I don't agree. Next-gen cards will probably be (should be?) mPCI-Express, which have two holes for screws near the antenna connectors. I believe this is by specification (not sure). That would reduce the stress on the slot connector.SMA seems bulky and expensive for miniPCI. Mechanically this will create problems when the low-loss too-fat SMA pigtail will stress the miniPCI slot.
Why exactly is this done? Is this because "tower climbers" must work on the enclosures in the air and they damage the u.FL connector when opening it? And how come do pigtails need to be replaced as evident from the replies?With u.fl we have heaps of problems. Our manufacturers have taken to using hot glue to hold the pigtails in place
I can't wait to start seeing all those forum posts complaining about the 'sudden' change of connector (not everyone reads the forums), that they have to throw away all their pigtails and buy new ones, or even complete enclosures...sma cant swivel 360 degrees,UFL is way too fragile for 99.9% of users,mmcx has less signal loss,and most importantly very durable.With all these
facts the answer is clearly obvious
SMA would be the ultimate in carrier class reliability (threaded connector, heavier cable), but MT would need to space their MiniPCI slots further apart to support it.
I would love to see SMA cards, but I think that realistically MMCX is probably the more logical choice when you consider various topics such as material cost, routerboard engineering, and availability of compatible products.
thanks for the support but looks like our cries for compatibility haven't been heard! R5H is out and has an MMCX connector. What's worse, it only has a single MMCX connector, so I am presuming the diversity switch is gone in the hardware. While this is good for the many victims of R52H cards failing, it shatters all hope of true diversity support in MikroTik ROS.I fully agree with andreacoppini (post regarding difference with connectors)
I think antA: ufl and antB:SMA would be a great solution.