The only bad thing about Ethernet cables is that they’re shaped like a goddamn grappling hook. If I wanna pull an Ethernet cable through my desk, I must understand that every other cable in its path is coming with it.
I've never heard it called foreskin, that's pretty funny, but FYI, the proper term is "boot". And I'm a big fan of no boots in the rack. They are nice for desks and places cables might be rearranged constantly, but in switches and backs of servers they just slow you down.
Not to be that person but ethernet is the specification, the "grappling hook" you are referring to is the connector (Rj45 8p8c). Ethernet has a ton of different connectors in the spec from SFP to DE-9 and even HDMI.
Why not? I prefer a hard wired connection over wifi where possible any day. The speeds are more than adequate for 99.9% of needs, it’s pretty secure, what’s not to like?
The speeds of wired ethernet are typically faster than wifi, and are consistantly more reliable.
I've worked in RF for my entire career, and I'll always recommend a wired solution as the best option unless the use case requires the hardware to be moving arbitrarily.
I'm really confused by the number of people here that are conflating Ethernet as a protocol and the physical medium it runs over.
Coxial, fiber, and twisted pairs, can all carry different protocols. None of them are as ubiquitous in the home as Ethernet. Alternative network technologies are usually specific purpose, like fibre channel for storage, or infiniband for low latency, or 5G for wireless telecommunications.
It's a very long lived protocol and it's a testament to its lightweight and flexible nature.
Ethernet really is a framework for higher level protocols where increasing change happens.
IP addresses? Not Ethernet, that's all Internet protocol.
It's more reminiscent of when electricity in the home was becoming common place. Before standardisation there was all kinds of chaos with different sockets, voltage, AC vs. DC etc. Although arguably that's a less settled debate with suppliers and home users often preferring different standards.
I just want to say that my home network is entirely ethernet, and I have a few fiber connections in there that are also ethernet.
The vast majority of the ethernet connections out there are done over category (5/5e/6/6a) cable, at least when it comes to end users, but that's not the only thing that can transmit ethernet.
802.11 is extremely similar to ethernet, though, very notably, it is not ethernet. It is ethernet compatible, and mostly just adds things like encryption and source and endpoint radio identifiers... It more adds to ethernet than it changes anything. Bring so similar, the end to end ethernet connection is almost entirely unchanged when there is a wireless link in the chain...
It is, of course, different, as it has some different methods for handling issues, and other things, but ethernet is in there.
Fact is, ethernet is not your category cable, nor your 8p8c "rj45" cable connectors.
There are so many protocols and standards that work together to make networks function that many have not observed outside of the practical application of LAN networks. Thus all the terms get conflated together because the vast majority have not observed these things used in any other context.
Category cable is just a standard for twisted pair wiring. "Rj45" is actually a very specific connector and signaling that has nothing to do with LAN networks. Most of the wiring standards used are born from other purposes, and few know the history behind it.
I was having a discussion about this with a colleague at work about the so-called "HDMI over Ethernet" and how it's a misnomer. As you said, Ethernet is a protocol, not a physical medium. I know a lot of people refer to the cable as "Ethernet cable" but the HDMI signal is being sent over CAT6 cables. There's no encapsulation into Ethernet frames being done.
Ethernet is gonna be, if its not already, one of those lifetime IEC standards that everyone has to support similar to how there are 20 different power plug standards, and someday USB will replace those. Boy, Ethernet over USB. That'll be the day...
250 years from now they'll be running Cat6 in mega-spaceships because it works, and the error-correction will be good enough for cosmic ray noise.
Hmm I’ve got an old Compaq 575e with a PCNet32 nic, and an old 3com 3c509 ISA adapter in a closet with 10base2 and AUI ports.
Use a modem router or managed switch to get down to 100baseT, give this box a Linux distro, enable Ethernet bridging in the kernel, and slaps case this baby can drop almost 20k packets a second, no sweat!
It works and supports bandwidth well beyond what the vast majority of usecases could ever saturate -- and we get new iterations all the time which increase that ceiling. RJ45 connectors and their respective ports are everywhere. Sure, we have "better" types of cables and connectors for networking, but they're almost always a staggering amount of overkill for the application and are not as common.
When did RJ45 last got a relevant update? 1 Gb/s is more than 2 decades old. It is still way more than enough for almost everyone. And it does not need a lot of power to operate.
They are coming out with new cabling standards to allow multi gbps over extended distances. There is still a lot of room for growth. You are right that nothing more is needed for the average use case though.
One person wrote an article on it a few weeks ago and for some reason everyone clicked on it, so now similar articles are being written to capitalize on that success.
Why wouldn't it be? I don't understand the point of this article. It's not like some other direct P2P communication medium is going to come along and upend it. It doesn't really make sense to run fiber inside your home. You don't need that kind of bandwidth for such a small number of devices and it would be prohibitively expensive since you need a specialized, highly trained technician to run it - unlike Ethernet, where any sufficiently motivated person can do so. I've heard that the people that run fiber for ISPs make something like $200/hr or so.
Running fibre really isn't as complicated as you make it out to be. The only problem is that you can't do any 90° turns, so just running it along the walls isn't possible. And the fact that the lasers each cost about 30€ for your standard 10G connection isn't really helping either.
And I really would like to see the job where running fiber gets you $200/hrs, i would switvh to there on the spot. The most complicated part is splicing 2 cables together and that isn't all too hard with the right tools and machines.
The article isn't talking about cables at all, but rather the ethernet protocol that is used as a standard for data transfer for a long time now. It has nothing to do with the debat over fiber vs. copper.
It falls under the low voltage // communications lines in most US states, so standard electricians union pay. It's pretty good, but not $400,000 salary good.
Depends entirely what type of fiber you want to run. I wouldn't consider running fibre strands in the home but normal jacketed fiber can be run without anything specialised. The armoured stuff can take a lot more abuse than a standard "Ethernet" cable.
Google has so much pull now that they alone can define a "web standard" by adding it to Chromium/Chrome. If it's there for more than a year and used by major websites, people will ever forgot it wasn't agreed upon by all parties. Any other browser will implement it simply because of the market share.