-reveals-more-than-a-decade-of-improper-surveillance
http://it.slashdot.org/story/15/01/14/2036249/nsa-official-supporting-backdoored-random-number-generat
http://it.slashdot.org/story/14/12/30/2235230/nsa-says-they-have-vpns-in-a-vulcan-death-grip
http://yro.slashdot.org/story/14/12/28/2054228/snowden-documents-show-how-well-nsa-codebreakers-can-pry
http://yro.slashdot.org/story/15/01/18/0215255/feds-operated-yet-another-secret-metadata-database-until-2013
http://yro.slashdot.org/story/14/08/25/2227226/850-billion-nsa-surveillance-records-searchable-by-domestic-law-enforcement
http://yro.slashdot.org/story/14/02/04/0026258/dea-presentation-shows-how-agency-hides-investigative-methods-from-trial-review
http://news.slashdot.org/story/13/08/05/168205/dea-program-more-troubling-than-nsa
http://yro.slashdot.org/story/12/10/31/1814232/federal-judge-approves-warrantless-covert-video-surveillance
http://yro.slashdot.org/story/15/01/12/1759210/fbi-access-to-nsa-surveillance-data-expands-in-recent-years
http://yro.slashdot.org/story/15/01/20/1540241/fbi-seeks-to-legally-hack-you-if-youre-connected-to-tor-or-a-vpn
http://yro.slashdot.org/story/15/01/06/1524223/fbi-says-search-warrants-not-needed-to-use-stingrays-in-public-places
http://yro.slashdot.org/story/15/01/17/2156204/obama-govt-shouldnt-be-hampered-by-encrypted-communications
http://news.slashdot.org/story/14/12/31/2124209/when-fisa-court-rejects-a-surveillance-request-the-fbi-issues-a-nsl-instead

These are just the basics.

josh reynolds :: chief information officer
spitwspots :: www.spitwspots.com

On 01/20/2015 11:07 PM, CBB - Jay Fuller wrote:
> sure they do. but i don't have to make it easy for them :)
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: Josh Reynolds
> To: ***@afmug.com
> Sent: Wednesday, January 21, 2015 1:58 AM
> Subject: Re: [AFMUG] EPMP Minimum System Specs <rant>
>
>
> *everybody*, from the NSA, FBI, DEA, <insert agency here> knows everything you do already.
>
> josh reynolds :: chief information officer
> spitwspots :: www.spitwspots.comOn 01/20/2015 10:35 PM, CBB - Jay Fuller wrote:
>
> not i. i'm too paranoid google will catalog everything i see and do.
> i still enjoy using an old netscape clone (seamoney) although chrome is loaded for certain tasks.
> FYI - seamonkey is 3-5 seconds to load (sitting at "loading dashboard parms" ) ; followed by a normal login.
> no complaints - ok , min complaints.
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: Josh Luthman
> To: ***@afmug.com
> Sent: Tuesday, January 20, 2015 1:08 PM
> Subject: Re: [AFMUG] EPMP Minimum System Specs <rant>
>
>
> Everyone uses Chrome nowadays.
>
>
>
>
> Josh Luthman
> Office: 937-552-2340
> Direct: 937-552-2343
> 1100 Wayne St
> Suite 1337
> Troy, OH 45373
>
>
> On Tue, Jan 20, 2015 at 2:05 PM, Jeremy <***@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> Example: Powercode mostly loads and then seems to hang for quite awhile on Firefox, but loads fast on Chrome.
>
>
> On Tue, Jan 20, 2015 at 12:04 PM, Jeremy <***@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> I've never used EPMP but I have noticed some interfaces lag on one browser and not on another. What browser is everyone using when they see lag? What browser are those of you who aren't seeing lag using?
>
>
> On Tue, Jan 20, 2015 at 11:59 AM, Ken Hohhof <***@kwisp.com> wrote:
>
> Good job of merging 2 threads! You win one free Internet!
>
> From: Chuck McCown
> Sent: Tuesday, January 20, 2015 12:48 PM
> To: ***@afmug.com
> Subject: Re: [AFMUG] EPMP Minimum System Specs <rant>
>
> Yeah but you bought the advantage GUI license, right?
>
> From: Sean Heskett
> Sent: Tuesday, January 20, 2015 11:45 AM
> To: ***@afmug.com
> Subject: Re: [AFMUG] EPMP Minimum System Specs <rant>
>
> less than 5 seconds on my iPhone as well.
>
>
>
> On Tue, Jan 20, 2015 at 11:43 AM, Josh Luthman <***@imaginenetworksllc.com> wrote:
>
> I doubt that 4 of my high end machines all have the same problem. The interface takes too long when it first shows up. Maybe it's because it gets all the information at once, maybe not. Don't care. I want it to be more smooth and faster.
>
> My phone (Droid Maxx) is one of the most recent models for Android. The interface is terribly slow and clumsy on that.
>
> Well if you feel a poor technology choice was the cause, that's fine, but it's just flat out wrong. I don't want to carry a big fat i7 laptop up the tower when I could just simply use my phone. It works with Ubiquiti, FSK Cambium, Tranzeo, Trango, Mikrotik, etc it should only make sense the one product with a clumsy interface needs fixed instead of changing my devices that work with the competitors products (as well as different products under their portfolio).
>
>
>
> Josh Luthman
> Office: 937-552-2340
> Direct: 937-552-2343
> 1100 Wayne St
> Suite 1337
> Troy, OH 45373
>
>
> On Tue, Jan 20, 2015 at 1:36 PM, Sean Heskett <***@zirkel.us> wrote:
>
> i'm just stating that on all of our computers i've never seen the ePMP page load slowly.
>
> maybe it's a computer problem and not a device problem, just trying to bring valid input to the discussion.
>
> On Tue, Jan 20, 2015 at 11:34 AM, Josh Luthman <***@imaginenetworksllc.com> wrote:
>
> Why are you/others arguing that the speed is just fine? This doesn't even make sense. There are people with slower laptops that work with other modern devices and epmp is the only interface that loads slow. There's no point in arguing peoples valid complaints. Are you trying to direct the engineers attention to something else?
>
>
>
> Josh Luthman
> Office: 937-552-2340
> Direct: 937-552-2343
> 1100 Wayne St
> Suite 1337
> Troy, OH 45373
>
>
> On Tue, Jan 20, 2015 at 1:30 PM, Mike Hammett <***@ics-il.net> wrote:
>
> Three, maybe four seconds to load the initial screen and then two maybe three seconds to login. As I doubt a screen capture will work when I'm RDPed in, I'll record the entire login process when I get home and post it up on YouTube.
>
>
>
>
> -----
> Mike Hammett
> Intelligent Computing Solutions
> http://www.ics-il.com
>
>
>
> ----------------------------------------------------------------
>
> From: "Josh Luthman" <***@imaginenetworksllc.com>
> To: ***@afmug.com
> Sent: Tuesday, January 20, 2015 12:26:09 PM
> Subject: Re: [AFMUG] EPMP Minimum System Specs <rant>
>
>
> Login takes forever. The first like 10-15 seconds just load and load and load. Once you're in, it's acceptable in terms of page rendering.
>
>
> Josh Luthman
> Office: 937-552-2340
> Direct: 937-552-2343
> 1100 Wayne St
> Suite 1337
> Troy, OH 45373
>
> On Tue, Jan 20, 2015 at 1:22 PM, Sean Heskett <***@zirkel.us> wrote:
>
> we use macbook pro's and the ePMP GUI has never been slow for us. It was UGLY, but they fixed that with version 2.0 haha.
>
> not sure why everyone says it's slow tho because we've never seen it.
>
> 2 cents
>
> -sean
>
>
>
> On Tue, Jan 20, 2015 at 9:57 AM, Nate Burke <***@blastcomm.com> wrote:
>
> Ok, Cambium, this is a little sad. My Field Laptop, a Lenovo S10-3t, Atom Processor with Windows 8.1 cannot load the EPMP WEB Pages in a timely manner. We're talking 40-60 seconds for initial load, and 20-30 seconds per screen refresh/menu change. Since I'm going to have to go to the boss, and tell him that I need a new laptop to do any field troubleshooting for these new radios, what are the minimum system specs for a machine to view the EPMP Screens? Unless Cambium is going to get their Web interface under control as of Yesterday.
>
> They still swear that the GUI was all developed in house and not purchased (something I still can't believe). I'd like to know who the engineers/managers are who signed off on that design. I can only imaging that there was a group of guys sitting around the conference table, watching the presentation on the GUI on the projector up front, all nodding their heads in agreement, "I think this is a wonderful layout, the field tech's won't mind waiting a couple extra minutes for the pages to load so they can look this pretty!!"
>
> I think that Cambium should step up and get engineers from ALL aspects of product development out into the field. 40 seconds waiting for the page to load is fine when you're sitting in the office, but not when you have the laptop balanced on a stack of firewood in the freezing rain trying to get to the monitoring page to see why a radio isn't linking up. I think that every WISP on this list would be more than happy to host an engineer for a day. Heck, even if they go into the parking lot and assemble it on the tailgate of someone's Pickup, they'll get some idea of what we experience.
>
> I have a feeling that if all steps of the Dev process took a week in the field, We'd have a radio that had a GUI that responded instantly on any device, and radios that assembled and mounted (and unmounted) with 1 gloved hand.
>
> </rant>
> Nate
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>

[CBB - Jay Fuller]

yes...yes...i'm aware....

i'll respond with facts. CHROME is made by a company that runs a SEARCH ENGINE
seamonkey is open source, isn't run by a company - and certainly not one that runs a search engine.

yah, i don't know if chrome sends stuff in or not - anymore than anything else does - but it's just a preference.

; )

----- Original Message -----
From: Josh Reynolds
To: ***@afmug.com
Sent: Wednesday, January 21, 2015 2:12 AM
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] EPMP Minimum System Specs <rant>


What you do is pretty irrelevant. I don't know if you've been paying attention lately, but...

http://yro.slashdot.org/story/14/12/04/1823255/how-the-nsa-is-spying-on-everyone-more-revelations
http://politics.slashdot.org/story/15/01/18/202220/nsa-prepares-for-future-techno-battles-by-plotting-network-takedowns
http://yro.slashdot.org/story/14/12/26/1442220/nsa-reveals-more-than-a-decade-of-improper-surveillance
http://it.slashdot.org/story/15/01/14/2036249/nsa-official-supporting-backdoored-random-number-generat
http://it.slashdot.org/story/14/12/30/2235230/nsa-says-they-have-vpns-in-a-vulcan-death-grip
http://yro.slashdot.org/story/14/12/28/2054228/snowden-documents-show-how-well-nsa-codebreakers-can-pry
http://yro.slashdot.org/story/15/01/18/0215255/feds-operated-yet-another-secret-metadata-database-until-2013
http://yro.slashdot.org/story/14/08/25/2227226/850-billion-nsa-surveillance-records-searchable-by-domestic-law-enforcement
http://yro.slashdot.org/story/14/02/04/0026258/dea-presentation-shows-how-agency-hides-investigative-methods-from-trial-review
http://news.slashdot.org/story/13/08/05/168205/dea-program-more-troubling-than-nsa
http://yro.slashdot.org/story/12/10/31/1814232/federal-judge-approves-warrantless-covert-video-surveillance
http://yro.slashdot.org/story/15/01/12/1759210/fbi-access-to-nsa-surveillance-data-expands-in-recent-years
http://yro.slashdot.org/story/15/01/20/1540241/fbi-seeks-to-legally-hack-you-if-youre-connected-to-tor-or-a-vpn
http://yro.slashdot.org/story/15/01/06/1524223/fbi-says-search-warrants-not-needed-to-use-stingrays-in-public-places
http://yro.slashdot.org/story/15/01/17/2156204/obama-govt-shouldnt-be-hampered-by-encrypted-communications
http://news.slashdot.org/story/14/12/31/2124209/when-fisa-court-rejects-a-surveillance-request-the-fbi-issues-a-nsl-instead

These are just the basics.

josh reynolds :: chief information officer
spitwspots :: www.spitwspots.comOn 01/20/2015 11:07 PM, CBB - Jay Fuller wrote:

sure they do. but i don't have to make it easy for them :)

----- Original Message -----
From: Josh Reynolds
To: ***@afmug.com
Sent: Wednesday, January 21, 2015 1:58 AM
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] EPMP Minimum System Specs <rant>


*everybody*, from the NSA, FBI, DEA, <insert agency here> knows everything you do already.

josh reynolds :: chief information officer
spitwspots :: www.spitwspots.comOn 01/20/2015 10:35 PM, CBB - Jay Fuller wrote:

not i. i'm too paranoid google will catalog everything i see and do.
i still enjoy using an old netscape clone (seamoney) although chrome is loaded for certain tasks.
FYI - seamonkey is 3-5 seconds to load (sitting at "loading dashboard parms" ) ; followed by a normal login.
no complaints - ok , min complaints.

----- Original Message -----
From: Josh Luthman
To: ***@afmug.com
Sent: Tuesday, January 20, 2015 1:08 PM
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] EPMP Minimum System Specs <rant>


Everyone uses Chrome nowadays.




Josh Luthman
Office: 937-552-2340
Direct: 937-552-2343
1100 Wayne St
Suite 1337
Troy, OH 45373


On Tue, Jan 20, 2015 at 2:05 PM, Jeremy <***@gmail.com> wrote:

Example: Powercode mostly loads and then seems to hang for quite awhile on Firefox, but loads fast on Chrome.


On Tue, Jan 20, 2015 at 12:04 PM, Jeremy <***@gmail.com> wrote:

I've never used EPMP but I have noticed some interfaces lag on one browser and not on another. What browser is everyone using when they see lag? What browser are those of you who aren't seeing lag using?


On Tue, Jan 20, 2015 at 11:59 AM, Ken Hohhof <***@kwisp.com> wrote:

Good job of merging 2 threads! You win one free Internet!

From: Chuck McCown
Sent: Tuesday, January 20, 2015 12:48 PM
To: ***@afmug.com
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] EPMP Minimum System Specs <rant>

Yeah but you bought the advantage GUI license, right?

From: Sean Heskett
Sent: Tuesday, January 20, 2015 11:45 AM
To: ***@afmug.com
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] EPMP Minimum System Specs <rant>

less than 5 seconds on my iPhone as well.



On Tue, Jan 20, 2015 at 11:43 AM, Josh Luthman <***@imaginenetworksllc.com> wrote:

I doubt that 4 of my high end machines all have the same problem. The interface takes too long when it first shows up. Maybe it's because it gets all the information at once, maybe not. Don't care. I want it to be more smooth and faster.

My phone (Droid Maxx) is one of the most recent models for Android. The interface is terribly slow and clumsy on that.

Well if you feel a poor technology choice was the cause, that's fine, but it's just flat out wrong. I don't want to carry a big fat i7 laptop up the tower when I could just simply use my phone. It works with Ubiquiti, FSK Cambium, Tranzeo, Trango, Mikrotik, etc it should only make sense the one product with a clumsy interface needs fixed instead of changing my devices that work with the competitors products (as well as different products under their portfolio).



Josh Luthman
Office: 937-552-2340
Direct: 937-552-2343
1100 Wayne St
Suite 1337
Troy, OH 45373


On Tue, Jan 20, 2015 at 1:36 PM, Sean Heskett <***@zirkel.us> wrote:

i'm just stating that on all of our computers i've never seen the ePMP page load slowly.

maybe it's a computer problem and not a device problem, just trying to bring valid input to the discussion.

On Tue, Jan 20, 2015 at 11:34 AM, Josh Luthman <***@imaginenetworksllc.com> wrote:

Why are you/others arguing that the speed is just fine? This doesn't even make sense. There are people with slower laptops that work with other modern devices and epmp is the only interface that loads slow. There's no point in arguing peoples valid complaints. Are you trying to direct the engineers attention to something else?



Josh Luthman
Office: 937-552-2340
Direct: 937-552-2343
1100 Wayne St
Suite 1337
Troy, OH 45373


On Tue, Jan 20, 2015 at 1:30 PM, Mike Hammett <***@ics-il.net> wrote:

Three, maybe four seconds to load the initial screen and then two maybe three seconds to login. As I doubt a screen capture will work when I'm RDPed in, I'll record the entire login process when I get home and post it up on YouTube.




-----
Mike Hammett
Intelligent Computing Solutions
http://www.ics-il.com



----------------------------------------------------------------

From: "Josh Luthman" <***@imaginenetworksllc.com>
To: ***@afmug.com
Sent: Tuesday, January 20, 2015 12:26:09 PM
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] EPMP Minimum System Specs <rant>


Login takes forever. The first like 10-15 seconds just load and load and load. Once you're in, it's acceptable in terms of page rendering.


Josh Luthman
Office: 937-552-2340
Direct: 937-552-2343
1100 Wayne St
Suite 1337
Troy, OH 45373

On Tue, Jan 20, 2015 at 1:22 PM, Sean Heskett <***@zirkel.us> wrote:

we use macbook pro's and the ePMP GUI has never been slow for us. It was UGLY, but they fixed that with version 2.0 haha.

not sure why everyone says it's slow tho because we've never seen it.

2 cents

-sean



On Tue, Jan 20, 2015 at 9:57 AM, Nate Burke <***@blastcomm.com> wrote:

Ok, Cambium, this is a little sad. My Field Laptop, a Lenovo S10-3t, Atom Processor with Windows 8.1 cannot load the EPMP WEB Pages in a timely manner. We're talking 40-60 seconds for initial load, and 20-30 seconds per screen refresh/menu change. Since I'm going to have to go to the boss, and tell him that I need a new laptop to do any field troubleshooting for these new radios, what are the minimum system specs for a machine to view the EPMP Screens? Unless Cambium is going to get their Web interface under control as of Yesterday.

They still swear that the GUI was all developed in house and not purchased (something I still can't believe). I'd like to know who the engineers/managers are who signed off on that design. I can only imaging that there was a group of guys sitting around the conference table, watching the presentation on the GUI on the projector up front, all nodding their heads in agreement, "I think this is a wonderful layout, the field tech's won't mind waiting a couple extra minutes for the pages to load so they can look this pretty!!"

I think that Cambium should step up and get engineers from ALL aspects of product development out into the field. 40 seconds waiting for the page to load is fine when you're sitting in the office, but not when you have the laptop balanced on a stack of firewood in the freezing rain trying to get to the monitoring page to see why a radio isn't linking up. I think that every WISP on this list would be more than happy to host an engineer for a day. Heck, even if they go into the parking lot and assemble it on the tailgate of someone's Pickup, they'll get some idea of what we experience.

I have a feeling that if all steps of the Dev process took a week in the field, We'd have a radio that had a GUI that responded instantly on any device, and radios that assembled and mounted (and unmounted) with 1 gloved hand.

</rant>
Nate

[Josh Reynolds]

Decade old habits are hard to break :) That said, the source links are in the posts.

On January 21, 2015 3:41:37 AM AKST, Mike Hammett <***@ics-il.net> wrote:
>Anyone that links to SlashDot goes down a peg or two... it's the more
>useless version of Reddit.
>
>That said, yes, most anything you think is secure really isn't.
>Wikileaks from a few weeks ago showed NSA documents on how easy various
>protocols\encryptions were to crack. Many of them were completely
>trivial.
>
>
>
>
>-----
>Mike Hammett
>Intelligent Computing Solutions
>http://www.ics-il.com
>
>----- Original Message -----
>
>From: "Josh Reynolds" <***@spitwspots.com>
>To: ***@afmug.com
>Sent: Wednesday, January 21, 2015 2:12:42 AM
>Subject: Re: [AFMUG] EPMP Minimum System Specs <rant>
>
>
>What you do is pretty ir relevant. I don't know if you've been paying
>attention lately, but...
>
>http://yro.slashdot.org/story/14/12/04/1823255/how-the-nsa-is-spying-on-everyone-more-revelations
>
>http://politics.slashdot.org/story/15/01/18/202220/nsa-prepares-for-future-techno-battles-by-plotting-network-takedowns
>
>http://yro.slashdot.org/story/14/12/26/1442220/nsa-reveals-more-than-a-decade-of-improper-surveillance
>
>http://it.slashdot.org/story/15/01/14/2036249/nsa-official-supporting-backdoored-random-number-generat
>
>http://it.slashdot.org/story/14/12/30/2235230/nsa-says-they-have-vpns-in-a-vulcan-death-grip
>
>http://yro.slashdot.org/story/14/12/28/2054228/snowden-documents-show-how-well-nsa-codebreakers-can-pry
>
>http://yro.slashdot.org/story/15/01/18/0215255/feds-operated-yet-another-secret-metadata-database-until-2013
>
>http://yro.slashdot.org/story/14/08/25/2227226/850-billion-nsa-surveillance-records-searchable-by-domestic-law-enforcement
>
>http://yro.slashdot.org/story/14/02/04/0026258/dea-presentation-shows-how-agency-hides-investigative-methods-from-trial-review
>
>http://news.slashdot.org/story/13/08/05/168205/dea-program-more-troubling-than-nsa
>
>http://yro.slashdot.org/story/12/10/31/1814232/federal-judge-approves-warrantless-covert-video-surveillance
>
>http://yro.slashdot.org/story/15/01/12/1759210/fbi-access-to-nsa-surveillance-data-expands-in-recent-years
>
>http://yro.slashdot.org/story/15/01/20/1540241/fbi-seeks-to-legally-hack-you-if-youre-connected-to-tor-or-a-vpn
>
>http://yro.slashdot.org/story/15/01/06/1524223/fbi-says-search-warrants-not-needed-to-use-stingrays-in-public-places
>
>http://yro.slashdot.org/story/15/01/17/2156204/obama-govt-shouldnt-be-hampered-by-encrypted-communications
>
>http://news.slashdot.org/story/14/12/31/2124209/when-fisa-court-rejects-a-surveillance-request-the-fbi-issues-a-nsl-instead
>
>
>These are just the basics.
>josh reynolds :: chief information officer
>spitwspots :: www.spitwspots.com On 01/20/2015 11:07 PM, CBB - Jay
>Fuller wrote:
>
>
>sure they do. but i don't have to make it easy for them :)
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: Josh Reynolds
> To: ***@afmug.com Sent: Wednesday, January 21, 2015 1:58 AM
> Subject: Re: [AFMUG] EPMP Minimum System Specs <rant>
>
>
>*everybody*, from the NSA, FBI, DEA, <insert agency here> knows
>everything you do already.
>
>josh reynolds :: chief information officer
>spitwspots :: www.spitwspots.comOn 01/20/2015 10:35 PM, CBB - Jay
>Fuller wrote:
>
>not i. i'm too paranoid google will catalog everything i see and do.
>i still enjoy using an old netscape clone (seamoney) although chrome is
>loaded for certain tasks.
>FYI - seamonkey is 3-5 seconds to load (sitting at "loading dashboard
>parms" ) ; followed by a normal login.
>no complaints - ok , min complaints.
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: Josh Luthman
> To: ***@afmug.com Sent: Tuesday, January 20, 2015 1:08 PM
> Subject: Re: [AFMUG] EPMP Minimum System Specs <rant>
>
>
> Everyone uses Chrome nowadays.
>
>
>
>
> Josh Luthman
> Office: 937-552-2340
> Direct: 937-552-2343
> 1100 Wayne St
> Suite 1337
> Troy, OH 45373
>
>
>On Tue, Jan 20, 2015 at 2:05 PM, Jeremy <***@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>Example: Powercode mostly loads and then seems to hang for quite
>awhile on Firefox, but loads fast on Chrome.
>
>
>On Tue, Jan 20, 2015 at 12:04 PM, Jeremy <***@gmail.com>
>wrote:
>
>I've never used EPMP but I have noticed some interfaces lag on one
>browser and not on another. What browser is everyone using when they
>see lag? What browser are those of you who aren't seeing lag using?
>
>
> On Tue, Jan 20, 2015 at 11:59 AM, Ken Hohhof <***@kwisp.com> wrote:
>
> Good job of merging 2 threads! You win one free Internet!
>
> From: Chuck McCown
> Sent: Tuesday, January 20, 2015 12:48 PM
> To: ***@afmug.com Subject: Re: [AFMUG] EPMP Minimum System Specs <rant>
>
> Yeah but you bought the advantage GUI license, right?
>
> From: Sean Heskett
> Sent: Tuesday, January 20, 2015 11:45 AM
> To: ***@afmug.com Subject: Re: [AFMUG] EPMP Minimum System Specs <rant>
>
> less than 5 seconds on my iPhone as well.
>
>
>
>On Tue, Jan 20, 2015 at 11:43 AM, Josh Luthman
><***@imaginenetworksllc.com> wrote:
>
>I doubt that 4 of my high end machines all have the same problem. The
>interface takes too long when it first shows up. Maybe it's because it
>gets all the information at once, maybe not. Don't care. I want it to
>be more smooth and faster.
>
>My phone (Droid Maxx) is one of the most recent models for Android.
>The interface is terribly slow and clumsy on that.
>
>Well if you feel a poor technology choice was the cause, that's fine,
>but it's just flat out wrong. I don't want to carry a big fat i7
>laptop up the tower when I could just simply use my phone. It works
>with Ubiquiti, FSK Cambium, Tranzeo, Trango, Mikrotik, etc it should
>only make sense the one product with a clumsy interface needs fixed
>instead of changing my devices that work with the competitors products
>(as well as different products under their portfolio).
>
>
>
> Josh Luthman
> Office: 937-552-2340
> Direct: 937-552-2343
> 1100 Wayne St
> Suite 1337
> Troy, OH 45373
>
>
> On Tue, Jan 20, 2015 at 1:36 PM, Sean Heskett <***@zirkel.us> wrote:
>
>i'm just stating that on all of our computers i've never seen the ePMP
>page load slowly.
>
>maybe it's a computer problem and not a device problem, just trying to
>bring valid input to the discussion.
>
>On Tue, Jan 20, 2015 at 11:34 AM, Josh Luthman
><***@imaginenetworksllc.com> wrote:
>
>Why are you/others arguing that the speed is just fine? This doesn't
>even make sense. There are people with slower laptops that work with
>other modern devices and epmp is the only interface that loads slow.
>There's no point in arguing peoples valid complaints. Are you trying
>to direct the engineers attention to something else?
>
>
>
> Josh Luthman
> Office: 937-552-2340
> Direct: 937-552-2343
> 1100 Wayne St
> Suite 1337
> Troy, OH 45373
>
>
>On Tue, Jan 20, 2015 at 1:30 PM, Mike Hammett <***@ics-il.net> wrote:
>
>Three, maybe four seconds to load the initial screen and then two maybe
>three seconds to login. As I doubt a screen capture will work when I'm
>RDPed in, I'll record the entire login process when I get home and post
>it up on YouTube.
>
>
>
>
> -----
> Mike Hammett
>Intelligent Computing Solutions http://www.ics-il.com
>----------------------------------------------------------------
>
>From: "Josh Luthman" <***@imaginenetworksllc.com> To: ***@afmug.com
>Sent: Tuesday, January 20, 2015 12:26:09 PM
> Subject: Re: [AFMUG] EPMP Minimum System Specs <rant>
>
>
>Login takes forever. The first like 10-15 seconds just load and load
>and load. Once you're in, it's acceptable in terms of page rendering.
>
>
> Josh Luthman
> Office: 937-552-2340
> Direct: 937-552-2343
> 1100 Wayne St
> Suite 1337
> Troy, OH 45373
>
> On Tue, Jan 20, 2015 at 1:22 PM, Sean Heskett <***@zirkel.us> wrote:
>
>we use macbook pro's and the ePMP GUI has never been slow for us. It
>was UGLY, but they fixed that with version 2.0 haha.
>
> not sure why everyone says it's slow tho because we've never seen it.
>
> 2 cents
>
> -sean
>
>
>
>On Tue, Jan 20, 2015 at 9:57 AM, Nate Burke <***@blastcomm.com> wrote:
>
>Ok, Cambium, this is a little sad. My Field Laptop, a Lenovo S10-3t,
>Atom Processor with Windows 8.1 cannot load the EPMP WEB Pages in a
>timely manner. We're talking 40-60 seconds for initial load, and 20-30
>seconds per screen refresh/menu change. Since I'm going to have to go
>to the boss, and tell him that I need a new laptop to do any field
>troubleshooting for these new radios, what are the minimum system specs
>for a machine to view the EPMP Screens? Unless Cambium is going to get
>their Web interface under control as of Yesterday.
>
>They still swear that the GUI was all developed in house and not
>purchased (something I still can't believe). I'd like to know who the
>engineers/managers are who signed off on that design. I can only
>imaging that there was a group of guys sitting around the conference
>table, watching the presentation on the GUI on the projector up front,
>all nodding their heads in agreement, "I think this is a wonderful
>layout, the field tech's won't mind waiting a couple extra minutes for
>the pages to load so they can look this pretty!!"
>
>I think that Cambium should step up and get engineers from ALL aspects
>of product development out into the field. 40 seconds waiting for the
>page to load is fine when you're sitting in the office, but not when
>you have the laptop balanced on a stack of firewood in the freezing
>rain trying to get to the monitoring page to see why a radio isn't
>linking up. I think that every WISP on this list would be more than
>happy to host an engineer for a day. Heck, even if they go into the
>parking lot and assemble it on the tailgate of someone's Pickup,
>they'll get some idea of what we experience.
>
>I have a feeling that if all steps of the Dev process took a week in
>the field, We'd have a radio that had a GUI that responded instantly on
>any device, and radios that assembled and mounted (and unmounted) with
>1 gloved hand.
>
> </rant>
> Nate

--
Sent from my Android device with K-9 Mail. Please excuse my brevity.

[Vlad Sedov]

Yes they did, and it was definitely for the better. Most of the
improvements were based on some sort of real world feedback.. That's how
you make a good UI :D


vlad


On 1/21/2015 1:29 AM, CBB - Jay Fuller wrote:
> I do recall they did completely redesign the interface, due to our
> request, after the initial complaints of v1.... : /
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> *From:* Vlad Sedov <mailto:***@atlasok.com>
> *To:* ***@afmug.com <mailto:***@afmug.com>
> *Sent:* Tuesday, January 20, 2015 11:15 AM
> *Subject:* Re: [AFMUG] EPMP Minimum System Specs <rant>
>
> This has been one of our biggest complaints from day one.
> The interface, while it has gotten slightly more usable, is still
> complete garbage. It's unpredictable, slow, and inconsistent.. Let
> alone
> the features that just don't work.
>
> Why on earth did they not just stick with a field-tested, fast,
> usable
> interface from the Canopy line? Nobody buys a radio for it's
> slide-out
> menus and pretty HTML5 crap.
> We need, fast, intuitive, consistent.. Forget the shiny.
>
> grr
>
> Vlad
>
>
> On 1/20/2015 10:57 AM, Nate Burke wrote:
> > Ok, Cambium, this is a little sad. My Field Laptop, a Lenovo
> S10-3t,
> > Atom Processor with Windows 8.1 cannot load the EPMP WEB Pages in a
> > timely manner. We're talking 40-60 seconds for initial load, and
> > 20-30 seconds per screen refresh/menu change. Since I'm going
> to have
> > to go to the boss, and tell him that I need a new laptop to do any
> > field troubleshooting for these new radios, what are the minimum
> > system specs for a machine to view the EPMP Screens? Unless Cambium
> > is going to get their Web interface under control as of Yesterday.
> >
> > They still swear that the GUI was all developed in house and not
> > purchased (something I still can't believe). I'd like to know
> who the
> > engineers/managers are who signed off on that design. I can only
> > imaging that there was a group of guys sitting around the
> conference
> > table, watching the presentation on the GUI on the projector up
> front,
> > all nodding their heads in agreement, "I think this is a wonderful
> > layout, the field tech's won't mind waiting a couple extra
> minutes for
> > the pages to load so they can look this pretty!!"
> >
> > I think that Cambium should step up and get engineers from ALL
> aspects
> > of product development out into the field. 40 seconds waiting
> for the
> > page to load is fine when you're sitting in the office, but not
> when
> > you have the laptop balanced on a stack of firewood in the freezing
> > rain trying to get to the monitoring page to see why a radio isn't
> > linking up. I think that every WISP on this list would be more
> than
> > happy to host an engineer for a day. Heck, even if they go into the
> > parking lot and assemble it on the tailgate of someone's Pickup,
> > they'll get some idea of what we experience.
> >
> > I have a feeling that if all steps of the Dev process took a
> week in
> > the field, We'd have a radio that had a GUI that responded
> instantly
> > on any device, and radios that assembled and mounted (and
> unmounted)
> > with 1 gloved hand.
> >
> > </rant>
> > Nate
>

[Nate Burke]

Just to sorta provide some more data from the original Thread, it seems
that CPU Makes a huge difference in how fast the pages load. I ran a
test from the office to the same EPMP radio using 3 different machines.

On my 6 core I7 Desktop. Initial web load takes 4-5 seconds. And login
takes another 4-5 seconds.
On an old Dualcore Xeon, it's 10 seconds for initial load, and 10
seconds to login
On my atom netbook, it was 20 seconds for initial Load, 10 seconds to
login, and another 10 seconds for the graph to display and all the red
'!' marks to disappear (they were on all left menu items)

I know people just said 'well just get a faster laptop'.

But Seriously, it's a web page displaying TEXT AND NUMBERS, why should
it need an i7 on the client side for that?


On 1/21/2015 8:34 AM, Vlad Sedov wrote:
> Yes they did, and it was definitely for the better. Most of the
> improvements were based on some sort of real world feedback.. That's
> how you make a good UI :D
>
>
> vlad
>
>
> On 1/21/2015 1:29 AM, CBB - Jay Fuller wrote:
>> ￜ
>> I do recall they did completely redesign the interface, due to our
>> request, after the initial complaints of v1....ￜ : /
>> ￜ
>>
>> ----- Original Message -----
>> *From:* Vlad Sedov <mailto:***@atlasok.com>
>> *To:* ***@afmug.com <mailto:***@afmug.com>
>> *Sent:* Tuesday, January 20, 2015 11:15 AM
>> *Subject:* Re: [AFMUG] EPMP Minimum System Specs <rant>
>>
>> This has been one of our biggest complaints from day one.
>> The interface, while it has gotten slightly more usable, is still
>> complete garbage. It's unpredictable, slow, and inconsistent..
>> Let alone
>> the features that just don't work.
>>
>> Why on earth did they not just stick with a field-tested, fast,
>> usable
>> interface from the Canopy line? Nobody buys a radio for it's
>> slide-out
>> menus and pretty HTML5 crap.
>> We need, fast, intuitive, consistent.. Forget the shiny.
>>
>> grr
>>
>> Vlad
>>
>>
>> On 1/20/2015 10:57 AM, Nate Burke wrote:
>> > Ok, Cambium, this is a little sad.ￜ My Field Laptop, a Lenovo
>> S10-3t,
>> > Atom Processor with Windows 8.1 cannot load the EPMP WEB Pages
>> in a
>> > timely manner.ￜ We're talking 40-60 seconds for initial load,
>> and
>> > 20-30 seconds per screen refresh/menu change.ￜ Since I'm
>> going to have
>> > to go to the boss, and tell him that I need a new laptop to do any
>> > field troubleshooting for these new radios, what are the minimum
>> > system specs for a machine to view the EPMP Screens?ￜ Unless
>> Cambium
>> > is going to get their Web interface under control as of Yesterday.
>> >
>> > They still swear that the GUI was all developed in house and not
>> > purchased (something I still can't believe).ￜ I'd like to
>> know who the
>> > engineers/managers are who signed off on that design.ￜ I can
>> only
>> > imaging that there was a group of guys sitting around the
>> conference
>> > table, watching the presentation on the GUI on the projector up
>> front,
>> > all nodding their heads in agreement, "I think this is a wonderful
>> > layout, the field tech's won't mind waiting a couple extra
>> minutes for
>> > the pages to load so they can look this pretty!!"
>> >
>> > I think that Cambium should step up and get engineers from ALL
>> aspects
>> > of product development out into the field.ￜ 40 seconds
>> waiting for the
>> > page to load is fine when you're sitting in the office, but not
>> when
>> > you have the laptop balanced on a stack of firewood in the
>> freezing
>> > rain trying to get to the monitoring page to see why a radio isn't
>> > linking up.ￜ I think that every WISP on this list would be
>> more than
>> > happy to host an engineer for a day. Heck, even if they go into
>> the
>> > parking lot and assemble it on the tailgate of someone's Pickup,
>> > they'll get some idea of what we experience.
>> >
>> > I have a feeling that if all steps of the Dev process took a
>> week in
>> > the field, We'd have a radio that had a GUI that responded
>> instantly
>> > on any device, and radios that assembled and mounted (and
>> unmounted)
>> > with 1 gloved hand.
>> >
>> > </rant>
>> > Nate
>>
>

[Josh Luthman]

>But Seriously, it's a web page displaying TEXT AND NUMBERS, why should it
need an i7 on the client side for that?

No shit.

So you're saying it's clock speed? I've no idea what my phone does but I
would be kind of surprised if the Galaxy S3 and my phone vary too much in
CPU (I think they're both 2013 products).


Josh Luthman
Office: 937-552-2340
Direct: 937-552-2343
1100 Wayne St
Suite 1337
Troy, OH 45373

On Wed, Jan 21, 2015 at 9:50 AM, Nate Burke <***@blastcomm.com> wrote:

> Just to sorta provide some more data from the original Thread, it seems
> that CPU Makes a huge difference in how fast the pages load.ￜ I ran a
> test from the office to the same EPMP radio using 3 different machines.
>
> On my 6 core I7 Desktop.ￜ Initial web load takes 4-5 seconds.ￜ And
> login takes another 4-5 seconds.
> On an old Dualcore Xeon, it's 10 seconds for initial load, and 10 seconds
> to login
> On my atom netbook, it was 20 seconds for initial Load, 10 seconds to
> login, and another 10 seconds for the graph to display and all the red '!'
> marks to disappear (they were on all left menu items)
>
> I know people just said 'well just get a faster laptop'.
>
> But Seriously, it's a web page displaying TEXT AND NUMBERS, why should it
> need an i7 on the client side for that?
>
>
>
> On 1/21/2015 8:34 AM, Vlad Sedov wrote:
>
> Yes they did, and it was definitely for the better. Most of the
> improvements were based on some sort of real world feedback.. That's how
> you make a good UI :D
>
>
> vlad
>
>
> On 1/21/2015 1:29 AM, CBB - Jay Fuller wrote:
>
> ￜ
> I do recall they did completely redesign the interface, due to our
> request, after the initial complaints of v1....ￜ : /
> ￜ
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> *From:* Vlad Sedov <***@atlasok.com>
> *To:* ***@afmug.com
> *Sent:* Tuesday, January 20, 2015 11:15 AM
> *Subject:* Re: [AFMUG] EPMP Minimum System Specs <rant>
>
> This has been one of our biggest complaints from day one.
> The interface, while it has gotten slightly more usable, is still
> complete garbage. It's unpredictable, slow, and inconsistent.. Let alone
> the features that just don't work.
>
> Why on earth did they not just stick with a field-tested, fast, usable
> interface from the Canopy line? Nobody buys a radio for it's slide-out
> menus and pretty HTML5 crap.
> We need, fast, intuitive, consistent.. Forget the shiny.
>
> grr
>
> Vlad
>
>
> On 1/20/2015 10:57 AM, Nate Burke wrote:
> > Ok, Cambium, this is a little sad.ￜ My Field Laptop, a Lenovo S10-3t,
> > Atom Processor with Windows 8.1 cannot load the EPMP WEB Pages in a
> > timely manner.ￜ We're talking 40-60 seconds for initial load, and
> > 20-30 seconds per screen refresh/menu change.ￜ Since I'm going to have
> > to go to the boss, and tell him that I need a new laptop to do any
> > field troubleshooting for these new radios, what are the minimum
> > system specs for a machine to view the EPMP Screens?ￜ Unless Cambium
> > is going to get their Web interface under control as of Yesterday.
> >
> > They still swear that the GUI was all developed in house and not
> > purchased (something I still can't believe).ￜ I'd like to know who the
> > engineers/managers are who signed off on that design.ￜ I can only
> > imaging that there was a group of guys sitting around the conference
> > table, watching the presentation on the GUI on the projector up front,
> > all nodding their heads in agreement, "I think this is a wonderful
> > layout, the field tech's won't mind waiting a couple extra minutes for
> > the pages to load so they can look this pretty!!"
> >
> > I think that Cambium should step up and get engineers from ALL aspects
> > of product development out into the field.ￜ 40 seconds waiting for the
> > page to load is fine when you're sitting in the office, but not when
> > you have the laptop balanced on a stack of firewood in the freezing
> > rain trying to get to the monitoring page to see why a radio isn't
> > linking up.ￜ I think that every WISP on this list would be more than
> > happy to host an engineer for a day. Heck, even if they go into the
> > parking lot and assemble it on the tailgate of someone's Pickup,
> > they'll get some idea of what we experience.
> >
> > I have a feeling that if all steps of the Dev process took a week in
> > the field, We'd have a radio that had a GUI that responded instantly
> > on any device, and radios that assembled and mounted (and unmounted)
> > with 1 gloved hand.
> >
> > </rant>
> > Nate
>
>
>
>

[Nate Burke]

Not sure what it is, but in my case, the Machine did make a difference
in load time. Be interested in others feedback as well. Do you see
similar results? Are my results bad? Do older/slower machines take longer?


On 1/21/2015 8:52 AM, Josh Luthman wrote:
> >But Seriously, it's a web page displaying TEXT AND NUMBERS, why
> should it need an i7 on the client side for that?
>
> No shit.
>
> So you're saying it's clock speed? I've no idea what my phone does
> but I would be kind of surprised if the Galaxy S3 and my phone vary
> too much in CPU (I think they're both 2013 products).
>
>
> Josh Luthman
> Office: 937-552-2340
> Direct: 937-552-2343
> 1100 Wayne St
> Suite 1337
> Troy, OH 45373
>
> On Wed, Jan 21, 2015 at 9:50 AM, Nate Burke <***@blastcomm.com
> <mailto:***@blastcomm.com>> wrote:
>
> Just to sorta provide some more data from the original Thread, it
> seems that CPU Makes a huge difference in how fast the pages
> load.ￜ I ran a test from the office to the same EPMP radio using
> 3 different machines.
>
> On my 6 core I7 Desktop.ￜ Initial web load takes 4-5 seconds.ￜ
> And login takes another 4-5 seconds.
> On an old Dualcore Xeon, it's 10 seconds for initial load, and 10
> seconds to login
> On my atom netbook, it was 20 seconds for initial Load, 10 seconds
> to login, and another 10 seconds for the graph to display and all
> the red '!' marks to disappear (they were on all left menu items)
>
> I know people just said 'well just get a faster laptop'.
>
> But Seriously, it's a web page displaying TEXT AND NUMBERS, why
> should it need an i7 on the client side for that?
>
>
>
> On 1/21/2015 8:34 AM, Vlad Sedov wrote:
>> Yes they did, and it was definitely for the better. Most of the
>> improvements were based on some sort of real world feedback..
>> That's how you make a good UI :D
>>
>>
>> vlad
>>
>>
>> On 1/21/2015 1:29 AM, CBB - Jay Fuller wrote:
>>> ￜ
>>> I do recall they did completely redesign the interface, due to
>>> our request, after the initial complaints of v1....ￜ : /
>>> ￜ
>>>
>>> ----- Original Message -----
>>> *From:* Vlad Sedov <mailto:***@atlasok.com>
>>> *To:* ***@afmug.com <mailto:***@afmug.com>
>>> *Sent:* Tuesday, January 20, 2015 11:15 AM
>>> *Subject:* Re: [AFMUG] EPMP Minimum System Specs <rant>
>>>
>>> This has been one of our biggest complaints from day one.
>>> The interface, while it has gotten slightly more usable, is
>>> still
>>> complete garbage. It's unpredictable, slow, and
>>> inconsistent.. Let alone
>>> the features that just don't work.
>>>
>>> Why on earth did they not just stick with a field-tested,
>>> fast, usable
>>> interface from the Canopy line? Nobody buys a radio for it's
>>> slide-out
>>> menus and pretty HTML5 crap.
>>> We need, fast, intuitive, consistent.. Forget the shiny.
>>>
>>> grr
>>>
>>> Vlad
>>>
>>>
>>> On 1/20/2015 10:57 AM, Nate Burke wrote:
>>> > Ok, Cambium, this is a little sad.ￜ My Field Laptop, a
>>> Lenovo S10-3t,
>>> > Atom Processor with Windows 8.1 cannot load the EPMP WEB
>>> Pages in a
>>> > timely manner.ￜ We're talking 40-60 seconds for initial
>>> load, and
>>> > 20-30 seconds per screen refresh/menu change.ￜ Since I'm
>>> going to have
>>> > to go to the boss, and tell him that I need a new laptop
>>> to do any
>>> > field troubleshooting for these new radios, what are the
>>> minimum
>>> > system specs for a machine to view the EPMP Screens?ￜ
>>> Unless Cambium
>>> > is going to get their Web interface under control as of
>>> Yesterday.
>>> >
>>> > They still swear that the GUI was all developed in house
>>> and not
>>> > purchased (something I still can't believe).ￜ I'd like
>>> to know who the
>>> > engineers/managers are who signed off on that design.ￜ I
>>> can only
>>> > imaging that there was a group of guys sitting around the
>>> conference
>>> > table, watching the presentation on the GUI on the
>>> projector up front,
>>> > all nodding their heads in agreement, "I think this is a
>>> wonderful
>>> > layout, the field tech's won't mind waiting a couple extra
>>> minutes for
>>> > the pages to load so they can look this pretty!!"
>>> >
>>> > I think that Cambium should step up and get engineers from
>>> ALL aspects
>>> > of product development out into the field.ￜ 40 seconds
>>> waiting for the
>>> > page to load is fine when you're sitting in the office,
>>> but not when
>>> > you have the laptop balanced on a stack of firewood in the
>>> freezing
>>> > rain trying to get to the monitoring page to see why a
>>> radio isn't
>>> > linking up.ￜ I think that every WISP on this list would
>>> be more than
>>> > happy to host an engineer for a day. Heck, even if they go
>>> into the
>>> > parking lot and assemble it on the tailgate of someone's
>>> Pickup,
>>> > they'll get some idea of what we experience.
>>> >
>>> > I have a feeling that if all steps of the Dev process took
>>> a week in
>>> > the field, We'd have a radio that had a GUI that responded
>>> instantly
>>> > on any device, and radios that assembled and mounted (and
>>> unmounted)
>>> > with 1 gloved hand.
>>> >
>>> > </rant>
>>> > Nate
>>>
>>
>
>

[Vlad Sedov]

I just did a quick memory usage test on our NMS box...

Firefox (google.com): 76MB in RAM
Firefox with Canopy 450 AP interface open, logged in: 84.5MB.. a gain of
less than 10MB of RAM usage.
Firefox with ePMP AP open, logged in: *170-185MB* in RAM. over 100MB RAM
usage, to display the same stuff. Why?

IE (google.com): 64MB in RAM
IE with Canopy 450 AP interface open: 53MB (less than google!)
IE with ePMP AP interface open: *138MB*

Similar results with Chrome.. About 75MB difference.


eh.

vlad

On 1/21/2015 8:56 AM, Nate Burke wrote:
> Not sure what it is, but in my case, the Machine did make a difference
> in load time. Be interested in others feedback as well. Do you see
> similar results? Are my results bad? Do older/slower machines take
> longer?
>
>
> On 1/21/2015 8:52 AM, Josh Luthman wrote:
>> >But Seriously, it's a web page displaying TEXT AND NUMBERS, why
>> should it need an i7 on the client side for that?
>>
>> No shit.
>>
>> So you're saying it's clock speed? I've no idea what my phone does
>> but I would be kind of surprised if the Galaxy S3 and my phone vary
>> too much in CPU (I think they're both 2013 products).
>>
>>
>> Josh Luthman
>> Office: 937-552-2340
>> Direct: 937-552-2343
>> 1100 Wayne St
>> Suite 1337
>> Troy, OH 45373
>>
>> On Wed, Jan 21, 2015 at 9:50 AM, Nate Burke <***@blastcomm.com
>> <mailto:***@blastcomm.com>> wrote:
>>
>> Just to sorta provide some more data from the original Thread, it
>> seems that CPU Makes a huge difference in how fast the pages
>> load.ￜ I ran a test from the office to the same EPMP radio
>> using 3 different machines.
>>
>> On my 6 core I7 Desktop.ￜ Initial web load takes 4-5
>> seconds.ￜ And login takes another 4-5 seconds.
>> On an old Dualcore Xeon, it's 10 seconds for initial load, and 10
>> seconds to login
>> On my atom netbook, it was 20 seconds for initial Load, 10
>> seconds to login, and another 10 seconds for the graph to display
>> and all the red '!' marks to disappear (they were on all left
>> menu items)
>>
>> I know people just said 'well just get a faster laptop'.
>>
>> But Seriously, it's a web page displaying TEXT AND NUMBERS, why
>> should it need an i7 on the client side for that?
>>
>>
>>
>> On 1/21/2015 8:34 AM, Vlad Sedov wrote:
>>> Yes they did, and it was definitely for the better. Most of the
>>> improvements were based on some sort of real world feedback..
>>> That's how you make a good UI :D
>>>
>>>
>>> vlad
>>>
>>>
>>> On 1/21/2015 1:29 AM, CBB - Jay Fuller wrote:
>>>> ￜ
>>>> I do recall they did completely redesign the interface, due to
>>>> our request, after the initial complaints of v1....ￜ : /
>>>> ￜ
>>>>
>>>> ----- Original Message -----
>>>> *From:* Vlad Sedov <mailto:***@atlasok.com>
>>>> *To:* ***@afmug.com <mailto:***@afmug.com>
>>>> *Sent:* Tuesday, January 20, 2015 11:15 AM
>>>> *Subject:* Re: [AFMUG] EPMP Minimum System Specs <rant>
>>>>
>>>> This has been one of our biggest complaints from day one.
>>>> The interface, while it has gotten slightly more usable, is
>>>> still
>>>> complete garbage. It's unpredictable, slow, and
>>>> inconsistent.. Let alone
>>>> the features that just don't work.
>>>>
>>>> Why on earth did they not just stick with a field-tested,
>>>> fast, usable
>>>> interface from the Canopy line? Nobody buys a radio for
>>>> it's slide-out
>>>> menus and pretty HTML5 crap.
>>>> We need, fast, intuitive, consistent.. Forget the shiny.
>>>>
>>>> grr
>>>>
>>>> Vlad
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> On 1/20/2015 10:57 AM, Nate Burke wrote:
>>>> > Ok, Cambium, this is a little sad.ￜ My Field Laptop, a
>>>> Lenovo S10-3t,
>>>> > Atom Processor with Windows 8.1 cannot load the EPMP WEB
>>>> Pages in a
>>>> > timely manner.ￜ We're talking 40-60 seconds for initial
>>>> load, and
>>>> > 20-30 seconds per screen refresh/menu change.ￜ Since
>>>> I'm going to have
>>>> > to go to the boss, and tell him that I need a new laptop
>>>> to do any
>>>> > field troubleshooting for these new radios, what are the
>>>> minimum
>>>> > system specs for a machine to view the EPMP Screens?ￜ
>>>> Unless Cambium
>>>> > is going to get their Web interface under control as of
>>>> Yesterday.
>>>> >
>>>> > They still swear that the GUI was all developed in house
>>>> and not
>>>> > purchased (something I still can't believe).ￜ I'd like
>>>> to know who the
>>>> > engineers/managers are who signed off on that design.ￜ
>>>> I can only
>>>> > imaging that there was a group of guys sitting around the
>>>> conference
>>>> > table, watching the presentation on the GUI on the
>>>> projector up front,
>>>> > all nodding their heads in agreement, "I think this is a
>>>> wonderful
>>>> > layout, the field tech's won't mind waiting a couple
>>>> extra minutes for
>>>> > the pages to load so they can look this pretty!!"
>>>> >
>>>> > I think that Cambium should step up and get engineers
>>>> from ALL aspects
>>>> > of product development out into the field.ￜ 40 seconds
>>>> waiting for the
>>>> > page to load is fine when you're sitting in the office,
>>>> but not when
>>>> > you have the laptop balanced on a stack of firewood in
>>>> the freezing
>>>> > rain trying to get to the monitoring page to see why a
>>>> radio isn't
>>>> > linking up.ￜ I think that every WISP on this list would
>>>> be more than
>>>> > happy to host an engineer for a day. Heck, even if they
>>>> go into the
>>>> > parking lot and assemble it on the tailgate of someone's
>>>> Pickup,
>>>> > they'll get some idea of what we experience.
>>>> >
>>>> > I have a feeling that if all steps of the Dev process
>>>> took a week in
>>>> > the field, We'd have a radio that had a GUI that
>>>> responded instantly
>>>> > on any device, and radios that assembled and mounted (and
>>>> unmounted)
>>>> > with 1 gloved hand.
>>>> >
>>>> > </rant>
>>>> > Nate
>>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>

[CBB - Jay Fuller]

i'm good with my napkin in my wallet
(snicker)

----- Original Message -----
From: Mike Hammett
To: ***@afmug.com
Sent: Wednesday, January 21, 2015 6:38 AM
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] EPMP Minimum System Specs <rant>


NEVER save a password in your browser. They're all insecure. (and not just emotionally) If you aren't using LastPass or a similar service by now, you should slap yourself before going any further. Every password should be unique and randomly generated.

BTW: If you're considering LastPass, use this link so I get a free month of the premium service ($1/month): https://lastpass.com/f?3544026




-----
Mike Hammett
Intelligent Computing Solutions
http://www.ics-il.com



------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: "Jeremy" <***@gmail.com>
To: ***@afmug.com
Sent: Tuesday, January 20, 2015 11:43:22 PM
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] EPMP Minimum System Specs <rant>


Firefox also has a sync feature for passwords and bookmarks. Does the EPMP give you the option to save pass in Firefox? Do they use SSL? If so, that is why Chrome won't offer to save.

On Jan 20, 2015 7:07 PM, "George Skorup (Cyber Broadcasting)" <***@cbcast.com> wrote:

I have an original/Gen-I Moto X and the ePMP GUI is somewhat annoyingly slow. It's maybe 10-12 seconds of "please wait" and then another 4-5 seconds of "getting dashboard" messages. Once I'm logged in, it seems fine. But the auto refresh scrolling pages all on its own is very annoying. I'm sure they will improve it. One thing they definitely need to fix is that for whatever reason, I do not get the "save this username/password" option. No idea why that is.

And yeah, that's Chrome. Chrome everywhere, because all of my bookmarks and passwords are sync'd. Even though Chrome's cache pisses me off to no end, and you wake up one morning and Google moved shit around.. I gots to have my bookmarks.

On 1/20/2015 1:13 PM, Josh Luthman wrote:

Galaxy S4 First released 26 April 2013; 20 months ago


Isn't this right around the ePMP development time? Granted the phone is "a whole generation" back but there's no excuse for something of that age to have problems on a radio management page.




Josh Luthman
Office: 937-552-2340
Direct: 937-552-2343
1100 Wayne St
Suite 1337
Troy, OH 45373


On Tue, Jan 20, 2015 at 2:11 PM, Mathew Howard <***@gmail.com> wrote:

okay... I just timed it, on my phone (Galaxy S4) it takes about 25 seconds to get to the login... to actually get logged in and the first page loaded took me a full minute - for comparison, I can log into a UBNT radio and get the main page loaded in under 15 seconds.


It takes 4-5 seconds to get to the login on my desktop.



On Tue, Jan 20, 2015 at 12:53 PM, Adam Moffett <***@gmail.com> wrote:

I don't know what makes the GUI slow for you or anybody else....I have literally never seen it load slowly. Even on a crummy old Atom. Even on a cell phone.

I don't know what to say.




I doubt that 4 of my high end machines all have the same problem. The interface takes too long when it first shows up. Maybe it's because it gets all the information at once, maybe not. Don't care. I want it to be more smooth and faster.


My phone (Droid Maxx) is one of the most recent models for Android. The interface is terribly slow and clumsy on that.


Well if you feel a poor technology choice was the cause, that's fine, but it's just flat out wrong. I don't want to carry a big fat i7 laptop up the tower when I could just simply use my phone. It works with Ubiquiti, FSK Cambium, Tranzeo, Trango, Mikrotik, etc it should only make sense the one product with a clumsy interface needs fixed instead of changing my devices that work with the competitors products (as well as different products under their portfolio).




Josh Luthman
Office: 937-552-2340
Direct: 937-552-2343
1100 Wayne St
Suite 1337
Troy, OH 45373


On Tue, Jan 20, 2015 at 1:36 PM, Sean Heskett <***@zirkel.us> wrote:

i'm just stating that on all of our computers i've never seen the ePMP page load slowly.


maybe it's a computer problem and not a device problem, just trying to bring valid input to the discussion.


On Tue, Jan 20, 2015 at 11:34 AM, Josh Luthman <***@imaginenetworksllc.com> wrote:

Why are you/others arguing that the speed is just fine? This doesn't even make sense. There are people with slower laptops that work with other modern devices and epmp is the only interface that loads slow. There's no point in arguing peoples valid complaints. Are you trying to direct the engineers attention to something else?




Josh Luthman
Office: 937-552-2340
Direct: 937-552-2343
1100 Wayne St
Suite 1337
Troy, OH 45373


On Tue, Jan 20, 2015 at 1:30 PM, Mike Hammett <***@ics-il.net> wrote:

Three, maybe four seconds to load the initial screen and then two maybe three seconds to login. As I doubt a screen capture will work when I'm RDPed in, I'll record the entire login process when I get home and post it up on YouTube.




-----
Mike Hammett
Intelligent Computing Solutions
http://www.ics-il.com



--------------------------------------------------------------

From: "Josh Luthman" <***@imaginenetworksllc.com>
To: ***@afmug.com
Sent: Tuesday, January 20, 2015 12:26:09 PM
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] EPMP Minimum System Specs <rant>


Login takes forever. The first like 10-15 seconds just load and load and load. Once you're in, it's acceptable in terms of page rendering.




Josh Luthman
Office: 937-552-2340
Direct: 937-552-2343
1100 Wayne St
Suite 1337
Troy, OH 45373


On Tue, Jan 20, 2015 at 1:22 PM, Sean Heskett <***@zirkel.us> wrote:

we use macbook pro's and the ePMP GUI has never been slow for us. It was UGLY, but they fixed that with version 2.0 haha.


not sure why everyone says it's slow tho because we've never seen it.


2 cents


-sean






On Tue, Jan 20, 2015 at 9:57 AM, Nate Burke <***@blastcomm.com> wrote:

Ok, Cambium, this is a little sad. My Field Laptop, a Lenovo S10-3t, Atom Processor with Windows 8.1 cannot load the EPMP WEB Pages in a timely manner. We're talking 40-60 seconds for initial load, and 20-30 seconds per screen refresh/menu change. Since I'm going to have to go to the boss, and tell him that I need a new laptop to do any field troubleshooting for these new radios, what are the minimum system specs for a machine to view the EPMP Screens? Unless Cambium is going to get their Web interface under control as of Yesterday.

They still swear that the GUI was all developed in house and not purchased (something I still can't believe). I'd like to know who the engineers/managers are who signed off on that design. I can only imaging that there was a group of guys sitting around the conference table, watching the presentation on the GUI on the projector up front, all nodding their heads in agreement, "I think this is a wonderful layout, the field tech's won't mind waiting a couple extra minutes for the pages to load so they can look this pretty!!"

I think that Cambium should step up and get engineers from ALL aspects of product development out into the field. 40 seconds waiting for the page to load is fine when you're sitting in the office, but not when you have the laptop balanced on a stack of firewood in the freezing rain trying to get to the monitoring page to see why a radio isn't linking up. I think that every WISP on this list would be more than happy to host an engineer for a day. Heck, even if they go into the parking lot and assemble it on the tailgate of someone's Pickup, they'll get some idea of what we experience.

I have a feeling that if all steps of the Dev process took a week in the field, We'd have a radio that had a GUI that responded instantly on any device, and radios that assembled and mounted (and unmounted) with 1 gloved hand.

</rant>
Nate

[Vlad Sedov]

Oh, no doubt. I like my sea of tabs too.

But we're talking about a radio web interface. I don't care how much RAM
your PC has, using 10x more resources to display the same stuff is a
huge waste. Consider how many lower-powered gadgets are used to manage
radios.. It has to be nimble.


Vlad

On 1/21/2015 9:17 AM, Mike Hammett wrote:
> I routinely have over 8 gigs of RAM chewed up by my browsers,
> sometimes almost 14 GB... You need big boy PCs to be on the Internet
> anymore. ;-)
>
>
>
> -----
> Mike Hammett
> Intelligent Computing Solutions
> http://www.ics-il.com
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
> *From: *"Vlad Sedov" <***@atlasok.com>
> *To: ****@afmug.com
> *Sent: *Wednesday, January 21, 2015 9:15:24 AM
> *Subject: *Re: [AFMUG] EPMP Minimum System Specs <rant>
>
> I just did a quick memory usage test on our NMS box...
>
> Firefox (google.com): 76MB in RAM
> Firefox with Canopy 450 AP interface open, logged in: 84.5MB.. a gain
> of less than 10MB of RAM usage.
> Firefox with ePMP AP open, logged in: *170-185MB* in RAM. over 100MB
> RAM usage, to display the same stuff. Why?
>
> IE (google.com): 64MB in RAM
> IE with Canopy 450 AP interface open: 53MB (less than google!)
> IE with ePMP AP interface open: *138MB*
>
> Similar results with Chrome.. About 75MB difference.
>
>
> eh.
>
> vlad
>
> On 1/21/2015 8:56 AM, Nate Burke wrote:
>
> Not sure what it is, but in my case, the Machine did make a
> difference in load time. Be interested in others feedback as
> well. Do you see similar results? Are my results bad? Do
> older/slower machines take longer?
>
>
> On 1/21/2015 8:52 AM, Josh Luthman wrote:
>
> >But Seriously, it's a web page displaying TEXT AND NUMBERS,
> why should it need an i7 on the client side for that?
>
> No shit.
>
> So you're saying it's clock speed? I've no idea what my phone
> does but I would be kind of surprised if the Galaxy S3 and my
> phone vary too much in CPU (I think they're both 2013 products).
>
>
> Josh Luthman
> Office: 937-552-2340
> Direct: 937-552-2343
> 1100 Wayne St
> Suite 1337
> Troy, OH 45373
>
> On Wed, Jan 21, 2015 at 9:50 AM, Nate Burke
> <***@blastcomm.com <mailto:***@blastcomm.com>> wrote:
>
> Just to sorta provide some more data from the original
> Thread, it seems that CPU Makes a huge difference in how
> fast the pages load.ￜ I ran a test from the office to
> the same EPMP radio using 3 different machines.
>
> On my 6 core I7 Desktop.ￜ Initial web load takes 4-5
> seconds.ￜ And login takes another 4-5 seconds.
> On an old Dualcore Xeon, it's 10 seconds for initial load,
> and 10 seconds to login
> On my atom netbook, it was 20 seconds for initial Load, 10
> seconds to login, and another 10 seconds for the graph to
> display and all the red '!' marks to disappear (they were
> on all left menu items)
>
> I know people just said 'well just get a faster laptop'.
>
> But Seriously, it's a web page displaying TEXT AND
> NUMBERS, why should it need an i7 on the client side for
> that?
>
>
>
> On 1/21/2015 8:34 AM, Vlad Sedov wrote:
>
> Yes they did, and it was definitely for the better.
> Most of the improvements were based on some sort of
> real world feedback.. That's how you make a good UI :D
>
>
> vlad
>
>
> On 1/21/2015 1:29 AM, CBB - Jay Fuller wrote:
>
> ￜ
> I do recall they did completely redesign the
> interface, due to our request, after the initial
> complaints of v1....ￜ : /
> ￜ
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> *From:* Vlad Sedov <mailto:***@atlasok.com>
> *To:* ***@afmug.com <mailto:***@afmug.com>
> *Sent:* Tuesday, January 20, 2015 11:15 AM
> *Subject:* Re: [AFMUG] EPMP Minimum System
> Specs <rant>
>
> This has been one of our biggest complaints
> from day one.
> The interface, while it has gotten slightly
> more usable, is still
> complete garbage. It's unpredictable, slow,
> and inconsistent.. Let alone
> the features that just don't work.
>
> Why on earth did they not just stick with a
> field-tested, fast, usable
> interface from the Canopy line? Nobody buys a
> radio for it's slide-out
> menus and pretty HTML5 crap.
> We need, fast, intuitive, consistent.. Forget
> the shiny.
>
> grr
>
> Vlad
>
>
> On 1/20/2015 10:57 AM, Nate Burke wrote:
> > Ok, Cambium, this is a little sad.ￜ My
> Field Laptop, a Lenovo S10-3t,
> > Atom Processor with Windows 8.1 cannot load
> the EPMP WEB Pages in a
> > timely manner.ￜ We're talking 40-60
> seconds for initial load, and
> > 20-30 seconds per screen refresh/menu
> change.ￜ Since I'm going to have
> > to go to the boss, and tell him that I need
> a new laptop to do any
> > field troubleshooting for these new radios,
> what are the minimum
> > system specs for a machine to view the EPMP
> Screens?ￜ Unless Cambium
> > is going to get their Web interface under
> control as of Yesterday.
> >
> > They still swear that the GUI was all
> developed in house and not
> > purchased (something I still can't
> believe).ￜ I'd like to know who the
> > engineers/managers are who signed off on
> that design.ￜ I can only
> > imaging that there was a group of guys
> sitting around the conference
> > table, watching the presentation on the GUI
> on the projector up front,
> > all nodding their heads in agreement, "I
> think this is a wonderful
> > layout, the field tech's won't mind waiting
> a couple extra minutes for
> > the pages to load so they can look this
> pretty!!"
> >
> > I think that Cambium should step up and get
> engineers from ALL aspects
> > of product development out into the
> field.ￜ 40 seconds waiting for the
> > page to load is fine when you're sitting in
> the office, but not when
> > you have the laptop balanced on a stack of
> firewood in the freezing
> > rain trying to get to the monitoring page to
> see why a radio isn't
> > linking up.ￜ I think that every WISP on
> this list would be more than
> > happy to host an engineer for a day. Heck,
> even if they go into the
> > parking lot and assemble it on the tailgate
> of someone's Pickup,
> > they'll get some idea of what we experience.
> >
> > I have a feeling that if all steps of the
> Dev process took a week in
> > the field, We'd have a radio that had a GUI
> that responded instantly
> > on any device, and radios that assembled and
> mounted (and unmounted)
> > with 1 gloved hand.
> >
> > </rant>
> > Nate
>
>
>
>
>
>
>

[Mathew Howard]

Yes... saying just get a faster laptop would all be fine and all if there
was a good reason for it, but it's doing exactly the same function as the
canopy interface, which works fine on... anything.

Clock speed does seem to make a difference, on my Core 2 toughbook, it
seems to be around 10 seconds.

The current interface is definitely a huge improvement from the monstrosity
that they started out with, but there's still plenty of room for
improvement.

On Wed, Jan 21, 2015 at 8:52 AM, Josh Luthman <***@imaginenetworksllc.com>
wrote:

> >But Seriously, it's a web page displaying TEXT AND NUMBERS, why should
> it need an i7 on the client side for that?
>
> No shit.
>
> So you're saying it's clock speed? I've no idea what my phone does but I
> would be kind of surprised if the Galaxy S3 and my phone vary too much in
> CPU (I think they're both 2013 products).
>
>
> Josh Luthman
> Office: 937-552-2340
> Direct: 937-552-2343
> 1100 Wayne St
> Suite 1337
> Troy, OH 45373
>
> On Wed, Jan 21, 2015 at 9:50 AM, Nate Burke <***@blastcomm.com> wrote:
>
>> Just to sorta provide some more data from the original Thread, it seems
>> that CPU Makes a huge difference in how fast the pages load.ￜ I ran a
>> test from the office to the same EPMP radio using 3 different machines.
>>
>> On my 6 core I7 Desktop.ￜ Initial web load takes 4-5 seconds.ￜ And
>> login takes another 4-5 seconds.
>> On an old Dualcore Xeon, it's 10 seconds for initial load, and 10 seconds
>> to login
>> On my atom netbook, it was 20 seconds for initial Load, 10 seconds to
>> login, and another 10 seconds for the graph to display and all the red '!'
>> marks to disappear (they were on all left menu items)
>>
>> I know people just said 'well just get a faster laptop'.
>>
>> But Seriously, it's a web page displaying TEXT AND NUMBERS, why should it
>> need an i7 on the client side for that?
>>
>>
>>
>> On 1/21/2015 8:34 AM, Vlad Sedov wrote:
>>
>> Yes they did, and it was definitely for the better. Most of the
>> improvements were based on some sort of real world feedback.. That's how
>> you make a good UI :D
>>
>>
>> vlad
>>
>>
>> On 1/21/2015 1:29 AM, CBB - Jay Fuller wrote:
>>
>> ￜ
>> I do recall they did completely redesign the interface, due to our
>> request, after the initial complaints of v1....ￜ : /
>> ￜ
>>
>> ----- Original Message -----
>> *From:* Vlad Sedov <***@atlasok.com>
>> *To:* ***@afmug.com
>> *Sent:* Tuesday, January 20, 2015 11:15 AM
>> *Subject:* Re: [AFMUG] EPMP Minimum System Specs <rant>
>>
>> This has been one of our biggest complaints from day one.
>> The interface, while it has gotten slightly more usable, is still
>> complete garbage. It's unpredictable, slow, and inconsistent.. Let alone
>> the features that just don't work.
>>
>> Why on earth did they not just stick with a field-tested, fast, usable
>> interface from the Canopy line? Nobody buys a radio for it's slide-out
>> menus and pretty HTML5 crap.
>> We need, fast, intuitive, consistent.. Forget the shiny.
>>
>> grr
>>
>> Vlad
>>
>>
>> On 1/20/2015 10:57 AM, Nate Burke wrote:
>> > Ok, Cambium, this is a little sad.ￜ My Field Laptop, a Lenovo S10-3t,
>> > Atom Processor with Windows 8.1 cannot load the EPMP WEB Pages in a
>> > timely manner.ￜ We're talking 40-60 seconds for initial load, and
>> > 20-30 seconds per screen refresh/menu change.ￜ Since I'm going to
>> have
>> > to go to the boss, and tell him that I need a new laptop to do any
>> > field troubleshooting for these new radios, what are the minimum
>> > system specs for a machine to view the EPMP Screens?ￜ Unless Cambium
>> > is going to get their Web interface under control as of Yesterday.
>> >
>> > They still swear that the GUI was all developed in house and not
>> > purchased (something I still can't believe).ￜ I'd like to know who
>> the
>> > engineers/managers are who signed off on that design.ￜ I can only
>> > imaging that there was a group of guys sitting around the conference
>> > table, watching the presentation on the GUI on the projector up front,
>> > all nodding their heads in agreement, "I think this is a wonderful
>> > layout, the field tech's won't mind waiting a couple extra minutes for
>> > the pages to load so they can look this pretty!!"
>> >
>> > I think that Cambium should step up and get engineers from ALL aspects
>> > of product development out into the field.ￜ 40 seconds waiting for
>> the
>> > page to load is fine when you're sitting in the office, but not when
>> > you have the laptop balanced on a stack of firewood in the freezing
>> > rain trying to get to the monitoring page to see why a radio isn't
>> > linking up.ￜ I think that every WISP on this list would be more than
>> > happy to host an engineer for a day. Heck, even if they go into the
>> > parking lot and assemble it on the tailgate of someone's Pickup,
>> > they'll get some idea of what we experience.
>> >
>> > I have a feeling that if all steps of the Dev process took a week in
>> > the field, We'd have a radio that had a GUI that responded instantly
>> > on any device, and radios that assembled and mounted (and unmounted)
>> > with 1 gloved hand.
>> >
>> > </rant>
>> > Nate
>>
>>
>>
>>
>

[Mathew Howard]

True enough - CPU performance seems to make a difference, for those of us
who are going to be picky about details. :P

On Wed, Jan 21, 2015 at 9:29 AM, Mike Hammett <***@ics-il.net> wrote:

> Clockspeed != CPU performance.
>
>
>
> -----
> Mike Hammett
> Intelligent Computing Solutions
> http://www.ics-il.com
>
> ------------------------------
> *From: *"Mathew Howard" <***@gmail.com>
> *To: *"af" <***@afmug.com>
> *Sent: *Wednesday, January 21, 2015 9:29:01 AM
> *Subject: *Re: [AFMUG] EPMP Minimum System Specs <rant>
>
> Yes... saying just get a faster laptop would all be fine and all if there
> was a good reason for it, but it's doing exactly the same function as the
> canopy interface, which works fine on... anything.
>
> Clock speed does seem to make a difference, on my Core 2 toughbook, it
> seems to be around 10 seconds.
>
> The current interface is definitely a huge improvement from the
> monstrosity that they started out with, but there's still plenty of room
> for improvement.
>
> On Wed, Jan 21, 2015 at 8:52 AM, Josh Luthman <***@imaginenetworksllc.com
> > wrote:
>
>> >But Seriously, it's a web page displaying TEXT AND NUMBERS, why should
>> it need an i7 on the client side for that?
>>
>> No shit.
>>
>> So you're saying it's clock speed? I've no idea what my phone does but I
>> would be kind of surprised if the Galaxy S3 and my phone vary too much in
>> CPU (I think they're both 2013 products).
>>
>>
>> Josh Luthman
>> Office: 937-552-2340
>> Direct: 937-552-2343
>> 1100 Wayne St
>> Suite 1337
>> Troy, OH 45373
>>
>> On Wed, Jan 21, 2015 at 9:50 AM, Nate Burke <***@blastcomm.com> wrote:
>>
>>> Just to sorta provide some more data from the original Thread, it seems
>>> that CPU Makes a huge difference in how fast the pages load.ￜ I ran a
>>> test from the office to the same EPMP radio using 3 different machines.
>>>
>>> On my 6 core I7 Desktop.ￜ Initial web load takes 4-5 seconds.ￜ And
>>> login takes another 4-5 seconds.
>>> On an old Dualcore Xeon, it's 10 seconds for initial load, and 10
>>> seconds to login
>>> On my atom netbook, it was 20 seconds for initial Load, 10 seconds to
>>> login, and another 10 seconds for the graph to display and all the red '!'
>>> marks to disappear (they were on all left menu items)
>>>
>>> I know people just said 'well just get a faster laptop'.
>>>
>>> But Seriously, it's a web page displaying TEXT AND NUMBERS, why should
>>> it need an i7 on the client side for that?
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> On 1/21/2015 8:34 AM, Vlad Sedov wrote:
>>>
>>> Yes they did, and it was definitely for the better. Most of the
>>> improvements were based on some sort of real world feedback.. That's how
>>> you make a good UI :D
>>>
>>>
>>> vlad
>>>
>>>
>>> On 1/21/2015 1:29 AM, CBB - Jay Fuller wrote:
>>>
>>> ￜ
>>> I do recall they did completely redesign the interface, due to our
>>> request, after the initial complaints of v1....ￜ : /
>>> ￜ
>>>
>>> ----- Original Message -----
>>> *From:* Vlad Sedov <***@atlasok.com>
>>> *To:* ***@afmug.com
>>> *Sent:* Tuesday, January 20, 2015 11:15 AM
>>> *Subject:* Re: [AFMUG] EPMP Minimum System Specs <rant>
>>>
>>> This has been one of our biggest complaints from day one.
>>> The interface, while it has gotten slightly more usable, is still
>>> complete garbage. It's unpredictable, slow, and inconsistent.. Let alone
>>> the features that just don't work.
>>>
>>> Why on earth did they not just stick with a field-tested, fast, usable
>>> interface from the Canopy line? Nobody buys a radio for it's slide-out
>>> menus and pretty HTML5 crap.
>>> We need, fast, intuitive, consistent.. Forget the shiny.
>>>
>>> grr
>>>
>>> Vlad
>>>
>>>
>>> On 1/20/2015 10:57 AM, Nate Burke wrote:
>>> > Ok, Cambium, this is a little sad.ￜ My Field Laptop, a Lenovo
>>> S10-3t,
>>> > Atom Processor with Windows 8.1 cannot load the EPMP WEB Pages in a
>>> > timely manner.ￜ We're talking 40-60 seconds for initial load, and
>>> > 20-30 seconds per screen refresh/menu change.ￜ Since I'm going to
>>> have
>>> > to go to the boss, and tell him that I need a new laptop to do any
>>> > field troubleshooting for these new radios, what are the minimum
>>> > system specs for a machine to view the EPMP Screens?ￜ Unless Cambium
>>> > is going to get their Web interface under control as of Yesterday.
>>> >
>>> > They still swear that the GUI was all developed in house and not
>>> > purchased (something I still can't believe).ￜ I'd like to know who
>>> the
>>> > engineers/managers are who signed off on that design.ￜ I can only
>>> > imaging that there was a group of guys sitting around the conference
>>> > table, watching the presentation on the GUI on the projector up front,
>>> > all nodding their heads in agreement, "I think this is a wonderful
>>> > layout, the field tech's won't mind waiting a couple extra minutes for
>>> > the pages to load so they can look this pretty!!"
>>> >
>>> > I think that Cambium should step up and get engineers from ALL aspects
>>> > of product development out into the field.ￜ 40 seconds waiting for
>>> the
>>> > page to load is fine when you're sitting in the office, but not when
>>> > you have the laptop balanced on a stack of firewood in the freezing
>>> > rain trying to get to the monitoring page to see why a radio isn't
>>> > linking up.ￜ I think that every WISP on this list would be more than
>>> > happy to host an engineer for a day. Heck, even if they go into the
>>> > parking lot and assemble it on the tailgate of someone's Pickup,
>>> > they'll get some idea of what we experience.
>>> >
>>> > I have a feeling that if all steps of the Dev process took a week in
>>> > the field, We'd have a radio that had a GUI that responded instantly
>>> > on any device, and radios that assembled and mounted (and unmounted)
>>> > with 1 gloved hand.
>>> >
>>> > </rant>
>>> > Nate
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
>
>

[Nate Burke]

> You need big boy PCs to be on the Internet anymore

Who's fault is this? There are sites I don't visit anymore because
they've made them so bloated they won't run (chicagotribune.com) They
provide the content, they should make sure they work for me, not the
other way around (Even though I realize that I am the eyeballs being sold)

Just think if the whole web was as neat as the packetflux equipment is.
You'd still only need 10mb interfaces on your servers.


On 1/21/2015 9:21 AM, Vlad Sedov wrote:
> Oh, no doubt. I like my sea of tabs too.
>
> But we're talking about a radio web interface. I don't care how much
> RAM your PC has, using 10x more resources to display the same stuff is
> a huge waste. Consider how many lower-powered gadgets are used to
> manage radios.. It has to be nimble.
>
>
> Vlad
>
> On 1/21/2015 9:17 AM, Mike Hammett wrote:
>> I routinely have over 8 gigs of RAM chewed up by my browsers,
>> sometimes almost 14 GB... You need big boy PCs to be on the Internet
>> anymore. ;-)
>>
>>
>>
>> -----
>> Mike Hammett
>> Intelligent Computing Solutions
>> http://www.ics-il.com
>>
>> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>> *From: *"Vlad Sedov" <***@atlasok.com>
>> *To: ****@afmug.com
>> *Sent: *Wednesday, January 21, 2015 9:15:24 AM
>> *Subject: *Re: [AFMUG] EPMP Minimum System Specs <rant>
>>
>> I just did a quick memory usage test on our NMS box...
>>
>> Firefox (google.com): 76MB in RAM
>> Firefox with Canopy 450 AP interface open, logged in: 84.5MB.. a gain
>> of less than 10MB of RAM usage.
>> Firefox with ePMP AP open, logged in: *170-185MB* in RAM. over 100MB
>> RAM usage, to display the same stuff. Why?
>>
>> IE (google.com): 64MB in RAM
>> IE with Canopy 450 AP interface open: 53MB (less than google!)
>> IE with ePMP AP interface open: *138MB*
>>
>> Similar results with Chrome.. About 75MB difference.
>>
>>
>> eh.
>>
>> vlad
>>
>> On 1/21/2015 8:56 AM, Nate Burke wrote:
>>
>> Not sure what it is, but in my case, the Machine did make a
>> difference in load time. Be interested in others feedback as
>> well. Do you see similar results? Are my results bad? Do
>> older/slower machines take longer?
>>
>>
>> On 1/21/2015 8:52 AM, Josh Luthman wrote:
>>
>> >But Seriously, it's a web page displaying TEXT AND NUMBERS,
>> why should it need an i7 on the client side for that?
>>
>> No shit.
>>
>> So you're saying it's clock speed? I've no idea what my
>> phone does but I would be kind of surprised if the Galaxy S3
>> and my phone vary too much in CPU (I think they're both 2013
>> products).
>>
>>
>> Josh Luthman
>> Office: 937-552-2340
>> Direct: 937-552-2343
>> 1100 Wayne St
>> Suite 1337
>> Troy, OH 45373
>>
>> On Wed, Jan 21, 2015 at 9:50 AM, Nate Burke
>> <***@blastcomm.com <mailto:***@blastcomm.com>> wrote:
>>
>> Just to sorta provide some more data from the original
>> Thread, it seems that CPU Makes a huge difference in how
>> fast the pages load.ￜ I ran a test from the office to
>> the same EPMP radio using 3 different machines.
>>
>> On my 6 core I7 Desktop.ￜ Initial web load takes 4-5
>> seconds.ￜ And login takes another 4-5 seconds.
>> On an old Dualcore Xeon, it's 10 seconds for initial
>> load, and 10 seconds to login
>> On my atom netbook, it was 20 seconds for initial Load,
>> 10 seconds to login, and another 10 seconds for the graph
>> to display and all the red '!' marks to disappear (they
>> were on all left menu items)
>>
>> I know people just said 'well just get a faster laptop'.
>>
>> But Seriously, it's a web page displaying TEXT AND
>> NUMBERS, why should it need an i7 on the client side for
>> that?
>>
>>
>>
>> On 1/21/2015 8:34 AM, Vlad Sedov wrote:
>>
>> Yes they did, and it was definitely for the better.
>> Most of the improvements were based on some sort of
>> real world feedback.. That's how you make a good UI :D
>>
>>
>> vlad
>>
>>
>> On 1/21/2015 1:29 AM, CBB - Jay Fuller wrote:
>>
>> ￜ
>> I do recall they did completely redesign the
>> interface, due to our request, after the initial
>> complaints of v1....ￜ : /
>> ￜ
>>
>> ----- Original Message -----
>> *From:* Vlad Sedov <mailto:***@atlasok.com>
>> *To:* ***@afmug.com <mailto:***@afmug.com>
>> *Sent:* Tuesday, January 20, 2015 11:15 AM
>> *Subject:* Re: [AFMUG] EPMP Minimum System
>> Specs <rant>
>>
>> This has been one of our biggest complaints
>> from day one.
>> The interface, while it has gotten slightly
>> more usable, is still
>> complete garbage. It's unpredictable, slow,
>> and inconsistent.. Let alone
>> the features that just don't work.
>>
>> Why on earth did they not just stick with a
>> field-tested, fast, usable
>> interface from the Canopy line? Nobody buys a
>> radio for it's slide-out
>> menus and pretty HTML5 crap.
>> We need, fast, intuitive, consistent.. Forget
>> the shiny.
>>
>> grr
>>
>> Vlad
>>
>>
>> On 1/20/2015 10:57 AM, Nate Burke wrote:
>> > Ok, Cambium, this is a little sad.ￜ My
>> Field Laptop, a Lenovo S10-3t,
>> > Atom Processor with Windows 8.1 cannot load
>> the EPMP WEB Pages in a
>> > timely manner.ￜ We're talking 40-60
>> seconds for initial load, and
>> > 20-30 seconds per screen refresh/menu
>> change.ￜ Since I'm going to have
>> > to go to the boss, and tell him that I need
>> a new laptop to do any
>> > field troubleshooting for these new radios,
>> what are the minimum
>> > system specs for a machine to view the EPMP
>> Screens?ￜ Unless Cambium
>> > is going to get their Web interface under
>> control as of Yesterday.
>> >
>> > They still swear that the GUI was all
>> developed in house and not
>> > purchased (something I still can't
>> believe).ￜ I'd like to know who the
>> > engineers/managers are who signed off on
>> that design.ￜ I can only
>> > imaging that there was a group of guys
>> sitting around the conference
>> > table, watching the presentation on the GUI
>> on the projector up front,
>> > all nodding their heads in agreement, "I
>> think this is a wonderful
>> > layout, the field tech's won't mind waiting
>> a couple extra minutes for
>> > the pages to load so they can look this
>> pretty!!"
>> >
>> > I think that Cambium should step up and get
>> engineers from ALL aspects
>> > of product development out into the
>> field.ￜ 40 seconds waiting for the
>> > page to load is fine when you're sitting in
>> the office, but not when
>> > you have the laptop balanced on a stack of
>> firewood in the freezing
>> > rain trying to get to the monitoring page
>> to see why a radio isn't
>> > linking up.ￜ I think that every WISP on
>> this list would be more than
>> > happy to host an engineer for a day. Heck,
>> even if they go into the
>> > parking lot and assemble it on the tailgate
>> of someone's Pickup,
>> > they'll get some idea of what we experience.
>> >
>> > I have a feeling that if all steps of the
>> Dev process took a week in
>> > the field, We'd have a radio that had a GUI
>> that responded instantly
>> > on any device, and radios that assembled
>> and mounted (and unmounted)
>> > with 1 gloved hand.
>> >
>> > </rant>
>> > Nate
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>

[Vlad Sedov]

lol..
shit code is mostly why we need gigabytes of RAM these days.


vlad


On 1/21/2015 9:42 AM, Jon Bruce wrote:
> And we only need 64k of RAM.
>





> On 1/21/2015 10:30 AM, Nate Burke wrote:
>> > You need big boy PCs to be on the Internet anymore
>>
>> Who's fault is this? There are sites I don't visit anymore because
>> they've made them so bloated they won't run (chicagotribune.com)
>> They provide the content, they should make sure they work for me, not
>> the other way around (Even though I realize that I am the eyeballs
>> being sold)
>>
>> Just think if the whole web was as neat as the packetflux equipment
>> is. You'd still only need 10mb interfaces on your servers.
>>
>>
>> On 1/21/2015 9:21 AM, Vlad Sedov wrote:
>>> Oh, no doubt. I like my sea of tabs too.
>>>
>>> But we're talking about a radio web interface. I don't care how much
>>> RAM your PC has, using 10x more resources to display the same stuff
>>> is a huge waste. Consider how many lower-powered gadgets are used to
>>> manage radios.. It has to be nimble.
>>>
>>>
>>> Vlad
>>>
>>> On 1/21/2015 9:17 AM, Mike Hammett wrote:
>>>> I routinely have over 8 gigs of RAM chewed up by my browsers,
>>>> sometimes almost 14 GB... You need big boy PCs to be on the
>>>> Internet anymore. ;-)
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> -----
>>>> Mike Hammett
>>>> Intelligent Computing Solutions
>>>> http://www.ics-il.com
>>>>
>>>> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>>>> *From: *"Vlad Sedov" <***@atlasok.com>
>>>> *To: ****@afmug.com
>>>> *Sent: *Wednesday, January 21, 2015 9:15:24 AM
>>>> *Subject: *Re: [AFMUG] EPMP Minimum System Specs <rant>
>>>>
>>>> I just did a quick memory usage test on our NMS box...
>>>>
>>>> Firefox (google.com): 76MB in RAM
>>>> Firefox with Canopy 450 AP interface open, logged in: 84.5MB.. a
>>>> gain of less than 10MB of RAM usage.
>>>> Firefox with ePMP AP open, logged in: *170-185MB* in RAM. over
>>>> 100MB RAM usage, to display the same stuff. Why?
>>>>
>>>> IE (google.com): 64MB in RAM
>>>> IE with Canopy 450 AP interface open: 53MB (less than google!)
>>>> IE with ePMP AP interface open: *138MB*
>>>>
>>>> Similar results with Chrome.. About 75MB difference.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> eh.
>>>>
>>>> vlad
>>>>
>>>> On 1/21/2015 8:56 AM, Nate Burke wrote:
>>>>
>>>> Not sure what it is, but in my case, the Machine did make a
>>>> difference in load time. Be interested in others feedback as
>>>> well. Do you see similar results? Are my results bad? Do
>>>> older/slower machines take longer?
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> On 1/21/2015 8:52 AM, Josh Luthman wrote:
>>>>
>>>> >But Seriously, it's a web page displaying TEXT AND
>>>> NUMBERS, why should it need an i7 on the client side for that?
>>>>
>>>> No shit.
>>>>
>>>> So you're saying it's clock speed? I've no idea what my
>>>> phone does but I would be kind of surprised if the Galaxy
>>>> S3 and my phone vary too much in CPU (I think they're both
>>>> 2013 products).
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Josh Luthman
>>>> Office: 937-552-2340
>>>> Direct: 937-552-2343
>>>> 1100 Wayne St
>>>> Suite 1337
>>>> Troy, OH 45373
>>>>
>>>> On Wed, Jan 21, 2015 at 9:50 AM, Nate Burke
>>>> <***@blastcomm.com <mailto:***@blastcomm.com>> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> Just to sorta provide some more data from the original
>>>> Thread, it seems that CPU Makes a huge difference in
>>>> how fast the pages load.ￜ I ran a test from the
>>>> office to the same EPMP radio using 3 different machines.
>>>>
>>>> On my 6 core I7 Desktop.ￜ Initial web load takes 4-5
>>>> seconds.ￜ And login takes another 4-5 seconds.
>>>> On an old Dualcore Xeon, it's 10 seconds for initial
>>>> load, and 10 seconds to login
>>>> On my atom netbook, it was 20 seconds for initial Load,
>>>> 10 seconds to login, and another 10 seconds for the
>>>> graph to display and all the red '!' marks to disappear
>>>> (they were on all left menu items)
>>>>
>>>> I know people just said 'well just get a faster laptop'.
>>>>
>>>> But Seriously, it's a web page displaying TEXT AND
>>>> NUMBERS, why should it need an i7 on the client side
>>>> for that?
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> On 1/21/2015 8:34 AM, Vlad Sedov wrote:
>>>>
>>>> Yes they did, and it was definitely for the better.
>>>> Most of the improvements were based on some sort of
>>>> real world feedback.. That's how you make a good UI :D
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> vlad
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> On 1/21/2015 1:29 AM, CBB - Jay Fuller wrote:
>>>>
>>>> ￜ
>>>> I do recall they did completely redesign the
>>>> interface, due to our request, after the
>>>> initial complaints of v1....ￜ : /
>>>> ￜ
>>>>
>>>> ----- Original Message -----
>>>> *From:* Vlad Sedov <mailto:***@atlasok.com>
>>>> *To:* ***@afmug.com <mailto:***@afmug.com>
>>>> *Sent:* Tuesday, January 20, 2015 11:15 AM
>>>> *Subject:* Re: [AFMUG] EPMP Minimum System
>>>> Specs <rant>
>>>>
>>>> This has been one of our biggest complaints
>>>> from day one.
>>>> The interface, while it has gotten slightly
>>>> more usable, is still
>>>> complete garbage. It's unpredictable, slow,
>>>> and inconsistent.. Let alone
>>>> the features that just don't work.
>>>>
>>>> Why on earth did they not just stick with a
>>>> field-tested, fast, usable
>>>> interface from the Canopy line? Nobody buys
>>>> a radio for it's slide-out
>>>> menus and pretty HTML5 crap.
>>>> We need, fast, intuitive, consistent..
>>>> Forget the shiny.
>>>>
>>>> grr
>>>>
>>>> Vlad
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> On 1/20/2015 10:57 AM, Nate Burke wrote:
>>>> > Ok, Cambium, this is a little sad.ￜ My
>>>> Field Laptop, a Lenovo S10-3t,
>>>> > Atom Processor with Windows 8.1 cannot
>>>> load the EPMP WEB Pages in a
>>>> > timely manner.ￜ We're talking 40-60
>>>> seconds for initial load, and
>>>> > 20-30 seconds per screen refresh/menu
>>>> change.ￜ Since I'm going to have
>>>> > to go to the boss, and tell him that I
>>>> need a new laptop to do any
>>>> > field troubleshooting for these new
>>>> radios, what are the minimum
>>>> > system specs for a machine to view the
>>>> EPMP Screens?ￜ Unless Cambium
>>>> > is going to get their Web interface under
>>>> control as of Yesterday.
>>>> >
>>>> > They still swear that the GUI was all
>>>> developed in house and not
>>>> > purchased (something I still can't
>>>> believe).ￜ I'd like to know who the
>>>> > engineers/managers are who signed off on
>>>> that design.ￜ I can only
>>>> > imaging that there was a group of guys
>>>> sitting around the conference
>>>> > table, watching the presentation on the
>>>> GUI on the projector up front,
>>>> > all nodding their heads in agreement, "I
>>>> think this is a wonderful
>>>> > layout, the field tech's won't mind
>>>> waiting a couple extra minutes for
>>>> > the pages to load so they can look this
>>>> pretty!!"
>>>> >
>>>> > I think that Cambium should step up and
>>>> get engineers from ALL aspects
>>>> > of product development out into the
>>>> field.ￜ 40 seconds waiting for the
>>>> > page to load is fine when you're sitting
>>>> in the office, but not when
>>>> > you have the laptop balanced on a stack
>>>> of firewood in the freezing
>>>> > rain trying to get to the monitoring page
>>>> to see why a radio isn't
>>>> > linking up.ￜ I think that every WISP on
>>>> this list would be more than
>>>> > happy to host an engineer for a day.
>>>> Heck, even if they go into the
>>>> > parking lot and assemble it on the
>>>> tailgate of someone's Pickup,
>>>> > they'll get some idea of what we experience.
>>>> >
>>>> > I have a feeling that if all steps of the
>>>> Dev process took a week in
>>>> > the field, We'd have a radio that had a
>>>> GUI that responded instantly
>>>> > on any device, and radios that assembled
>>>> and mounted (and unmounted)
>>>> > with 1 gloved hand.
>>>> >
>>>> > </rant>
>>>> > Nate
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>
>

[Jason McKemie]

Exactly. There are too many web developers that just use a GUI to make
their sites and don't know anything about what is going on behind the
scenes. I realize that people expect more out of their sites than you would
probably want to hand code, but there needs to be a middle ground. This is
more in reference to the web in general than epmp.

On Wednesday, January 21, 2015, Vlad Sedov <***@atlasok.com> wrote:

> lol..
> shit code is mostly why we need gigabytes of RAM these days.
>
>
> vlad
>
>
> On 1/21/2015 9:42 AM, Jon Bruce wrote:
>
> And we only need 64k of RAM.
>
>
>
>
>
>
> On 1/21/2015 10:30 AM, Nate Burke wrote:
>
> > You need big boy PCs to be on the Internet anymore
>
> Who's fault is this? There are sites I don't visit anymore because
> they've made them so bloated they won't run (chicagotribune.com) They
> provide the content, they should make sure they work for me, not the other
> way around (Even though I realize that I am the eyeballs being sold)
>
> Just think if the whole web was as neat as the packetflux equipment is.
> You'd still only need 10mb interfaces on your servers.
>
>
> On 1/21/2015 9:21 AM, Vlad Sedov wrote:
>
> Oh, no doubt. I like my sea of tabs too.
>
> But we're talking about a radio web interface. I don't care how much RAM
> your PC has, using 10x more resources to display the same stuff is a huge
> waste. Consider how many lower-powered gadgets are used to manage radios..
> It has to be nimble.
>
>
> Vlad
>
> On 1/21/2015 9:17 AM, Mike Hammett wrote:
>
> I routinely have over 8 gigs of RAM chewed up by my browsers, sometimes
> almost 14 GB... You need big boy PCs to be on the Internet anymore. ;-)
>
>
>
> -----
> Mike Hammett
> Intelligent Computing Solutions
> http://www.ics-il.com
>
> ------------------------------
> *From: *"Vlad Sedov" <***@atlasok.com>
> <javascript:_e(%7B%7D,'cvml','***@atlasok.com');>
> *To: ****@afmug.com <javascript:_e(%7B%7D,'cvml','***@afmug.com');>
> *Sent: *Wednesday, January 21, 2015 9:15:24 AM
> *Subject: *Re: [AFMUG] EPMP Minimum System Specs <rant>
>
> I just did a quick memory usage test on our NMS box...
>
> Firefox (google.com): 76MB in RAM
> Firefox with Canopy 450 AP interface open, logged in: 84.5MB.. a gain of
> less than 10MB of RAM usage.
> Firefox with ePMP AP open, logged in: *170-185MB* in RAM. over 100MB RAM
> usage, to display the same stuff. Why?
>
> IE (google.com): 64MB in RAM
> IE with Canopy 450 AP interface open: 53MB (less than google!)
> IE with ePMP AP interface open: *138MB*
>
> Similar results with Chrome.. About 75MB difference.
>
>
> eh.
>
> vlad
>
> On 1/21/2015 8:56 AM, Nate Burke wrote:
>
> Not sure what it is, but in my case, the Machine did make a difference in
> load time. Be interested in others feedback as well. Do you see similar
> results? Are my results bad? Do older/slower machines take longer?
>
>
> On 1/21/2015 8:52 AM, Josh Luthman wrote:
>
> >But Seriously, it's a web page displaying TEXT AND NUMBERS, why should
> it need an i7 on the client side for that?
>
> No shit.
>
> So you're saying it's clock speed? I've no idea what my phone does but
> I would be kind of surprised if the Galaxy S3 and my phone vary too much in
> CPU (I think they're both 2013 products).
>
>
> Josh Luthman
> Office: 937-552-2340
> Direct: 937-552-2343
> 1100 Wayne St
> Suite 1337
> Troy, OH 45373
>
> On Wed, Jan 21, 2015 at 9:50 AM, Nate Burke <***@blastcomm.com
> <javascript:_e(%7B%7D,'cvml','***@blastcomm.com');>> wrote:
>
>> Just to sorta provide some more data from the original Thread, it seems
>> that CPU Makes a huge difference in how fast the pages load.ￜ I ran a
>> test from the office to the same EPMP radio using 3 different machines.
>>
>> On my 6 core I7 Desktop.ￜ Initial web load takes 4-5 seconds.ￜ And
>> login takes another 4-5 seconds.
>> On an old Dualcore Xeon, it's 10 seconds for initial load, and 10 seconds
>> to login
>> On my atom netbook, it was 20 seconds for initial Load, 10 seconds to
>> login, and another 10 seconds for the graph to display and all the red '!'
>> marks to disappear (they were on all left menu items)
>>
>> I know people just said 'well just get a faster laptop'.
>>
>> But Seriously, it's a web page displaying TEXT AND NUMBERS, why should it
>> need an i7 on the client side for that?
>>
>>
>>
>> On 1/21/2015 8:34 AM, Vlad Sedov wrote:
>>
>> Yes they did, and it was definitely for the better. Most of the
>> improvements were based on some sort of real world feedback.. That's how
>> you make a good UI :D
>>
>>
>> vlad
>>
>>
>> On 1/21/2015 1:29 AM, CBB - Jay Fuller wrote:
>>
>> ￜ
>> I do recall they did completely redesign the interface, due to our
>> request, after the initial complaints of v1....ￜ : /
>> ￜ
>>
>> ----- Original Message -----
>> *From:* Vlad Sedov <javascript:_e(%7B%7D,'cvml','***@atlasok.com');>
>> *To:* ***@afmug.com <javascript:_e(%7B%7D,'cvml','***@afmug.com');>
>> *Sent:* Tuesday, January 20, 2015 11:15 AM
>> *Subject:* Re: [AFMUG] EPMP Minimum System Specs <rant>
>>
>> This has been one of our biggest complaints from day one.
>> The interface, while it has gotten slightly more usable, is still
>> complete garbage. It's unpredictable, slow, and inconsistent.. Let alone
>> the features that just don't work.
>>
>> Why on earth did they not just stick with a field-tested, fast, usable
>> interface from the Canopy line? Nobody buys a radio for it's slide-out
>> menus and pretty HTML5 crap.
>> We need, fast, intuitive, consistent.. Forget the shiny.
>>
>> grr
>>
>> Vlad
>>
>>
>> On 1/20/2015 10:57 AM, Nate Burke wrote:
>> > Ok, Cambium, this is a little sad.ￜ My Field Laptop, a Lenovo S10-3t,
>> > Atom Processor with Windows 8.1 cannot load the EPMP WEB Pages in a
>> > timely manner.ￜ We're talking 40-60 seconds for initial load, and
>> > 20-30 seconds per screen refresh/menu change.ￜ Since I'm going to
>> have
>> > to go to the boss, and tell him that I need a new laptop to do any
>> > field troubleshooting for these new radios, what are the minimum
>> > system specs for a machine to view the EPMP Screens?ￜ Unless Cambium
>> > is going to get their Web interface under control as of Yesterday.
>> >
>> > They still swear that the GUI was all developed in house and not
>> > purchased (something I still can't believe).ￜ I'd like to know who
>> the
>> > engineers/managers are who signed off on that design.ￜ I can only
>> > imaging that there was a group of guys sitting around the conference
>> > table, watching the presentation on the GUI on the projector up front,
>> > all nodding their heads in agreement, "I think this is a wonderful
>> > layout, the field tech's won't mind waiting a couple extra minutes for
>> > the pages to load so they can look this pretty!!"
>> >
>> > I think that Cambium should step up and get engineers from ALL aspects
>> > of product development out into the field.ￜ 40 seconds waiting for
>> the
>> > page to load is fine when you're sitting in the office, but not when
>> > you have the laptop balanced on a stack of firewood in the freezing
>> > rain trying to get to the monitoring page to see why a radio isn't
>> > linking up.ￜ I think that every WISP on this list would be more than
>> > happy to host an engineer for a day. Heck, even if they go into the
>> > parking lot and assemble it on the tailgate of someone's Pickup,
>> > they'll get some idea of what we experience.
>> >
>> > I have a feeling that if all steps of the Dev process took a week in
>> > the field, We'd have a radio that had a GUI that responded instantly
>> > on any device, and radios that assembled and mounted (and unmounted)
>> > with 1 gloved hand.
>> >
>> > </rant>
>> > Nate
>>
>>
>>
>>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>

[CBB - Jay Fuller]

isn't that like having 200 files open on your desktop?
or 200 paper files cluttering your desk?
you should put some stuff away every now-and-then....

----- Original Message -----
From: Mike Hammett
To: ***@afmug.com
Sent: Wednesday, January 21, 2015 9:26 AM
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] EPMP Minimum System Specs <rant>


But how many other modern web sites use the same resources?

I used to keep a sea of tabs (200+), but once I get near 50 anymore, my system chokes. Time to go to 32 GB on my desktops!




-----
Mike Hammett
Intelligent Computing Solutions
http://www.ics-il.com



------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: "Vlad Sedov" <***@atlasok.com>
To: ***@afmug.com
Sent: Wednesday, January 21, 2015 9:21:29 AM
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] EPMP Minimum System Specs <rant>


Oh, no doubt. I like my sea of tabs too.

But we're talking about a radio web interface. I don't care how much RAM your PC has, using 10x more resources to display the same stuff is a huge waste. Consider how many lower-powered gadgets are used to manage radios.. It has to be nimble.


Vlad

On 1/21/2015 9:17 AM, Mike Hammett wrote:

I routinely have over 8 gigs of RAM chewed up by my browsers, sometimes almost 14 GB... You need big boy PCs to be on the Internet anymore. ;-)




-----
Mike Hammett
Intelligent Computing Solutions
http://www.ics-il.com



----------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: "Vlad Sedov" <***@atlasok.com>
To: ***@afmug.com
Sent: Wednesday, January 21, 2015 9:15:24 AM
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] EPMP Minimum System Specs <rant>


I just did a quick memory usage test on our NMS box...

Firefox (google.com): 76MB in RAM
Firefox with Canopy 450 AP interface open, logged in: 84.5MB.. a gain of less than 10MB of RAM usage.
Firefox with ePMP AP open, logged in: 170-185MB in RAM. over 100MB RAM usage, to display the same stuff. Why?

IE (google.com): 64MB in RAM
IE with Canopy 450 AP interface open: 53MB (less than google!)
IE with ePMP AP interface open: 138MB

Similar results with Chrome.. About 75MB difference.


eh.

vlad

On 1/21/2015 8:56 AM, Nate Burke wrote:

Not sure what it is, but in my case, the Machine did make a difference in load time. Be interested in others feedback as well. Do you see similar results? Are my results bad? Do older/slower machines take longer?



On 1/21/2015 8:52 AM, Josh Luthman wrote:

>But Seriously, it's a web page displaying TEXT AND NUMBERS, why should it need an i7 on the client side for that?


No shit.


So you're saying it's clock speed? I've no idea what my phone does but I would be kind of surprised if the Galaxy S3 and my phone vary too much in CPU (I think they're both 2013 products).




Josh Luthman
Office: 937-552-2340
Direct: 937-552-2343
1100 Wayne St
Suite 1337
Troy, OH 45373


On Wed, Jan 21, 2015 at 9:50 AM, Nate Burke <***@blastcomm.com> wrote:

Just to sorta provide some more data from the original Thread, it seems that CPU Makes a huge difference in how fast the pages load.ￜ I ran a test from the office to the same EPMP radio using 3 different machines.

On my 6 core I7 Desktop.ￜ Initial web load takes 4-5 seconds.ￜ And login takes another 4-5 seconds.
On an old Dualcore Xeon, it's 10 seconds for initial load, and 10 seconds to login
On my atom netbook, it was 20 seconds for initial Load, 10 seconds to login, and another 10 seconds for the graph to display and all the red '!' marks to disappear (they were on all left menu items)

I know people just said 'well just get a faster laptop'.

But Seriously, it's a web page displaying TEXT AND NUMBERS, why should it need an i7 on the client side for that?




On 1/21/2015 8:34 AM, Vlad Sedov wrote:

Yes they did, and it was definitely for the better. Most of the improvements were based on some sort of real world feedback.. That's how you make a good UI :D


vlad


On 1/21/2015 1:29 AM, CBB - Jay Fuller wrote:

ￜ
I do recall they did completely redesign the interface, due to our request, after the initial complaints of v1....ￜ : /
ￜ
----- Original Message -----
From: Vlad Sedov
To: ***@afmug.com
Sent: Tuesday, January 20, 2015 11:15 AM
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] EPMP Minimum System Specs <rant>


This has been one of our biggest complaints from day one.
The interface, while it has gotten slightly more usable, is still
complete garbage. It's unpredictable, slow, and inconsistent.. Let alone
the features that just don't work.

Why on earth did they not just stick with a field-tested, fast, usable
interface from the Canopy line? Nobody buys a radio for it's slide-out
menus and pretty HTML5 crap.
We need, fast, intuitive, consistent.. Forget the shiny.

grr

Vlad


On 1/20/2015 10:57 AM, Nate Burke wrote:
> Ok, Cambium, this is a little sad.ￜ My Field Laptop, a Lenovo S10-3t,
> Atom Processor with Windows 8.1 cannot load the EPMP WEB Pages in a
> timely manner.ￜ We're talking 40-60 seconds for initial load, and
> 20-30 seconds per screen refresh/menu change.ￜ Since I'm going to have
> to go to the boss, and tell him that I need a new laptop to do any
> field troubleshooting for these new radios, what are the minimum
> system specs for a machine to view the EPMP Screens?ￜ Unless Cambium
> is going to get their Web interface under control as of Yesterday.
>
> They still swear that the GUI was all developed in house and not
> purchased (something I still can't believe).ￜ I'd like to know who the
> engineers/managers are who signed off on that design.ￜ I can only
> imaging that there was a group of guys sitting around the conference
> table, watching the presentation on the GUI on the projector up front,
> all nodding their heads in agreement, "I think this is a wonderful
> layout, the field tech's won't mind waiting a couple extra minutes for
> the pages to load so they can look this pretty!!"
>
> I think that Cambium should step up and get engineers from ALL aspects
> of product development out into the field.ￜ 40 seconds waiting for the
> page to load is fine when you're sitting in the office, but not when
> you have the laptop balanced on a stack of firewood in the freezing
> rain trying to get to the monitoring page to see why a radio isn't
> linking up.ￜ I think that every WISP on this list would be more than
> happy to host an engineer for a day. Heck, even if they go into the
> parking lot and assemble it on the tailgate of someone's Pickup,
> they'll get some idea of what we experience.
>
> I have a feeling that if all steps of the Dev process took a week in
> the field, We'd have a radio that had a GUI that responded instantly
> on any device, and radios that assembled and mounted (and unmounted)
> with 1 gloved hand.
>
> </rant>
> Nate

[Caleb Knauer]

One tab per thread/forum on which he's currently arguing with someone ;-)

On Wed, Jan 21, 2015 at 11:22 AM, Mike Hammett <***@ics-il.net> wrote:
> Lots of stuff going on. One window per project or main section of a project,
> then a bunch of windows inside of it. a lot of stuff, but organized.
>
>
>
> -----
> Mike Hammett
> Intelligent Computing Solutions
> http://www.ics-il.com
>
> ________________________________
> From: "CBB - Jay Fuller" <***@cyberbroadband.net>
> To: ***@afmug.com
> Sent: Wednesday, January 21, 2015 10:21:17 AM
> Subject: Re: [AFMUG] EPMP Minimum System Specs <rant>
>
> 
>
> isn't that like having 200 files open on your desktop?
> or 200 paper files cluttering your desk?
> you should put some stuff away every now-and-then....
>
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: Mike Hammett
> To: ***@afmug.com
> Sent: Wednesday, January 21, 2015 9:26 AM
> Subject: Re: [AFMUG] EPMP Minimum System Specs <rant>
>
> But how many other modern web sites use the same resources?
>
> I used to keep a sea of tabs (200+), but once I get near 50 anymore, my
> system chokes. Time to go to 32 GB on my desktops!
>
>
>
> -----
> Mike Hammett
> Intelligent Computing Solutions
> http://www.ics-il.com
>
> ________________________________
> From: "Vlad Sedov" <***@atlasok.com>
> To: ***@afmug.com
> Sent: Wednesday, January 21, 2015 9:21:29 AM
> Subject: Re: [AFMUG] EPMP Minimum System Specs <rant>
>
> Oh, no doubt. I like my sea of tabs too.
>
> But we're talking about a radio web interface. I don't care how much RAM
> your PC has, using 10x more resources to display the same stuff is a huge
> waste. Consider how many lower-powered gadgets are used to manage radios..
> It has to be nimble.
>
>
> Vlad
>
> On 1/21/2015 9:17 AM, Mike Hammett wrote:
>
> I routinely have over 8 gigs of RAM chewed up by my browsers, sometimes
> almost 14 GB... You need big boy PCs to be on the Internet anymore. ;-)
>
>
>
> -----
> Mike Hammett
> Intelligent Computing Solutions
> http://www.ics-il.com
>
> ________________________________
> From: "Vlad Sedov" <***@atlasok.com>
> To: ***@afmug.com
> Sent: Wednesday, January 21, 2015 9:15:24 AM
> Subject: Re: [AFMUG] EPMP Minimum System Specs <rant>
>
> I just did a quick memory usage test on our NMS box...
>
> Firefox (google.com): 76MB in RAM
> Firefox with Canopy 450 AP interface open, logged in: 84.5MB.. a gain of
> less than 10MB of RAM usage.
> Firefox with ePMP AP open, logged in: 170-185MB in RAM. over 100MB RAM
> usage, to display the same stuff. Why?
>
> IE (google.com): 64MB in RAM
> IE with Canopy 450 AP interface open: 53MB (less than google!)
> IE with ePMP AP interface open: 138MB
>
> Similar results with Chrome.. About 75MB difference.
>
>
> eh.
>
> vlad
>
> On 1/21/2015 8:56 AM, Nate Burke wrote:
>
> Not sure what it is, but in my case, the Machine did make a difference in
> load time. Be interested in others feedback as well. Do you see similar
> results? Are my results bad? Do older/slower machines take longer?
>
>
> On 1/21/2015 8:52 AM, Josh Luthman wrote:
>
>>But Seriously, it's a web page displaying TEXT AND NUMBERS, why should it
>> need an i7 on the client side for that?
>
> No shit.
>
> So you're saying it's clock speed? I've no idea what my phone does but I
> would be kind of surprised if the Galaxy S3 and my phone vary too much in
> CPU (I think they're both 2013 products).
>
>
> Josh Luthman
> Office: 937-552-2340
> Direct: 937-552-2343
> 1100 Wayne St
> Suite 1337
> Troy, OH 45373
>
> On Wed, Jan 21, 2015 at 9:50 AM, Nate Burke <***@blastcomm.com> wrote:
>>
>> Just to sorta provide some more data from the original Thread, it seems
>> that CPU Makes a huge difference in how fast the pages load.� I ran a test
>> from the office to the same EPMP radio using 3 different machines.
>>
>> On my 6 core I7 Desktop.� Initial web load takes 4-5 seconds.� And
>> login takes another 4-5 seconds.
>> On an old Dualcore Xeon, it's 10 seconds for initial load, and 10 seconds
>> to login
>> On my atom netbook, it was 20 seconds for initial Load, 10 seconds to
>> login, and another 10 seconds for the graph to display and all the red '!'
>> marks to disappear (they were on all left menu items)
>>
>> I know people just said 'well just get a faster laptop'.
>>
>> But Seriously, it's a web page displaying TEXT AND NUMBERS, why should it
>> need an i7 on the client side for that?
>>
>>
>>
>> On 1/21/2015 8:34 AM, Vlad Sedov wrote:
>>
>> Yes they did, and it was definitely for the better. Most of the
>> improvements were based on some sort of real world feedback.. That's how you
>> make a good UI :D
>>
>>
>> vlad
>>
>>
>> On 1/21/2015 1:29 AM, CBB - Jay Fuller wrote:
>>
>> �
>> I do recall they did completely redesign the interface, due to our
>> request, after the initial complaints of v1....� : /
>> �
>>
>> ----- Original Message -----
>> From: Vlad Sedov
>> To: ***@afmug.com
>> Sent: Tuesday, January 20, 2015 11:15 AM
>> Subject: Re: [AFMUG] EPMP Minimum System Specs <rant>
>>
>> This has been one of our biggest complaints from day one.
>> The interface, while it has gotten slightly more usable, is still
>> complete garbage. It's unpredictable, slow, and inconsistent.. Let alone
>> the features that just don't work.
>>
>> Why on earth did they not just stick with a field-tested, fast, usable
>> interface from the Canopy line? Nobody buys a radio for it's slide-out
>> menus and pretty HTML5 crap.
>> We need, fast, intuitive, consistent.. Forget the shiny.
>>
>> grr
>>
>> Vlad
>>
>>
>> On 1/20/2015 10:57 AM, Nate Burke wrote:
>> > Ok, Cambium, this is a little sad.� My Field Laptop, a Lenovo S10-3t,
>> > Atom Processor with Windows 8.1 cannot load the EPMP WEB Pages in a
>> > timely manner.� We're talking 40-60 seconds for initial load, and
>> > 20-30 seconds per screen refresh/menu change.� Since I'm going to have
>> > to go to the boss, and tell him that I need a new laptop to do any
>> > field troubleshooting for these new radios, what are the minimum
>> > system specs for a machine to view the EPMP Screens?� Unless Cambium
>> > is going to get their Web interface under control as of Yesterday.
>> >
>> > They still swear that the GUI was all developed in house and not
>> > purchased (something I still can't believe).� I'd like to know who the
>> > engineers/managers are who signed off on that design.� I can only
>> > imaging that there was a group of guys sitting around the conference
>> > table, watching the presentation on the GUI on the projector up front,
>> > all nodding their heads in agreement, "I think this is a wonderful
>> > layout, the field tech's won't mind waiting a couple extra minutes for
>> > the pages to load so they can look this pretty!!"
>> >
>> > I think that Cambium should step up and get engineers from ALL aspects
>> > of product development out into the field.� 40 seconds waiting for the
>> > page to load is fine when you're sitting in the office, but not when
>> > you have the laptop balanced on a stack of firewood in the freezing
>> > rain trying to get to the monitoring page to see why a radio isn't
>> > linking up.� I think that every WISP on this list would be more than
>> > happy to host an engineer for a day. Heck, even if they go into the
>> > parking lot and assemble it on the tailgate of someone's Pickup,
>> > they'll get some idea of what we experience.
>> >
>> > I have a feeling that if all steps of the Dev process took a week in
>> > the field, We'd have a radio that had a GUI that responded instantly
>> > on any device, and radios that assembled and mounted (and unmounted)
>> > with 1 gloved hand.
>> >
>> > </rant>
>> > Nate
>>
>>
>>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>

[Paul McCall]

If you watch what is going on behind the scenes, they were pulling the Java libraries across each time instead of caching them on your machine. I think they should have an option to cache the libs, then all will be better

From: Af [mailto:af-***@afmug.com] On Behalf Of Mike Hammett
Sent: Wednesday, January 21, 2015 12:04 PM
To: ***@afmug.com
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] EPMP Minimum System Specs <rant>

Hey now...


-----
Mike Hammett
Intelligent Computing Solutions
http://www.ics-il.com

________________________________
From: "Caleb Knauer" <***@gmail.com<mailto:***@gmail.com>>
To: ***@afmug.com<mailto:***@afmug.com>
Sent: Wednesday, January 21, 2015 10:56:52 AM
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] EPMP Minimum System Specs <rant>

One tab per thread/forum on which he's currently arguing with someone ;-)

On Wed, Jan 21, 2015 at 11:22 AM, Mike Hammett <***@ics-il.net<mailto:***@ics-il.net>> wrote:
> Lots of stuff going on. One window per project or main section of a project,
> then a bunch of windows inside of it. a lot of stuff, but organized.
>
>
>
> -----
> Mike Hammett
> Intelligent Computing Solutions
> http://www.ics-il.com
>
> ________________________________
> From: "CBB - Jay Fuller" <***@cyberbroadband.net<mailto:***@cyberbroadband.net>>
> To: ***@afmug.com<mailto:***@afmug.com>
> Sent: Wednesday, January 21, 2015 10:21:17 AM
> Subject: Re: [AFMUG] EPMP Minimum System Specs <rant>
>
> 
>
> isn't that like having 200 files open on your desktop?
> or 200 paper files cluttering your desk?
> you should put some stuff away every now-and-then....
>
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: Mike Hammett
> To: ***@afmug.com<mailto:***@afmug.com>
> Sent: Wednesday, January 21, 2015 9:26 AM
> Subject: Re: [AFMUG] EPMP Minimum System Specs <rant>
>
> But how many other modern web sites use the same resources?
>
> I used to keep a sea of tabs (200+), but once I get near 50 anymore, my
> system chokes. Time to go to 32 GB on my desktops!
>
>
>
> -----
> Mike Hammett
> Intelligent Computing Solutions
> http://www.ics-il.com
>
> ________________________________
> From: "Vlad Sedov" <***@atlasok.com<mailto:***@atlasok.com>>
> To: ***@afmug.com<mailto:***@afmug.com>
> Sent: Wednesday, January 21, 2015 9:21:29 AM
> Subject: Re: [AFMUG] EPMP Minimum System Specs <rant>
>
> Oh, no doubt. I like my sea of tabs too.
>
> But we're talking about a radio web interface. I don't care how much RAM
> your PC has, using 10x more resources to display the same stuff is a huge
> waste. Consider how many lower-powered gadgets are used to manage radios..
> It has to be nimble.
>
>
> Vlad
>
> On 1/21/2015 9:17 AM, Mike Hammett wrote:
>
> I routinely have over 8 gigs of RAM chewed up by my browsers, sometimes
> almost 14 GB... You need big boy PCs to be on the Internet anymore. ;-)
>
>
>
> -----
> Mike Hammett
> Intelligent Computing Solutions
> http://www.ics-il.com
>
> ________________________________
> From: "Vlad Sedov" <***@atlasok.com<mailto:***@atlasok.com>>
> To: ***@afmug.com<mailto:***@afmug.com>
> Sent: Wednesday, January 21, 2015 9:15:24 AM
> Subject: Re: [AFMUG] EPMP Minimum System Specs <rant>
>
> I just did a quick memory usage test on our NMS box...
>
> Firefox (google.com): 76MB in RAM
> Firefox with Canopy 450 AP interface open, logged in: 84.5MB.. a gain of
> less than 10MB of RAM usage.
> Firefox with ePMP AP open, logged in: 170-185MB in RAM. over 100MB RAM
> usage, to display the same stuff. Why?
>
> IE (google.com): 64MB in RAM
> IE with Canopy 450 AP interface open: 53MB (less than google!)
> IE with ePMP AP interface open: 138MB
>
> Similar results with Chrome.. About 75MB difference.
>
>
> eh.
>
> vlad
>
> On 1/21/2015 8:56 AM, Nate Burke wrote:
>
> Not sure what it is, but in my case, the Machine did make a difference in
> load time. Be interested in others feedback as well. Do you see similar
> results? Are my results bad? Do older/slower machines take longer?
>
>
> On 1/21/2015 8:52 AM, Josh Luthman wrote:
>
>>But Seriously, it's a web page displaying TEXT AND NUMBERS, why should it
>> need an i7 on the client side for that?
>
> No shit.
>
> So you're saying it's clock speed? I've no idea what my phone does but I
> would be kind of surprised if the Galaxy S3 and my phone vary too much in
> CPU (I think they're both 2013 products).
>
>
> Josh Luthman
> Office: 937-552-2340
> Direct: 937-552-2343
> 1100 Wayne St
> Suite 1337
> Troy, OH 45373
>
> On Wed, Jan 21, 2015 at 9:50 AM, Nate Burke <***@blastcomm.com<mailto:***@blastcomm.com>> wrote:
>>
>> Just to sorta provide some more data from the original Thread, it seems
>> that CPU Makes a huge difference in how fast the pages load.ￜ I ran a test
>> from the office to the same EPMP radio using 3 different machines.
>>
>> On my 6 core I7 Desktop.ￜ Initial web load takes 4-5 seconds.ￜ And
>> login takes another 4-5 seconds.
>> On an old Dualcore Xeon, it's 10 seconds for initial load, and 10 seconds
>> to login
>> On my atom netbook, it was 20 seconds for initial Load, 10 seconds to
>> login, and another 10 seconds for the graph to display and all the red '!'
>> marks to disappear (they were on all left menu items)
>>
>> I know people just said 'well just get a faster laptop'.
>>
>> But Seriously, it's a web page displaying TEXT AND NUMBERS, why should it
>> need an i7 on the client side for that?
>>
>>
>>
>> On 1/21/2015 8:34 AM, Vlad Sedov wrote:
>>
>> Yes they did, and it was definitely for the better. Most of the
>> improvements were based on some sort of real world feedback.. That's how you
>> make a good UI :D
>>
>>
>> vlad
>>
>>
>> On 1/21/2015 1:29 AM, CBB - Jay Fuller wrote:
>>
>> ￜ
>> I do recall they did completely redesign the interface, due to our
>> request, after the initial complaints of v1....ￜ : /
>> ￜ
>>
>> ----- Original Message -----
>> From: Vlad Sedov
>> To: ***@afmug.com<mailto:***@afmug.com>
>> Sent: Tuesday, January 20, 2015 11:15 AM
>> Subject: Re: [AFMUG] EPMP Minimum System Specs <rant>
>>
>> This has been one of our biggest complaints from day one.
>> The interface, while it has gotten slightly more usable, is still
>> complete garbage. It's unpredictable, slow, and inconsistent.. Let alone
>> the features that just don't work.
>>
>> Why on earth did they not just stick with a field-tested, fast, usable
>> interface from the Canopy line? Nobody buys a radio for it's slide-out
>> menus and pretty HTML5 crap.
>> We need, fast, intuitive, consistent.. Forget the shiny.
>>
>> grr
>>
>> Vlad
>>
>>
>> On 1/20/2015 10:57 AM, Nate Burke wrote:
>> > Ok, Cambium, this is a little sad.ￜ My Field Laptop, a Lenovo S10-3t,
>> > Atom Processor with Windows 8.1 cannot load the EPMP WEB Pages in a
>> > timely manner.ￜ We're talking 40-60 seconds for initial load, and
>> > 20-30 seconds per screen refresh/menu change.ￜ Since I'm going to have
>> > to go to the boss, and tell him that I need a new laptop to do any
>> > field troubleshooting for these new radios, what are the minimum
>> > system specs for a machine to view the EPMP Screens?ￜ Unless Cambium
>> > is going to get their Web interface under control as of Yesterday.
>> >
>> > They still swear that the GUI was all developed in house and not
>> > purchased (something I still can't believe).ￜ I'd like to know who the
>> > engineers/managers are who signed off on that design.ￜ I can only
>> > imaging that there was a group of guys sitting around the conference
>> > table, watching the presentation on the GUI on the projector up front,
>> > all nodding their heads in agreement, "I think this is a wonderful
>> > layout, the field tech's won't mind waiting a couple extra minutes for
>> > the pages to load so they can look this pretty!!"
>> >
>> > I think that Cambium should step up and get engineers from ALL aspects
>> > of product development out into the field.ￜ 40 seconds waiting for the
>> > page to load is fine when you're sitting in the office, but not when
>> > you have the laptop balanced on a stack of firewood in the freezing
>> > rain trying to get to the monitoring page to see why a radio isn't
>> > linking up.ￜ I think that every WISP on this list would be more than
>> > happy to host an engineer for a day. Heck, even if they go into the
>> > parking lot and assemble it on the tailgate of someone's Pickup,
>> > they'll get some idea of what we experience.
>> >
>> > I have a feeling that if all steps of the Dev process took a week in
>> > the field, We'd have a radio that had a GUI that responded instantly
>> > on any device, and radios that assembled and mounted (and unmounted)
>> > with 1 gloved hand.
>> >
>> > </rant>
>> > Nate
>>
>>
>>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>

[James Howard]

Now that’s funny!

From: Af [mailto:af-***@afmug.com] On Behalf Of Caleb Knauer
Sent: Wednesday, January 21, 2015 10:57 AM
To: ***@afmug.com
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] EPMP Minimum System Specs <rant>

One tab per thread/forum on which he's currently arguing with someone ;-)

On Wed, Jan 21, 2015 at 11:22 AM, Mike Hammett <***@ics-il.net><mailto:***@ics-il.net%3e> wrote:
> Lots of stuff going on. One window per project or main section of a project,
> then a bunch of windows inside of it. a lot of stuff, but organized.
>
>
>
> -----
> Mike Hammett
> Intelligent Computing Solutions
> http://www.ics-il.com
>
> ________________________________
> From: "CBB - Jay Fuller" <***@cyberbroadband.net><mailto:***@cyberbroadband.net%3e>
> To: ***@afmug.com<mailto:***@afmug.com>
> Sent: Wednesday, January 21, 2015 10:21:17 AM
> Subject: Re: [AFMUG] EPMP Minimum System Specs <rant>
>
> 
>
> isn't that like having 200 files open on your desktop?
> or 200 paper files cluttering your desk?
> you should put some stuff away every now-and-then....
>
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: Mike Hammett
> To: ***@afmug.com<mailto:***@afmug.com>
> Sent: Wednesday, January 21, 2015 9:26 AM
> Subject: Re: [AFMUG] EPMP Minimum System Specs <rant>
>
> But how many other modern web sites use the same resources?
>
> I used to keep a sea of tabs (200+), but once I get near 50 anymore, my
> system chokes. Time to go to 32 GB on my desktops!
>
>
>
> -----
> Mike Hammett
> Intelligent Computing Solutions
> http://www.ics-il.com
>
> ________________________________
> From: "Vlad Sedov" <***@atlasok.com><mailto:***@atlasok.com%3e>
> To: ***@afmug.com<mailto:***@afmug.com>
> Sent: Wednesday, January 21, 2015 9:21:29 AM
> Subject: Re: [AFMUG] EPMP Minimum System Specs <rant>
>
> Oh, no doubt. I like my sea of tabs too.
>
> But we're talking about a radio web interface. I don't care how much RAM
> your PC has, using 10x more resources to display the same stuff is a huge
> waste. Consider how many lower-powered gadgets are used to manage radios..
> It has to be nimble.
>
>
> Vlad
>
> On 1/21/2015 9:17 AM, Mike Hammett wrote:
>
> I routinely have over 8 gigs of RAM chewed up by my browsers, sometimes
> almost 14 GB... You need big boy PCs to be on the Internet anymore. ;-)
>
>
>
> -----
> Mike Hammett
> Intelligent Computing Solutions
> http://www.ics-il.com
>
> ________________________________
> From: "Vlad Sedov" <***@atlasok.com><mailto:***@atlasok.com%3e>
> To: ***@afmug.com<mailto:***@afmug.com>
> Sent: Wednesday, January 21, 2015 9:15:24 AM
> Subject: Re: [AFMUG] EPMP Minimum System Specs <rant>
>
> I just did a quick memory usage test on our NMS box...
>
> Firefox (google.com): 76MB in RAM
> Firefox with Canopy 450 AP interface open, logged in: 84.5MB.. a gain of
> less than 10MB of RAM usage.
> Firefox with ePMP AP open, logged in: 170-185MB in RAM. over 100MB RAM
> usage, to display the same stuff. Why?
>
> IE (google.com): 64MB in RAM
> IE with Canopy 450 AP interface open: 53MB (less than google!)
> IE with ePMP AP interface open: 138MB
>
> Similar results with Chrome.. About 75MB difference.
>
>
> eh.
>
> vlad
>
> On 1/21/2015 8:56 AM, Nate Burke wrote:
>
> Not sure what it is, but in my case, the Machine did make a difference in
> load time. Be interested in others feedback as well. Do you see similar
> results? Are my results bad? Do older/slower machines take longer?
>
>
> On 1/21/2015 8:52 AM, Josh Luthman wrote:
>
>>But Seriously, it's a web page displaying TEXT AND NUMBERS, why should it
>> need an i7 on the client side for that?
>
> No shit.
>
> So you're saying it's clock speed? I've no idea what my phone does but I
> would be kind of surprised if the Galaxy S3 and my phone vary too much in
> CPU (I think they're both 2013 products).
>
>
> Josh Luthman
> Office: 937-552-2340
> Direct: 937-552-2343
> 1100 Wayne St
> Suite 1337
> Troy, OH 45373
>
> On Wed, Jan 21, 2015 at 9:50 AM, Nate Burke <***@blastcomm.com><mailto:***@blastcomm.com%3e> wrote:
>>
>> Just to sorta provide some more data from the original Thread, it seems
>> that CPU Makes a huge difference in how fast the pages load.ￜ I ran a test
>> from the office to the same EPMP radio using 3 different machines.
>>
>> On my 6 core I7 Desktop.ￜ Initial web load takes 4-5 seconds.ￜ And
>> login takes another 4-5 seconds.
>> On an old Dualcore Xeon, it's 10 seconds for initial load, and 10 seconds
>> to login
>> On my atom netbook, it was 20 seconds for initial Load, 10 seconds to
>> login, and another 10 seconds for the graph to display and all the red '!'
>> marks to disappear (they were on all left menu items)
>>
>> I know people just said 'well just get a faster laptop'.
>>
>> But Seriously, it's a web page displaying TEXT AND NUMBERS, why should it
>> need an i7 on the client side for that?
>>
>>
>>
>> On 1/21/2015 8:34 AM, Vlad Sedov wrote:
>>
>> Yes they did, and it was definitely for the better. Most of the
>> improvements were based on some sort of real world feedback.. That's how you
>> make a good UI :D
>>
>>
>> vlad
>>
>>
>> On 1/21/2015 1:29 AM, CBB - Jay Fuller wrote:
>>
>> ￜ
>> I do recall they did completely redesign the interface, due to our
>> request, after the initial complaints of v1....ￜ : /
>> ￜ
>>
>> ----- Original Message -----
>> From: Vlad Sedov
>> To: ***@afmug.com<mailto:***@afmug.com>
>> Sent: Tuesday, January 20, 2015 11:15 AM
>> Subject: Re: [AFMUG] EPMP Minimum System Specs <rant>
>>
>> This has been one of our biggest complaints from day one.
>> The interface, while it has gotten slightly more usable, is still
>> complete garbage. It's unpredictable, slow, and inconsistent.. Let alone
>> the features that just don't work.
>>
>> Why on earth did they not just stick with a field-tested, fast, usable
>> interface from the Canopy line? Nobody buys a radio for it's slide-out
>> menus and pretty HTML5 crap.
>> We need, fast, intuitive, consistent.. Forget the shiny.
>>
>> grr
>>
>> Vlad
>>
>>
>> On 1/20/2015 10:57 AM, Nate Burke wrote:
>> > Ok, Cambium, this is a little sad.ￜ My Field Laptop, a Lenovo S10-3t,
>> > Atom Processor with Windows 8.1 cannot load the EPMP WEB Pages in a
>> > timely manner.ￜ We're talking 40-60 seconds for initial load, and
>> > 20-30 seconds per screen refresh/menu change.ￜ Since I'm going to have
>> > to go to the boss, and tell him that I need a new laptop to do any
>> > field troubleshooting for these new radios, what are the minimum
>> > system specs for a machine to view the EPMP Screens?ￜ Unless Cambium
>> > is going to get their Web interface under control as of Yesterday.
>> >
>> > They still swear that the GUI was all developed in house and not
>> > purchased (something I still can't believe).ￜ I'd like to know who the
>> > engineers/managers are who signed off on that design.ￜ I can only
>> > imaging that there was a group of guys sitting around the conference
>> > table, watching the presentation on the GUI on the projector up front,
>> > all nodding their heads in agreement, "I think this is a wonderful
>> > layout, the field tech's won't mind waiting a couple extra minutes for
>> > the pages to load so they can look this pretty!!"
>> >
>> > I think that Cambium should step up and get engineers from ALL aspects
>> > of product development out into the field.ￜ 40 seconds waiting for the
>> > page to load is fine when you're sitting in the office, but not when
>> > you have the laptop balanced on a stack of firewood in the freezing
>> > rain trying to get to the monitoring page to see why a radio isn't
>> > linking up.ￜ I think that every WISP on this list would be more than
>> > happy to host an engineer for a day. Heck, even if they go into the
>> > parking lot and assemble it on the tailgate of someone's Pickup,
>> > they'll get some idea of what we experience.
>> >
>> > I have a feeling that if all steps of the Dev process took a week in
>> > the field, We'd have a radio that had a GUI that responded instantly
>> > on any device, and radios that assembled and mounted (and unmounted)
>> > with 1 gloved hand.
>> >
>> > </rant>
>> > Nate
>>
>>
>>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>

________________________________
Total Control Panel

Login<https://asp.reflexion.net/login?domain=litewire.net>


To: ***@litewire.net<https://asp.reflexion.net/address-properties?aID=242260993&domain=litewire.net>

From: 0000014b0d6cda4d-0c82983b-dd14-43eb-8098-84d2854fc1e8-***@amazonses.com<https://asp.reflexion.net/address-properties?aID=2997069078&domain=litewire.net>


Remove<https://asp.reflexion.net/FooterAction?ver=2&un-wl-sender-domain=1&rID=242260993&aID=2997069078&domain=litewire.net> amazonses.com from my allow list



You received this message because the domain amazonses.com is on your allow list.

[Mathew Howard]

What's wrong with having 200 paper files cluttering your desk... ?

On Wed, Jan 21, 2015 at 10:21 AM, CBB - Jay Fuller <
***@cyberbroadband.net> wrote:

>
> isn't that like having 200 files open on your desktop?
> or 200 paper files cluttering your desk?
> you should put some stuff away every now-and-then....
>
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> *From:* Mike Hammett <***@ics-il.net>
> *To:* ***@afmug.com
> *Sent:* Wednesday, January 21, 2015 9:26 AM
> *Subject:* Re: [AFMUG] EPMP Minimum System Specs <rant>
>
> But how many other modern web sites use the same resources?
>
> I used to keep a sea of tabs (200+), but once I get near 50 anymore, my
> system chokes. Time to go to 32 GB on my desktops!
>
>
>
> -----
> Mike Hammett
> Intelligent Computing Solutions
> http://www.ics-il.com
>
> ------------------------------
> *From: *"Vlad Sedov" <***@atlasok.com>
> *To: ****@afmug.com
> *Sent: *Wednesday, January 21, 2015 9:21:29 AM
>
> *Subject: *Re: [AFMUG] EPMP Minimum System Specs <rant>
>
> Oh, no doubt. I like my sea of tabs too.
>
> But we're talking about a radio web interface. I don't care how much RAM
> your PC has, using 10x more resources to display the same stuff is a huge
> waste. Consider how many lower-powered gadgets are used to manage radios..
> It has to be nimble.
>
>
> Vlad
>
> On 1/21/2015 9:17 AM, Mike Hammett wrote:
>
> I routinely have over 8 gigs of RAM chewed up by my browsers, sometimes
> almost 14 GB... You need big boy PCs to be on the Internet anymore. ;-)
>
>
>
> -----
> Mike Hammett
> Intelligent Computing Solutions
> http://www.ics-il.com
>
> ------------------------------
> *From: *"Vlad Sedov" <***@atlasok.com> <***@atlasok.com>
> *To: ****@afmug.com
> *Sent: *Wednesday, January 21, 2015 9:15:24 AM
> *Subject: *Re: [AFMUG] EPMP Minimum System Specs <rant>
>
> I just did a quick memory usage test on our NMS box...
>
> Firefox (google.com): 76MB in RAM
> Firefox with Canopy 450 AP interface open, logged in: 84.5MB.. a gain of
> less than 10MB of RAM usage.
> Firefox with ePMP AP open, logged in: *170-185MB* in RAM. over 100MB RAM
> usage, to display the same stuff. Why?
>
> IE (google.com): 64MB in RAM
> IE with Canopy 450 AP interface open: 53MB (less than google!)
> IE with ePMP AP interface open: *138MB*
>
> Similar results with Chrome.. About 75MB difference.
>
>
> eh.
>
> vlad
>
> On 1/21/2015 8:56 AM, Nate Burke wrote:
>
> Not sure what it is, but in my case, the Machine did make a difference in
> load time. Be interested in others feedback as well. Do you see similar
> results? Are my results bad? Do older/slower machines take longer?
>
>
> On 1/21/2015 8:52 AM, Josh Luthman wrote:
>
> >But Seriously, it's a web page displaying TEXT AND NUMBERS, why should
> it need an i7 on the client side for that?
>
> No shit.
>
> So you're saying it's clock speed? I've no idea what my phone does but I
> would be kind of surprised if the Galaxy S3 and my phone vary too much in
> CPU (I think they're both 2013 products).
>
>
> Josh Luthman
> Office: 937-552-2340
> Direct: 937-552-2343
> 1100 Wayne St
> Suite 1337
> Troy, OH 45373
>
> On Wed, Jan 21, 2015 at 9:50 AM, Nate Burke <***@blastcomm.com> wrote:
>
>> Just to sorta provide some more data from the original Thread, it seems
>> that CPU Makes a huge difference in how fast the pages load.ￜ I ran a
>> test from the office to the same EPMP radio using 3 different machines.
>>
>> On my 6 core I7 Desktop.ￜ Initial web load takes 4-5 seconds.ￜ And
>> login takes another 4-5 seconds.
>> On an old Dualcore Xeon, it's 10 seconds for initial load, and 10 seconds
>> to login
>> On my atom netbook, it was 20 seconds for initial Load, 10 seconds to
>> login, and another 10 seconds for the graph to display and all the red '!'
>> marks to disappear (they were on all left menu items)
>>
>> I know people just said 'well just get a faster laptop'.
>>
>> But Seriously, it's a web page displaying TEXT AND NUMBERS, why should it
>> need an i7 on the client side for that?
>>
>>
>>
>> On 1/21/2015 8:34 AM, Vlad Sedov wrote:
>>
>> Yes they did, and it was definitely for the better. Most of the
>> improvements were based on some sort of real world feedback.. That's how
>> you make a good UI :D
>>
>>
>> vlad
>>
>>
>> On 1/21/2015 1:29 AM, CBB - Jay Fuller wrote:
>>
>> ￜ
>> I do recall they did completely redesign the interface, due to our
>> request, after the initial complaints of v1....ￜ : /
>> ￜ
>>
>> ----- Original Message -----
>> *From:* Vlad Sedov <***@atlasok.com>
>> *To:* ***@afmug.com
>> *Sent:* Tuesday, January 20, 2015 11:15 AM
>> *Subject:* Re: [AFMUG] EPMP Minimum System Specs <rant>
>>
>> This has been one of our biggest complaints from day one.
>> The interface, while it has gotten slightly more usable, is still
>> complete garbage. It's unpredictable, slow, and inconsistent.. Let alone
>> the features that just don't work.
>>
>> Why on earth did they not just stick with a field-tested, fast, usable
>> interface from the Canopy line? Nobody buys a radio for it's slide-out
>> menus and pretty HTML5 crap.
>> We need, fast, intuitive, consistent.. Forget the shiny.
>>
>> grr
>>
>> Vlad
>>
>>
>> On 1/20/2015 10:57 AM, Nate Burke wrote:
>> > Ok, Cambium, this is a little sad.ￜ My Field Laptop, a Lenovo S10-3t,
>> > Atom Processor with Windows 8.1 cannot load the EPMP WEB Pages in a
>> > timely manner.ￜ We're talking 40-60 seconds for initial load, and
>> > 20-30 seconds per screen refresh/menu change.ￜ Since I'm going to
>> have
>> > to go to the boss, and tell him that I need a new laptop to do any
>> > field troubleshooting for these new radios, what are the minimum
>> > system specs for a machine to view the EPMP Screens?ￜ Unless Cambium
>> > is going to get their Web interface under control as of Yesterday.
>> >
>> > They still swear that the GUI was all developed in house and not
>> > purchased (something I still can't believe).ￜ I'd like to know who
>> the
>> > engineers/managers are who signed off on that design.ￜ I can only
>> > imaging that there was a group of guys sitting around the conference
>> > table, watching the presentation on the GUI on the projector up front,
>> > all nodding their heads in agreement, "I think this is a wonderful
>> > layout, the field tech's won't mind waiting a couple extra minutes for
>> > the pages to load so they can look this pretty!!"
>> >
>> > I think that Cambium should step up and get engineers from ALL aspects
>> > of product development out into the field.ￜ 40 seconds waiting for
>> the
>> > page to load is fine when you're sitting in the office, but not when
>> > you have the laptop balanced on a stack of firewood in the freezing
>> > rain trying to get to the monitoring page to see why a radio isn't
>> > linking up.ￜ I think that every WISP on this list would be more than
>> > happy to host an engineer for a day. Heck, even if they go into the
>> > parking lot and assemble it on the tailgate of someone's Pickup,
>> > they'll get some idea of what we experience.
>> >
>> > I have a feeling that if all steps of the Dev process took a week in
>> > the field, We'd have a radio that had a GUI that responded instantly
>> > on any device, and radios that assembled and mounted (and unmounted)
>> > with 1 gloved hand.
>> >
>> > </rant>
>> > Nate
>>
>>
>>
>>
>
>
>
>
>
>

[Bill Prince]

I remember working on an old Data General multi-user basic system.
Sure, it was only running a basic interpreter, but it supported 4
simultaneous users in a TOTAL of 16 KB of memory (core memory at that)...

bp
<part15sbs{at}gmail{dot}com>

On 1/21/2015 7:42 AM, Jon Bruce wrote:
> And we only need 64k of RAM.
>
> On 1/21/2015 10:30 AM, Nate Burke wrote:
>> > You need big boy PCs to be on the Internet anymore
>>
>> Who's fault is this? There are sites I don't visit anymore because
>> they've made them so bloated they won't run (chicagotribune.com)
>> They provide the content, they should make sure they work for me, not
>> the other way around (Even though I realize that I am the eyeballs
>> being sold)
>>
>> Just think if the whole web was as neat as the packetflux equipment
>> is. You'd still only need 10mb interfaces on your servers.
>>
>>
>> On 1/21/2015 9:21 AM, Vlad Sedov wrote:
>>> Oh, no doubt. I like my sea of tabs too.
>>>
>>> But we're talking about a radio web interface. I don't care how much
>>> RAM your PC has, using 10x more resources to display the same stuff
>>> is a huge waste. Consider how many lower-powered gadgets are used to
>>> manage radios.. It has to be nimble.
>>>
>>>
>>> Vlad
>>>
>>> On 1/21/2015 9:17 AM, Mike Hammett wrote:
>>>> I routinely have over 8 gigs of RAM chewed up by my browsers,
>>>> sometimes almost 14 GB... You need big boy PCs to be on the
>>>> Internet anymore. ;-)
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> -----
>>>> Mike Hammett
>>>> Intelligent Computing Solutions
>>>> http://www.ics-il.com
>>>>
>>>> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>>>> *From: *"Vlad Sedov" <***@atlasok.com>
>>>> *To: ****@afmug.com
>>>> *Sent: *Wednesday, January 21, 2015 9:15:24 AM
>>>> *Subject: *Re: [AFMUG] EPMP Minimum System Specs <rant>
>>>>
>>>> I just did a quick memory usage test on our NMS box...
>>>>
>>>> Firefox (google.com): 76MB in RAM
>>>> Firefox with Canopy 450 AP interface open, logged in: 84.5MB.. a
>>>> gain of less than 10MB of RAM usage.
>>>> Firefox with ePMP AP open, logged in: *170-185MB* in RAM. over
>>>> 100MB RAM usage, to display the same stuff. Why?
>>>>
>>>> IE (google.com): 64MB in RAM
>>>> IE with Canopy 450 AP interface open: 53MB (less than google!)
>>>> IE with ePMP AP interface open: *138MB*
>>>>
>>>> Similar results with Chrome.. About 75MB difference.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> eh.
>>>>
>>>> vlad
>>>>
>>>> On 1/21/2015 8:56 AM, Nate Burke wrote:
>>>>
>>>> Not sure what it is, but in my case, the Machine did make a
>>>> difference in load time. Be interested in others feedback as
>>>> well. Do you see similar results? Are my results bad? Do
>>>> older/slower machines take longer?
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> On 1/21/2015 8:52 AM, Josh Luthman wrote:
>>>>
>>>> >But Seriously, it's a web page displaying TEXT AND
>>>> NUMBERS, why should it need an i7 on the client side for that?
>>>>
>>>> No shit.
>>>>
>>>> So you're saying it's clock speed? I've no idea what my
>>>> phone does but I would be kind of surprised if the Galaxy
>>>> S3 and my phone vary too much in CPU (I think they're both
>>>> 2013 products).
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Josh Luthman
>>>> Office: 937-552-2340
>>>> Direct: 937-552-2343
>>>> 1100 Wayne St
>>>> Suite 1337
>>>> Troy, OH 45373
>>>>
>>>> On Wed, Jan 21, 2015 at 9:50 AM, Nate Burke
>>>> <***@blastcomm.com <mailto:***@blastcomm.com>> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> Just to sorta provide some more data from the original
>>>> Thread, it seems that CPU Makes a huge difference in
>>>> how fast the pages load.ￜ I ran a test from the
>>>> office to the same EPMP radio using 3 different machines.
>>>>
>>>> On my 6 core I7 Desktop.ￜ Initial web load takes 4-5
>>>> seconds.ￜ And login takes another 4-5 seconds.
>>>> On an old Dualcore Xeon, it's 10 seconds for initial
>>>> load, and 10 seconds to login
>>>> On my atom netbook, it was 20 seconds for initial Load,
>>>> 10 seconds to login, and another 10 seconds for the
>>>> graph to display and all the red '!' marks to disappear
>>>> (they were on all left menu items)
>>>>
>>>> I know people just said 'well just get a faster laptop'.
>>>>
>>>> But Seriously, it's a web page displaying TEXT AND
>>>> NUMBERS, why should it need an i7 on the client side
>>>> for that?
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> On 1/21/2015 8:34 AM, Vlad Sedov wrote:
>>>>
>>>> Yes they did, and it was definitely for the better.
>>>> Most of the improvements were based on some sort of
>>>> real world feedback.. That's how you make a good UI :D
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> vlad
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> On 1/21/2015 1:29 AM, CBB - Jay Fuller wrote:
>>>>
>>>> ￜ
>>>> I do recall they did completely redesign the
>>>> interface, due to our request, after the
>>>> initial complaints of v1....ￜ : /
>>>> ￜ
>>>>
>>>> ----- Original Message -----
>>>> *From:* Vlad Sedov <mailto:***@atlasok.com>
>>>> *To:* ***@afmug.com <mailto:***@afmug.com>
>>>> *Sent:* Tuesday, January 20, 2015 11:15 AM
>>>> *Subject:* Re: [AFMUG] EPMP Minimum System
>>>> Specs <rant>
>>>>
>>>> This has been one of our biggest complaints
>>>> from day one.
>>>> The interface, while it has gotten slightly
>>>> more usable, is still
>>>> complete garbage. It's unpredictable, slow,
>>>> and inconsistent.. Let alone
>>>> the features that just don't work.
>>>>
>>>> Why on earth did they not just stick with a
>>>> field-tested, fast, usable
>>>> interface from the Canopy line? Nobody buys
>>>> a radio for it's slide-out
>>>> menus and pretty HTML5 crap.
>>>> We need, fast, intuitive, consistent..
>>>> Forget the shiny.
>>>>
>>>> grr
>>>>
>>>> Vlad
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> On 1/20/2015 10:57 AM, Nate Burke wrote:
>>>> > Ok, Cambium, this is a little sad.ￜ My
>>>> Field Laptop, a Lenovo S10-3t,
>>>> > Atom Processor with Windows 8.1 cannot
>>>> load the EPMP WEB Pages in a
>>>> > timely manner.ￜ We're talking 40-60
>>>> seconds for initial load, and
>>>> > 20-30 seconds per screen refresh/menu
>>>> change.ￜ Since I'm going to have
>>>> > to go to the boss, and tell him that I
>>>> need a new laptop to do any
>>>> > field troubleshooting for these new
>>>> radios, what are the minimum
>>>> > system specs for a machine to view the
>>>> EPMP Screens?ￜ Unless Cambium
>>>> > is going to get their Web interface under
>>>> control as of Yesterday.
>>>> >
>>>> > They still swear that the GUI was all
>>>> developed in house and not
>>>> > purchased (something I still can't
>>>> believe).ￜ I'd like to know who the
>>>> > engineers/managers are who signed off on
>>>> that design.ￜ I can only
>>>> > imaging that there was a group of guys
>>>> sitting around the conference
>>>> > table, watching the presentation on the
>>>> GUI on the projector up front,
>>>> > all nodding their heads in agreement, "I
>>>> think this is a wonderful
>>>> > layout, the field tech's won't mind
>>>> waiting a couple extra minutes for
>>>> > the pages to load so they can look this
>>>> pretty!!"
>>>> >
>>>> > I think that Cambium should step up and
>>>> get engineers from ALL aspects
>>>> > of product development out into the
>>>> field.ￜ 40 seconds waiting for the
>>>> > page to load is fine when you're sitting
>>>> in the office, but not when
>>>> > you have the laptop balanced on a stack
>>>> of firewood in the freezing
>>>> > rain trying to get to the monitoring page
>>>> to see why a radio isn't
>>>> > linking up.ￜ I think that every WISP on
>>>> this list would be more than
>>>> > happy to host an engineer for a day.
>>>> Heck, even if they go into the
>>>> > parking lot and assemble it on the
>>>> tailgate of someone's Pickup,
>>>> > they'll get some idea of what we experience.
>>>> >
>>>> > I have a feeling that if all steps of the
>>>> Dev process took a week in
>>>> > the field, We'd have a radio that had a
>>>> GUI that responded instantly
>>>> > on any device, and radios that assembled
>>>> and mounted (and unmounted)
>>>> > with 1 gloved hand.
>>>> >
>>>> > </rant>
>>>> > Nate
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>
>

[Bill Prince]

We used to joke that that a programmer worth his salt could write code
to consume any and all resources available. If the
processor/memory/storage each grew by 50% or 100%, a good programmer
could write/re-write code to consume the new resources.

bp
<part15sbs{at}gmail{dot}com>

On 1/21/2015 10:42 AM, Ken Hohhof wrote:
> I wonder what the source code looks like for an HTML5 “hello world” page.
> It’s kind of shocking how fast a straight HTML/CSS page with no bloat
> comes up. It used to be Google too great pride in how fast their
> results appeared in your browser, consistently under a second. Now
> even Google doesn’t seem to care. I think ads, data mining, and
> bloated code have accustomed people to pages taking 10 or 20 seconds
> to load and become functional and scrollable, and then the autoplaying
> video starts and you go hunting for the mute or pause button. It also
> seems with virtualization that many dynamic sites are starved for
> resources and take an unacceptably long time to access the database
> and build the page.
> Sometimes it helps to use the mobile version of a site because it is
> optimized for a slow processor and small screen. If there is an m dot
> site I’ll sometimes use that from my desktop browser, not sure how to
> fool a site that auto detects if it is a mobile browser.
> Maybe devices like ePMP should have a mobile version of the GUI for
> field use.
> Or if the problem is pulling Java libraries for each page, maybe they
> need a custom app instead of using a browser. Look how fast WInbox
> is, even when it needs to download the plugins for the version of RoS
> on a certain router. Or remember smartBridges and their
> simpleMonitor? It was basically a small program that accessed the
> radio via SNMP.
> *From:* Bill Prince <mailto:***@gmail.com>
> *Sent:* Wednesday, January 21, 2015 12:14 PM
> *To:* ***@afmug.com <mailto:***@afmug.com>
> *Subject:* Re: [AFMUG] EPMP Minimum System Specs <rant>
> I remember working on an old Data General multi-user basic system.
> Sure, it was only running a basic interpreter, but it supported 4
> simultaneous users in a TOTAL of 16 KB of memory (core memory at that)...
>
> bp
> <part15sbs{at}gmail{dot}com>
>
> On 1/21/2015 7:42 AM, Jon Bruce wrote:
>> And we only need 64k of RAM.
>>
>> On 1/21/2015 10:30 AM, Nate Burke wrote:
>>> > You need big boy PCs to be on the Internet anymore
>>>
>>> Who's fault is this? There are sites I don't visit anymore because
>>> they've made them so bloated they won't run (chicagotribune.com)
>>> They provide the content, they should make sure they work for me,
>>> not the other way around (Even though I realize that I am the
>>> eyeballs being sold)
>>>
>>> Just think if the whole web was as neat as the packetflux equipment
>>> is. You'd still only need 10mb interfaces on your servers.
>>>
>>>
>>> On 1/21/2015 9:21 AM, Vlad Sedov wrote:
>>>> Oh, no doubt. I like my sea of tabs too.
>>>>
>>>> But we're talking about a radio web interface. I don't care how
>>>> much RAM your PC has, using 10x more resources to display the same
>>>> stuff is a huge waste. Consider how many lower-powered gadgets are
>>>> used to manage radios.. It has to be nimble.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Vlad
>>>>
>>>> On 1/21/2015 9:17 AM, Mike Hammett wrote:
>>>>> I routinely have over 8 gigs of RAM chewed up by my browsers,
>>>>> sometimes almost 14 GB... You need big boy PCs to be on the
>>>>> Internet anymore. ;-)
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> -----
>>>>> Mike Hammett
>>>>> Intelligent Computing Solutions
>>>>> http://www.ics-il.com
>>>>>
>>>>> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>>>>> *From: *"Vlad Sedov" mailto:***@atlasok.com
>>>>> *To: ****@afmug.com
>>>>> *Sent: *Wednesday, January 21, 2015 9:15:24 AM
>>>>> *Subject: *Re: [AFMUG] EPMP Minimum System Specs <rant>
>>>>>
>>>>> I just did a quick memory usage test on our NMS box...
>>>>>
>>>>> Firefox (google.com): 76MB in RAM
>>>>> Firefox with Canopy 450 AP interface open, logged in: 84.5MB.. a
>>>>> gain of less than 10MB of RAM usage.
>>>>> Firefox with ePMP AP open, logged in: *170-185MB* in RAM. over
>>>>> 100MB RAM usage, to display the same stuff. Why?
>>>>>
>>>>> IE (google.com): 64MB in RAM
>>>>> IE with Canopy 450 AP interface open: 53MB (less than google!)
>>>>> IE with ePMP AP interface open: *138MB*
>>>>>
>>>>> Similar results with Chrome.. About 75MB difference.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> eh.
>>>>>
>>>>> vlad
>>>>>
>>>>> On 1/21/2015 8:56 AM, Nate Burke wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> Not sure what it is, but in my case, the Machine did make a
>>>>> difference in load time. Be interested in others feedback as
>>>>> well. Do you see similar results? Are my results bad? Do
>>>>> older/slower machines take longer?
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> On 1/21/2015 8:52 AM, Josh Luthman wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> >But Seriously, it's a web page displaying TEXT AND
>>>>> NUMBERS, why should it need an i7 on the client side for
>>>>> that?
>>>>> No shit.
>>>>> So you're saying it's clock speed? I've no idea what my
>>>>> phone does but I would be kind of surprised if the Galaxy
>>>>> S3 and my phone vary too much in CPU (I think they're both
>>>>> 2013 products).
>>>>> Josh Luthman
>>>>> Office: 937-552-2340
>>>>> Direct: 937-552-2343
>>>>> 1100 Wayne St
>>>>> Suite 1337
>>>>> Troy, OH 45373
>>>>> On Wed, Jan 21, 2015 at 9:50 AM, Nate Burke
>>>>> <***@blastcomm.com <mailto:***@blastcomm.com>> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> Just to sorta provide some more data from the original
>>>>> Thread, it seems that CPU Makes a huge difference in
>>>>> how fast the pages load.ￜ I ran a test from the
>>>>> office to the same EPMP radio using 3 different machines.
>>>>>
>>>>> On my 6 core I7 Desktop.ￜ Initial web load takes 4-5
>>>>> seconds.ￜ And login takes another 4-5 seconds.
>>>>> On an old Dualcore Xeon, it's 10 seconds for initial
>>>>> load, and 10 seconds to login
>>>>> On my atom netbook, it was 20 seconds for initial
>>>>> Load, 10 seconds to login, and another 10 seconds for
>>>>> the graph to display and all the red '!' marks to
>>>>> disappear (they were on all left menu items)
>>>>>
>>>>> I know people just said 'well just get a faster laptop'.
>>>>>
>>>>> But Seriously, it's a web page displaying TEXT AND
>>>>> NUMBERS, why should it need an i7 on the client side
>>>>> for that?
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> On 1/21/2015 8:34 AM, Vlad Sedov wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> Yes they did, and it was definitely for the
>>>>> better. Most of the improvements were based on
>>>>> some sort of real world feedback.. That's how you
>>>>> make a good UI :D
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> vlad
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> On 1/21/2015 1:29 AM, CBB - Jay Fuller wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> ￜ
>>>>> I do recall they did completely redesign the
>>>>> interface, due to our request, after the
>>>>> initial complaints of v1....ￜ : /
>>>>> ￜ
>>>>>
>>>>> ----- Original Message -----
>>>>> *From:* Vlad Sedov <mailto:***@atlasok.com>
>>>>> *To:* ***@afmug.com <mailto:***@afmug.com>
>>>>> *Sent:* Tuesday, January 20, 2015 11:15 AM
>>>>> *Subject:* Re: [AFMUG] EPMP Minimum System
>>>>> Specs <rant>
>>>>> This has been one of our biggest
>>>>> complaints from day one.
>>>>> The interface, while it has gotten
>>>>> slightly more usable, is still
>>>>> complete garbage. It's unpredictable,
>>>>> slow, and inconsistent.. Let alone
>>>>> the features that just don't work.
>>>>>
>>>>> Why on earth did they not just stick with
>>>>> a field-tested, fast, usable
>>>>> interface from the Canopy line? Nobody
>>>>> buys a radio for it's slide-out
>>>>> menus and pretty HTML5 crap.
>>>>> We need, fast, intuitive, consistent..
>>>>> Forget the shiny.
>>>>>
>>>>> grr
>>>>>
>>>>> Vlad
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> On 1/20/2015 10:57 AM, Nate Burke wrote:
>>>>> > Ok, Cambium, this is a little sad.ￜ My
>>>>> Field Laptop, a Lenovo S10-3t,
>>>>> > Atom Processor with Windows 8.1 cannot
>>>>> load the EPMP WEB Pages in a
>>>>> > timely manner.ￜ We're talking 40-60
>>>>> seconds for initial load, and
>>>>> > 20-30 seconds per screen refresh/menu
>>>>> change.ￜ Since I'm going to have
>>>>> > to go to the boss, and tell him that I
>>>>> need a new laptop to do any
>>>>> > field troubleshooting for these new
>>>>> radios, what are the minimum
>>>>> > system specs for a machine to view the
>>>>> EPMP Screens?ￜ Unless Cambium
>>>>> > is going to get their Web interface
>>>>> under control as of Yesterday.
>>>>> >
>>>>> > They still swear that the GUI was all
>>>>> developed in house and not
>>>>> > purchased (something I still can't
>>>>> believe).ￜ I'd like to know who the
>>>>> > engineers/managers are who signed off on
>>>>> that design.ￜ I can only
>>>>> > imaging that there was a group of guys
>>>>> sitting around the conference
>>>>> > table, watching the presentation on the
>>>>> GUI on the projector up front,
>>>>> > all nodding their heads in agreement, "I
>>>>> think this is a wonderful
>>>>> > layout, the field tech's won't mind
>>>>> waiting a couple extra minutes for
>>>>> > the pages to load so they can look this
>>>>> pretty!!"
>>>>> >
>>>>> > I think that Cambium should step up and
>>>>> get engineers from ALL aspects
>>>>> > of product development out into the
>>>>> field.ￜ 40 seconds waiting for the
>>>>> > page to load is fine when you're sitting
>>>>> in the office, but not when
>>>>> > you have the laptop balanced on a stack
>>>>> of firewood in the freezing
>>>>> > rain trying to get to the monitoring
>>>>> page to see why a radio isn't
>>>>> > linking up.ￜ I think that every WISP
>>>>> on this list would be more than
>>>>> > happy to host an engineer for a day.
>>>>> Heck, even if they go into the
>>>>> > parking lot and assemble it on the
>>>>> tailgate of someone's Pickup,
>>>>> > they'll get some idea of what we experience.
>>>>> >
>>>>> > I have a feeling that if all steps of
>>>>> the Dev process took a week in
>>>>> > the field, We'd have a radio that had a
>>>>> GUI that responded instantly
>>>>> > on any device, and radios that assembled
>>>>> and mounted (and unmounted)
>>>>> > with 1 gloved hand.
>>>>> >
>>>>> > </rant>
>>>>> > Nate
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>
>

[Nate Burke]

Probably like saving a blank word doc these days. Way back in the day
(feel free to insert a 'young whippersnapper' comment here) when I fit
all my college papers on a single 3.5" disk.

I remember when google used to be fast, but now with the predictive
searching, it's gotten to be a pain, especially over a cell connection.
And what's with changing the web page as you're typing. That's just
annoying.

The only thing saving my sanity right now is running noscript. It
blocks all those annoying videos/popups/artsy fartsy nonsense, and also
gives you an every day reminder of how poor coding has become since so
many sites will just break. Sometime I have to use the Wife's laptop, I
can only stand browsing for a few minutes at a time on that.

On 1/21/2015 12:42 PM, Ken Hohhof wrote:
> I wonder what the source code looks like for an HTML5 “hello world” page.
> It’s kind of shocking how fast a straight HTML/CSS page with no bloat
> comes up. It used to be Google too great pride in how fast their
> results appeared in your browser, consistently under a second. Now
> even Google doesn’t seem to care. I think ads, data mining, and
> bloated code have accustomed people to pages taking 10 or 20 seconds
> to load and become functional and scrollable, and then the autoplaying
> video starts and you go hunting for the mute or pause button. It also
> seems with virtualization that many dynamic sites are starved for
> resources and take an unacceptably long time to access the database
> and build the page.
> Sometimes it helps to use the mobile version of a site because it is
> optimized for a slow processor and small screen. If there is an m dot
> site I’ll sometimes use that from my desktop browser, not sure how to
> fool a site that auto detects if it is a mobile browser.
> Maybe devices like ePMP should have a mobile version of the GUI for
> field use.
> Or if the problem is pulling Java libraries for each page, maybe they
> need a custom app instead of using a browser. Look how fast WInbox
> is, even when it needs to download the plugins for the version of RoS
> on a certain router. Or remember smartBridges and their
> simpleMonitor? It was basically a small program that accessed the
> radio via SNMP.
> *From:* Bill Prince <mailto:***@gmail.com>
> *Sent:* Wednesday, January 21, 2015 12:14 PM
> *To:* ***@afmug.com <mailto:***@afmug.com>
> *Subject:* Re: [AFMUG] EPMP Minimum System Specs <rant>
> I remember working on an old Data General multi-user basic system.
> Sure, it was only running a basic interpreter, but it supported 4
> simultaneous users in a TOTAL of 16 KB of memory (core memory at that)...
>
> bp
> <part15sbs{at}gmail{dot}com>
>
> On 1/21/2015 7:42 AM, Jon Bruce wrote:
>> And we only need 64k of RAM.
>>
>> On 1/21/2015 10:30 AM, Nate Burke wrote:
>>> > You need big boy PCs to be on the Internet anymore
>>>
>>> Who's fault is this? There are sites I don't visit anymore because
>>> they've made them so bloated they won't run (chicagotribune.com)
>>> They provide the content, they should make sure they work for me,
>>> not the other way around (Even though I realize that I am the
>>> eyeballs being sold)
>>>
>>> Just think if the whole web was as neat as the packetflux equipment
>>> is. You'd still only need 10mb interfaces on your servers.
>>>
>>>
>>> On 1/21/2015 9:21 AM, Vlad Sedov wrote:
>>>> Oh, no doubt. I like my sea of tabs too.
>>>>
>>>> But we're talking about a radio web interface. I don't care how
>>>> much RAM your PC has, using 10x more resources to display the same
>>>> stuff is a huge waste. Consider how many lower-powered gadgets are
>>>> used to manage radios.. It has to be nimble.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Vlad
>>>>
>>>> On 1/21/2015 9:17 AM, Mike Hammett wrote:
>>>>> I routinely have over 8 gigs of RAM chewed up by my browsers,
>>>>> sometimes almost 14 GB... You need big boy PCs to be on the
>>>>> Internet anymore. ;-)
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> -----
>>>>> Mike Hammett
>>>>> Intelligent Computing Solutions
>>>>> http://www.ics-il.com
>>>>>
>>>>> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>>>>> *From: *"Vlad Sedov" mailto:***@atlasok.com
>>>>> *To: ****@afmug.com
>>>>> *Sent: *Wednesday, January 21, 2015 9:15:24 AM
>>>>> *Subject: *Re: [AFMUG] EPMP Minimum System Specs <rant>
>>>>>
>>>>> I just did a quick memory usage test on our NMS box...
>>>>>
>>>>> Firefox (google.com): 76MB in RAM
>>>>> Firefox with Canopy 450 AP interface open, logged in: 84.5MB.. a
>>>>> gain of less than 10MB of RAM usage.
>>>>> Firefox with ePMP AP open, logged in: *170-185MB* in RAM. over
>>>>> 100MB RAM usage, to display the same stuff. Why?
>>>>>
>>>>> IE (google.com): 64MB in RAM
>>>>> IE with Canopy 450 AP interface open: 53MB (less than google!)
>>>>> IE with ePMP AP interface open: *138MB*
>>>>>
>>>>> Similar results with Chrome.. About 75MB difference.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> eh.
>>>>>
>>>>> vlad
>>>>>
>>>>> On 1/21/2015 8:56 AM, Nate Burke wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> Not sure what it is, but in my case, the Machine did make a
>>>>> difference in load time. Be interested in others feedback as
>>>>> well. Do you see similar results? Are my results bad? Do
>>>>> older/slower machines take longer?
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> On 1/21/2015 8:52 AM, Josh Luthman wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> >But Seriously, it's a web page displaying TEXT AND
>>>>> NUMBERS, why should it need an i7 on the client side for
>>>>> that?
>>>>> No shit.
>>>>> So you're saying it's clock speed? I've no idea what my
>>>>> phone does but I would be kind of surprised if the Galaxy
>>>>> S3 and my phone vary too much in CPU (I think they're both
>>>>> 2013 products).
>>>>> Josh Luthman
>>>>> Office: 937-552-2340
>>>>> Direct: 937-552-2343
>>>>> 1100 Wayne St
>>>>> Suite 1337
>>>>> Troy, OH 45373
>>>>> On Wed, Jan 21, 2015 at 9:50 AM, Nate Burke
>>>>> <***@blastcomm.com <mailto:***@blastcomm.com>> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> Just to sorta provide some more data from the original
>>>>> Thread, it seems that CPU Makes a huge difference in
>>>>> how fast the pages load.ￜ I ran a test from the
>>>>> office to the same EPMP radio using 3 different machines.
>>>>>
>>>>> On my 6 core I7 Desktop.ￜ Initial web load takes 4-5
>>>>> seconds.ￜ And login takes another 4-5 seconds.
>>>>> On an old Dualcore Xeon, it's 10 seconds for initial
>>>>> load, and 10 seconds to login
>>>>> On my atom netbook, it was 20 seconds for initial
>>>>> Load, 10 seconds to login, and another 10 seconds for
>>>>> the graph to display and all the red '!' marks to
>>>>> disappear (they were on all left menu items)
>>>>>
>>>>> I know people just said 'well just get a faster laptop'.
>>>>>
>>>>> But Seriously, it's a web page displaying TEXT AND
>>>>> NUMBERS, why should it need an i7 on the client side
>>>>> for that?
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> On 1/21/2015 8:34 AM, Vlad Sedov wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> Yes they did, and it was definitely for the
>>>>> better. Most of the improvements were based on
>>>>> some sort of real world feedback.. That's how you
>>>>> make a good UI :D
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> vlad
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> On 1/21/2015 1:29 AM, CBB - Jay Fuller wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> ￜ
>>>>> I do recall they did completely redesign the
>>>>> interface, due to our request, after the
>>>>> initial complaints of v1....ￜ : /
>>>>> ￜ
>>>>>
>>>>> ----- Original Message -----
>>>>> *From:* Vlad Sedov <mailto:***@atlasok.com>
>>>>> *To:* ***@afmug.com <mailto:***@afmug.com>
>>>>> *Sent:* Tuesday, January 20, 2015 11:15 AM
>>>>> *Subject:* Re: [AFMUG] EPMP Minimum System
>>>>> Specs <rant>
>>>>> This has been one of our biggest
>>>>> complaints from day one.
>>>>> The interface, while it has gotten
>>>>> slightly more usable, is still
>>>>> complete garbage. It's unpredictable,
>>>>> slow, and inconsistent.. Let alone
>>>>> the features that just don't work.
>>>>>
>>>>> Why on earth did they not just stick with
>>>>> a field-tested, fast, usable
>>>>> interface from the Canopy line? Nobody
>>>>> buys a radio for it's slide-out
>>>>> menus and pretty HTML5 crap.
>>>>> We need, fast, intuitive, consistent..
>>>>> Forget the shiny.
>>>>>
>>>>> grr
>>>>>
>>>>> Vlad
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> On 1/20/2015 10:57 AM, Nate Burke wrote:
>>>>> > Ok, Cambium, this is a little sad.ￜ My
>>>>> Field Laptop, a Lenovo S10-3t,
>>>>> > Atom Processor with Windows 8.1 cannot
>>>>> load the EPMP WEB Pages in a
>>>>> > timely manner.ￜ We're talking 40-60
>>>>> seconds for initial load, and
>>>>> > 20-30 seconds per screen refresh/menu
>>>>> change.ￜ Since I'm going to have
>>>>> > to go to the boss, and tell him that I
>>>>> need a new laptop to do any
>>>>> > field troubleshooting for these new
>>>>> radios, what are the minimum
>>>>> > system specs for a machine to view the
>>>>> EPMP Screens?ￜ Unless Cambium
>>>>> > is going to get their Web interface
>>>>> under control as of Yesterday.
>>>>> >
>>>>> > They still swear that the GUI was all
>>>>> developed in house and not
>>>>> > purchased (something I still can't
>>>>> believe).ￜ I'd like to know who the
>>>>> > engineers/managers are who signed off on
>>>>> that design.ￜ I can only
>>>>> > imaging that there was a group of guys
>>>>> sitting around the conference
>>>>> > table, watching the presentation on the
>>>>> GUI on the projector up front,
>>>>> > all nodding their heads in agreement, "I
>>>>> think this is a wonderful
>>>>> > layout, the field tech's won't mind
>>>>> waiting a couple extra minutes for
>>>>> > the pages to load so they can look this
>>>>> pretty!!"
>>>>> >
>>>>> > I think that Cambium should step up and
>>>>> get engineers from ALL aspects
>>>>> > of product development out into the
>>>>> field.ￜ 40 seconds waiting for the
>>>>> > page to load is fine when you're sitting
>>>>> in the office, but not when
>>>>> > you have the laptop balanced on a stack
>>>>> of firewood in the freezing
>>>>> > rain trying to get to the monitoring
>>>>> page to see why a radio isn't
>>>>> > linking up.ￜ I think that every WISP
>>>>> on this list would be more than
>>>>> > happy to host an engineer for a day.
>>>>> Heck, even if they go into the
>>>>> > parking lot and assemble it on the
>>>>> tailgate of someone's Pickup,
>>>>> > they'll get some idea of what we experience.
>>>>> >
>>>>> > I have a feeling that if all steps of
>>>>> the Dev process took a week in
>>>>> > the field, We'd have a radio that had a
>>>>> GUI that responded instantly
>>>>> > on any device, and radios that assembled
>>>>> and mounted (and unmounted)
>>>>> > with 1 gloved hand.
>>>>> >
>>>>> > </rant>
>>>>> > Nate
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>
>

[Vlad Sedov]

oh that's evil...


vlad


On 1/21/2015 12:55 PM, Bill Prince wrote:
> We used to joke that that a programmer worth his salt could write code
> to consume any and all resources available. If the
> processor/memory/storage each grew by 50% or 100%, a good programmer
> could write/re-write code to consume the new resources.
>
> bp
> <part15sbs{at}gmail{dot}com>
>
> On 1/21/2015 10:42 AM, Ken Hohhof wrote:
>> I wonder what the source code looks like for an HTML5 “hello world” page.
>> It’s kind of shocking how fast a straight HTML/CSS page with no bloat
>> comes up. It used to be Google too great pride in how fast their
>> results appeared in your browser, consistently under a second. Now
>> even Google doesn’t seem to care. I think ads, data mining, and
>> bloated code have accustomed people to pages taking 10 or 20 seconds
>> to load and become functional and scrollable, and then the
>> autoplaying video starts and you go hunting for the mute or pause
>> button. It also seems with virtualization that many dynamic sites
>> are starved for resources and take an unacceptably long time to
>> access the database and build the page.
>> Sometimes it helps to use the mobile version of a site because it is
>> optimized for a slow processor and small screen. If there is an m
>> dot site I’ll sometimes use that from my desktop browser, not sure
>> how to fool a site that auto detects if it is a mobile browser.
>> Maybe devices like ePMP should have a mobile version of the GUI for
>> field use.
>> Or if the problem is pulling Java libraries for each page, maybe they
>> need a custom app instead of using a browser. Look how fast WInbox
>> is, even when it needs to download the plugins for the version of RoS
>> on a certain router. Or remember smartBridges and their
>> simpleMonitor? It was basically a small program that accessed the
>> radio via SNMP.
>> *From:* Bill Prince <mailto:***@gmail.com>
>> *Sent:* Wednesday, January 21, 2015 12:14 PM
>> *To:* ***@afmug.com <mailto:***@afmug.com>
>> *Subject:* Re: [AFMUG] EPMP Minimum System Specs <rant>
>> I remember working on an old Data General multi-user basic system.
>> Sure, it was only running a basic interpreter, but it supported 4
>> simultaneous users in a TOTAL of 16 KB of memory (core memory at that)...
>>
>> bp
>> <part15sbs{at}gmail{dot}com>
>>
>> On 1/21/2015 7:42 AM, Jon Bruce wrote:
>>> And we only need 64k of RAM.
>>>
>>> On 1/21/2015 10:30 AM, Nate Burke wrote:
>>>> > You need big boy PCs to be on the Internet anymore
>>>>
>>>> Who's fault is this? There are sites I don't visit anymore because
>>>> they've made them so bloated they won't run (chicagotribune.com)
>>>> They provide the content, they should make sure they work for me,
>>>> not the other way around (Even though I realize that I am the
>>>> eyeballs being sold)
>>>>
>>>> Just think if the whole web was as neat as the packetflux equipment
>>>> is. You'd still only need 10mb interfaces on your servers.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> On 1/21/2015 9:21 AM, Vlad Sedov wrote:
>>>>> Oh, no doubt. I like my sea of tabs too.
>>>>>
>>>>> But we're talking about a radio web interface. I don't care how
>>>>> much RAM your PC has, using 10x more resources to display the same
>>>>> stuff is a huge waste. Consider how many lower-powered gadgets are
>>>>> used to manage radios.. It has to be nimble.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Vlad
>>>>>
>>>>> On 1/21/2015 9:17 AM, Mike Hammett wrote:
>>>>>> I routinely have over 8 gigs of RAM chewed up by my browsers,
>>>>>> sometimes almost 14 GB... You need big boy PCs to be on the
>>>>>> Internet anymore. ;-)
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> -----
>>>>>> Mike Hammett
>>>>>> Intelligent Computing Solutions
>>>>>> http://www.ics-il.com
>>>>>>
>>>>>> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>>>>>> *From: *"Vlad Sedov" mailto:***@atlasok.com
>>>>>> *To: ****@afmug.com
>>>>>> *Sent: *Wednesday, January 21, 2015 9:15:24 AM
>>>>>> *Subject: *Re: [AFMUG] EPMP Minimum System Specs <rant>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I just did a quick memory usage test on our NMS box...
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Firefox (google.com): 76MB in RAM
>>>>>> Firefox with Canopy 450 AP interface open, logged in: 84.5MB.. a
>>>>>> gain of less than 10MB of RAM usage.
>>>>>> Firefox with ePMP AP open, logged in: *170-185MB* in RAM. over
>>>>>> 100MB RAM usage, to display the same stuff. Why?
>>>>>>
>>>>>> IE (google.com): 64MB in RAM
>>>>>> IE with Canopy 450 AP interface open: 53MB (less than google!)
>>>>>> IE with ePMP AP interface open: *138MB*
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Similar results with Chrome.. About 75MB difference.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> eh.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> vlad
>>>>>>
>>>>>> On 1/21/2015 8:56 AM, Nate Burke wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Not sure what it is, but in my case, the Machine did make a
>>>>>> difference in load time. Be interested in others feedback as
>>>>>> well. Do you see similar results? Are my results bad? Do
>>>>>> older/slower machines take longer?
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> On 1/21/2015 8:52 AM, Josh Luthman wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> >But Seriously, it's a web page displaying TEXT AND
>>>>>> NUMBERS, why should it need an i7 on the client side for
>>>>>> that?
>>>>>> No shit.
>>>>>> So you're saying it's clock speed? I've no idea what my
>>>>>> phone does but I would be kind of surprised if the Galaxy
>>>>>> S3 and my phone vary too much in CPU (I think they're
>>>>>> both 2013 products).
>>>>>> Josh Luthman
>>>>>> Office: 937-552-2340
>>>>>> Direct: 937-552-2343
>>>>>> 1100 Wayne St
>>>>>> Suite 1337
>>>>>> Troy, OH 45373
>>>>>> On Wed, Jan 21, 2015 at 9:50 AM, Nate Burke
>>>>>> <***@blastcomm.com <mailto:***@blastcomm.com>> wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Just to sorta provide some more data from the
>>>>>> original Thread, it seems that CPU Makes a huge
>>>>>> difference in how fast the pages load.ￜ I ran a
>>>>>> test from the office to the same EPMP radio using 3
>>>>>> different machines.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> On my 6 core I7 Desktop.ￜ Initial web load takes
>>>>>> 4-5 seconds.ￜ And login takes another 4-5 seconds.
>>>>>> On an old Dualcore Xeon, it's 10 seconds for initial
>>>>>> load, and 10 seconds to login
>>>>>> On my atom netbook, it was 20 seconds for initial
>>>>>> Load, 10 seconds to login, and another 10 seconds for
>>>>>> the graph to display and all the red '!' marks to
>>>>>> disappear (they were on all left menu items)
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I know people just said 'well just get a faster laptop'.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> But Seriously, it's a web page displaying TEXT AND
>>>>>> NUMBERS, why should it need an i7 on the client side
>>>>>> for that?
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> On 1/21/2015 8:34 AM, Vlad Sedov wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Yes they did, and it was definitely for the
>>>>>> better. Most of the improvements were based on
>>>>>> some sort of real world feedback.. That's how you
>>>>>> make a good UI :D
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> vlad
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> On 1/21/2015 1:29 AM, CBB - Jay Fuller wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> ￜ
>>>>>> I do recall they did completely redesign the
>>>>>> interface, due to our request, after the
>>>>>> initial complaints of v1....ￜ : /
>>>>>> ￜ
>>>>>>
>>>>>> ----- Original Message -----
>>>>>> *From:* Vlad Sedov <mailto:***@atlasok.com>
>>>>>> *To:* ***@afmug.com <mailto:***@afmug.com>
>>>>>> *Sent:* Tuesday, January 20, 2015 11:15 AM
>>>>>> *Subject:* Re: [AFMUG] EPMP Minimum
>>>>>> System Specs <rant>
>>>>>> This has been one of our biggest
>>>>>> complaints from day one.
>>>>>> The interface, while it has gotten
>>>>>> slightly more usable, is still
>>>>>> complete garbage. It's unpredictable,
>>>>>> slow, and inconsistent.. Let alone
>>>>>> the features that just don't work.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Why on earth did they not just stick with
>>>>>> a field-tested, fast, usable
>>>>>> interface from the Canopy line? Nobody
>>>>>> buys a radio for it's slide-out
>>>>>> menus and pretty HTML5 crap.
>>>>>> We need, fast, intuitive, consistent..
>>>>>> Forget the shiny.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> grr
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Vlad
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> On 1/20/2015 10:57 AM, Nate Burke wrote:
>>>>>> > Ok, Cambium, this is a little sad.ￜ
>>>>>> My Field Laptop, a Lenovo S10-3t,
>>>>>> > Atom Processor with Windows 8.1 cannot
>>>>>> load the EPMP WEB Pages in a
>>>>>> > timely manner.ￜ We're talking 40-60
>>>>>> seconds for initial load, and
>>>>>> > 20-30 seconds per screen refresh/menu
>>>>>> change.ￜ Since I'm going to have
>>>>>> > to go to the boss, and tell him that I
>>>>>> need a new laptop to do any
>>>>>> > field troubleshooting for these new
>>>>>> radios, what are the minimum
>>>>>> > system specs for a machine to view the
>>>>>> EPMP Screens?ￜ Unless Cambium
>>>>>> > is going to get their Web interface
>>>>>> under control as of Yesterday.
>>>>>> >
>>>>>> > They still swear that the GUI was all
>>>>>> developed in house and not
>>>>>> > purchased (something I still can't
>>>>>> believe).ￜ I'd like to know who the
>>>>>> > engineers/managers are who signed off
>>>>>> on that design.ￜ I can only
>>>>>> > imaging that there was a group of guys
>>>>>> sitting around the conference
>>>>>> > table, watching the presentation on the
>>>>>> GUI on the projector up front,
>>>>>> > all nodding their heads in agreement,
>>>>>> "I think this is a wonderful
>>>>>> > layout, the field tech's won't mind
>>>>>> waiting a couple extra minutes for
>>>>>> > the pages to load so they can look this
>>>>>> pretty!!"
>>>>>> >
>>>>>> > I think that Cambium should step up and
>>>>>> get engineers from ALL aspects
>>>>>> > of product development out into the
>>>>>> field.ￜ 40 seconds waiting for the
>>>>>> > page to load is fine when you're
>>>>>> sitting in the office, but not when
>>>>>> > you have the laptop balanced on a stack
>>>>>> of firewood in the freezing
>>>>>> > rain trying to get to the monitoring
>>>>>> page to see why a radio isn't
>>>>>> > linking up.ￜ I think that every WISP
>>>>>> on this list would be more than
>>>>>> > happy to host an engineer for a day.
>>>>>> Heck, even if they go into the
>>>>>> > parking lot and assemble it on the
>>>>>> tailgate of someone's Pickup,
>>>>>> > they'll get some idea of what we
>>>>>> experience.
>>>>>> >
>>>>>> > I have a feeling that if all steps of
>>>>>> the Dev process took a week in
>>>>>> > the field, We'd have a radio that had a
>>>>>> GUI that responded instantly
>>>>>> > on any device, and radios that
>>>>>> assembled and mounted (and unmounted)
>>>>>> > with 1 gloved hand.
>>>>>> >
>>>>>> > </rant>
>>>>>> > Nate
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>
>

[CBB - Jay Fuller]

oh gosh. *facepalm*. I love you too Ken. :)

----- Original Message -----
From: Ken Hohhof
To: ***@afmug.com
Sent: Wednesday, January 21, 2015 10:52 AM
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] EPMP Minimum System Specs <rant>


LOL, you said “desktop”. That’s so cute, in a 1999 kind of way. I think you mean “homescreen”. Or do you store your documents in that picture of a file cabinet, and use the little animated dog and paper clip when you need help? OMG, I’ll bet you say “click” instead of “tap” and “swipe”. OMG, OMG, LOL, LOL.


From: CBB - Jay Fuller
Sent: Wednesday, January 21, 2015 10:21 AM
To: ***@afmug.com
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] EPMP Minimum System Specs <rant>


isn't that like having 200 files open on your desktop?
or 200 paper files cluttering your desk?
you should put some stuff away every now-and-then....

----- Original Message -----
From: Mike Hammett
To: ***@afmug.com
Sent: Wednesday, January 21, 2015 9:26 AM
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] EPMP Minimum System Specs <rant>

But how many other modern web sites use the same resources?

I used to keep a sea of tabs (200+), but once I get near 50 anymore, my system chokes. Time to go to 32 GB on my desktops!




-----
Mike Hammett
Intelligent Computing Solutions
http://www.ics-il.com



----------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: "Vlad Sedov" <***@atlasok.com>
To: ***@afmug.com
Sent: Wednesday, January 21, 2015 9:21:29 AM
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] EPMP Minimum System Specs <rant>


Oh, no doubt. I like my sea of tabs too.

But we're talking about a radio web interface. I don't care how much RAM your PC has, using 10x more resources to display the same stuff is a huge waste. Consider how many lower-powered gadgets are used to manage radios.. It has to be nimble.


Vlad

On 1/21/2015 9:17 AM, Mike Hammett wrote:

I routinely have over 8 gigs of RAM chewed up by my browsers, sometimes almost 14 GB... You need big boy PCs to be on the Internet anymore. ;-)




-----
Mike Hammett
Intelligent Computing Solutions
http://www.ics-il.com



--------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: "Vlad Sedov" mailto:***@atlasok.com
To: ***@afmug.com
Sent: Wednesday, January 21, 2015 9:15:24 AM
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] EPMP Minimum System Specs <rant>


I just did a quick memory usage test on our NMS box...

Firefox (google.com): 76MB in RAM
Firefox with Canopy 450 AP interface open, logged in: 84.5MB.. a gain of less than 10MB of RAM usage.
Firefox with ePMP AP open, logged in: 170-185MB in RAM. over 100MB RAM usage, to display the same stuff. Why?

IE (google.com): 64MB in RAM
IE with Canopy 450 AP interface open: 53MB (less than google!)
IE with ePMP AP interface open: 138MB

Similar results with Chrome.. About 75MB difference.


eh.

vlad

On 1/21/2015 8:56 AM, Nate Burke wrote:

Not sure what it is, but in my case, the Machine did make a difference in load time. Be interested in others feedback as well. Do you see similar results? Are my results bad? Do older/slower machines take longer?



On 1/21/2015 8:52 AM, Josh Luthman wrote:

>But Seriously, it's a web page displaying TEXT AND NUMBERS, why should it need an i7 on the client side for that?

No shit.

So you're saying it's clock speed? I've no idea what my phone does but I would be kind of surprised if the Galaxy S3 and my phone vary too much in CPU (I think they're both 2013 products).


Josh Luthman
Office: 937-552-2340
Direct: 937-552-2343
1100 Wayne St
Suite 1337
Troy, OH 45373

On Wed, Jan 21, 2015 at 9:50 AM, Nate Burke <***@blastcomm.com> wrote:

Just to sorta provide some more data from the original Thread, it seems that CPU Makes a huge difference in how fast the pages load.ￜ I ran a test from the office to the same EPMP radio using 3 different machines.

On my 6 core I7 Desktop.ￜ Initial web load takes 4-5 seconds.ￜ And login takes another 4-5 seconds.
On an old Dualcore Xeon, it's 10 seconds for initial load, and 10 seconds to login
On my atom netbook, it was 20 seconds for initial Load, 10 seconds to login, and another 10 seconds for the graph to display and all the red '!' marks to disappear (they were on all left menu items)

I know people just said 'well just get a faster laptop'.

But Seriously, it's a web page displaying TEXT AND NUMBERS, why should it need an i7 on the client side for that?




On 1/21/2015 8:34 AM, Vlad Sedov wrote:

Yes they did, and it was definitely for the better. Most of the improvements were based on some sort of real world feedback.. That's how you make a good UI :D


vlad


On 1/21/2015 1:29 AM, CBB - Jay Fuller wrote:

ￜ
I do recall they did completely redesign the interface, due to our request, after the initial complaints of v1....ￜ : /
ￜ
----- Original Message -----
From: Vlad Sedov
To: ***@afmug.com
Sent: Tuesday, January 20, 2015 11:15 AM
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] EPMP Minimum System Specs <rant>

This has been one of our biggest complaints from day one.
The interface, while it has gotten slightly more usable, is still
complete garbage. It's unpredictable, slow, and inconsistent.. Let alone
the features that just don't work.

Why on earth did they not just stick with a field-tested, fast, usable
interface from the Canopy line? Nobody buys a radio for it's slide-out
menus and pretty HTML5 crap.
We need, fast, intuitive, consistent.. Forget the shiny.

grr

Vlad


On 1/20/2015 10:57 AM, Nate Burke wrote:
> Ok, Cambium, this is a little sad.ￜ My Field Laptop, a Lenovo S10-3t,
> Atom Processor with Windows 8.1 cannot load the EPMP WEB Pages in a
> timely manner.ￜ We're talking 40-60 seconds for initial load, and
> 20-30 seconds per screen refresh/menu change.ￜ Since I'm going to have
> to go to the boss, and tell him that I need a new laptop to do any
> field troubleshooting for these new radios, what are the minimum
> system specs for a machine to view the EPMP Screens?ￜ Unless Cambium
> is going to get their Web interface under control as of Yesterday.
>
> They still swear that the GUI was all developed in house and not
> purchased (something I still can't believe).ￜ I'd like to know who the
> engineers/managers are who signed off on that design.ￜ I can only
> imaging that there was a group of guys sitting around the conference
> table, watching the presentation on the GUI on the projector up front,
> all nodding their heads in agreement, "I think this is a wonderful
> layout, the field tech's won't mind waiting a couple extra minutes for
> the pages to load so they can look this pretty!!"
>
> I think that Cambium should step up and get engineers from ALL aspects
> of product development out into the field.ￜ 40 seconds waiting for the
> page to load is fine when you're sitting in the office, but not when
> you have the laptop balanced on a stack of firewood in the freezing
> rain trying to get to the monitoring page to see why a radio isn't
> linking up.ￜ I think that every WISP on this list would be more than
> happy to host an engineer for a day. Heck, even if they go into the
> parking lot and assemble it on the tailgate of someone's Pickup,
> they'll get some idea of what we experience.
>
> I have a feeling that if all steps of the Dev process took a week in
> the field, We'd have a radio that had a GUI that responded instantly
> on any device, and radios that assembled and mounted (and unmounted)
> with 1 gloved hand.
>
> </rant>
> Nate