I’ve been wondering this myself - I’m over on the enterprise wireless side of the house, so I’m not familiar with the richter details on this product line at all other than the fact that the AP hardware looks awfully familiar. I do appreciate the absolute breath of fresh air that is the starting of the functional max client per AP capacity rather than the absurdly high association limit that seemingly everyone in the industry is touting as “AP capacity”. Where I’m also a little confused on this is whether the “100 users” is a functional management limit intended to suggest the rough size of an organization that the system would best fit (as in, 100 managed users/employees) or if it’s a hard limit in terms of how many simultaneous associations across the system. I have numerous colleagues in the church IT world who are using Ubiquiti pretty heavily in their environments, and their typical deployment is 10-20 APs with about 50-75 staff , which would fit nicely, but on weekends, they get several hundred guest devices. I think we could use some additional clarity on what the guest capacity is. It looks like this is being targeted at the market space that Meraki, Ubiquiti, and Ruckus Unleashed are playing in (which is really ironic considering that Unleashed was initially Ruckus’ answer to the original Instant product from Aruba, and it eventually morphed into something a little more downmarket) Ruckus also attempted a higher end consumer product like this (using their low/mid enterprise hardware) but it never took off, perhaps because at the time the consumer market wasn’t ready for multi-AP systems the way it is now. I’ll be very interested to see how this plays out.