>Ethernet was invented in 1973 Is this the oldest technology

>>59107704
You can run a 100m 10Gbps Ethernet cable.

You can run a 5m USB cable, if at that, before shit starts getting wonky.

If all the shit you need to connect to your network is within 5m of the router, then get yourself a USB-based router.

Thing is, people who tend to need 10Gbps need to run it all over a fucking building.

Let's see
USB 3.1
>10gbps
>max length of 3m

cat 6a/7
>10gbps
>max length of 100m

You're right. Ethernet sucks. what a useless outdated tech.

>>59107771
The real question is why is SATA 6Gbps such garbage?

>>59107704
Well you see, ethernet, or more rightfully known as 802.3 standard, can be used over a variety of mediums.

You can find ethernet over fiber stretching across the fucking Atlantic. And USB 3.1 can barely stretch to your couch.

I know 3.0 standards for USB did not have provisions for optical, but can't be bothered to see about 3.1 or tb3

>>59107816
Who still uses SATA?

While there is a debate as to determine the definition on "still in use," AMD Ryzen reserves the title of "secondmost oldest technology to be used in modern computing, with semiconductor technology dating back to 2011 being actively developed and released in 2017.

>>59107704
USB 3.1 doesn't interface with routing hardware or allow you to connect to the internet. They aren't meant to serve the same purpose, but you already knew this.

>>59108396
you can connect to the internet via usb


its a PITFA,but it is possible

>>59108504
Yes, with a USB->RJ45 converter. Doesn't change the fact that RJ45 has to come into the mix somewhere, unless you connect wirelessly.

>>59108166
>Who still uses SATA?

Nearly everyone without a $1000+ laptop or a gaymen pc. NVMe is still very niche.

tfw you use a fiber optic adapter for your router so prevent static discharge in the lines and to prevent electrical surge damage during storms

tfw it also makes your wifi faster because you dont have ethernet antennas all over the house

>>59108638
how is pcie>nvme faster then pcie>sata

its the same bandwidth and interface limitations?

>>59107816
Hard drive still couldn't using 100%.
SDD had NVMe

Ethernet is outdated, use Wayland and systemd instead.

>>59107878
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XmxAcVvAO40

Heh

>>59107704
Isn't the Auxiliary (speaker/headphone) port like 200 years old or more now?

>>59107704
Headphone jack is older. RS232 is older.

>>59107816
Because it's literally good enough for all consumer disk drives.

Everything else that's not spinning rust has moved on to greener pastures.

>>59108755
No nvme is not the same as sata

File: 1485262515835.jpg (76KB, 1065x859px) Image search: [Google]

76KB, 1065x859px

>>59108733
>ethernet antennas

>>59109286
No one uses those anymore tho

>>59107704
>>Ethernet was invented in 1973
Are you seriously trying to imply that it has not been updated since then?
Modern ethernet is absolutely nothing like the ethernet from back then.

>>59109455
It's still the same basic technology that hasn't been supplanted by an entirely new, superior technology.

>>59109273
>>59109286
>Analog

>>59109488
Are you seriously thinking that ethernet is being phased out, or even becoming less popular?
It's becoming MORE popular. Even ISPs are using it for part of their networks, where traditionally, other protocols would have been used.
Also, don't conflate "Ethernet" with the medium that is used to transport that (e.g. Cat6). Cat6 may have limits, but Ethernet goes beyond that.
There are standards for 40Gbps Ethernet, 100Gbps Ethernet, and newer, faster standards are going to make it even faster.

>>59109517
>meaningless reply

File: serveimage.jpg (9KB, 500x500px) Image search: [Google]

9KB, 500x500px

>>59107704
This is at least 20 years older and is used in anything that matters

>>59109488
>still the same basic technology
What, differential signalling over twisted copper wire pairs?

Oh, wait, that's Thunderbolt and every USB standard too.

>>59108733
> tfw you forget meme arrows

>>59109488
That's where you're wrong, ethernet has gone from fully shared-medium to fully switched, which is a pretty huge change.

>>59109436
Obviously wrt headphone jacks this reply is intentional b8. But if you do a lot of embedded development, you probably use RS232. And the serial console on your VM is also using RS232.

>>59109535
not in the iPhone™ :^)

>>59109628
Try reading her post again.

>>59109628
He said anything that matters.

>>59107704
It's not going anywhere soon. Fiber had a hope of replacing it but fiber is not flexible enough in both a application and physical sense to be used in the same manner as ethernet. Cat7 should be a good show.

>>59109652
>Ethernet == Cat6
Please, anon.

>>59109661
I never implied all of ethernet is Cat6. Cat5e is still the most common cable I see. Probably will be for the next twenty years or so. Guess my point is fiber is not as flexible as copper is.

>>59109679
You're making it sound like an "Ethernet vs Fibre" argument, which is completely wrong. You're actually arguing a "CatWhatever twisted pair vs fibre" argument.
Fibre is just a physical medium, and Ethernet can run over it.

>>59109691
Yes, that is why I revised my argument to fiber vs copper.

nanoEthernet is the port to replace all ports, mark my words.

>>59107743
55m for 10gb; 100m for 1gb

>>59109737
plebs using cat5e still

>>59109737
>cat7

>DUDE FUCK OLD STANDARDS

File: remington_no2.png (1001KB, 900x794px) Image search: [Google]

1001KB, 900x794px

>>59107704
>Is this the oldest technology that is still standard in modern computing?
I'd say QWERTY is, introduced by the Remington no.1 and no.2

>>59107704
>lawl let's change shit just cuz it's old!!

You sicken me.

>>59110178
Is QWERTY really a technology? To me it's closer to a method/idea. You can take any QWERTY keyboard and make it any other standard without changing the way it works or even the way it's wired at all.
Tho this doesn't apply to typewriters so i'm not sure.

>>59110178
the electron is the oldest tochsnogglegie

>>59110246
QWERTY was designed with typewriters in mind. With previous key layouts, typists could go fast enough to cause the typebars to collide. QWERTY was introduced to slow these typists down so the technology of the day could keep up with them.

>>59111121
yet they trained secretaries to type really fast anyway.
Fucking confusing times.

>>59111121
Why didn't they just rearrange the stamping parts instead of rearranging the keys?

>>59111142
As technology improved typists could go faster but the QWERTY standard was set. It's difficult and expensive to retrain someone on an entirely new layout so they said fuck it. I have never used it but apparently Dworzak is designed for modern use.

>>59111164
They did everything they could but you still need 26 letters plus 0-9 and punctuation all to be able to hit the exact same spot at the press of a key. There's only so much that can be done the mechanical world.

>>59111121
Not exactly, at least not how I heard it. The point of QWERTY was to put the most used and frequently paired characters farther from each other, again so they don't collide. Dvorak is kinda the opposite.

This matters little nowadays, even between languages. My keyboard is QWERTZ, with roughly the same layout in QWERTY even though my usage of letters will be completely different as I use a different language.

>>59111204
>The point of QWERTY was to put the most used and frequently paired characters farther from each other, again so they don't collide.
This. It wasn't to slow typists down, but rather to reduce the potential for jamming when keys with adjacent typebars were pressed in quick succession. The qwerty layout is such that you're less likely to need any two "adjacent" keys as a letter pair.

>>59107704
>>59107743
>>59109737
I'm literally fine with 24Mpbs down max. There is nothing I want to watch that caused me a problem and most of the time I can stream it (or pseudo-stream it with clever torrent commands).
I only see a real need for faster technologies if I literally want to run mass internet services.
A small exception could be video uploading to youtube but I don't do that.

No, the TRRS cable is. 1880ish iirc

>>59111142
>yet they trained secretaries to type really fast anyway.
It might not even be true. The primary source on this is a paper submitted by Lillian Malt to Printing Industry Research Association in 1977. Over 100 years after the first commercial typewriters were introduced.

The problem was that adjacent keys could cause jams - typing faster makes it more likely to hit adjacent keys in rapid succession, ergo slow typists down and they are less likely to jam.

But there are issues with this explanation. The first commercially viable typewriters (Remmington and Caligraph) used layouts very similar to QWERTY. The idea that the layout was introduced to slow down typists depends on those typists using a better, faster layout on a typewriter that could support over 100wpm (which the Remmington could handle) - these typewriters did not exist. The science is also pretty shoddy - people adapt and can achieve fast typing speeds on pretty much any layout with individual letter keys and a normal press mechanism, certainly fast enough to jam up a pre-1874 typewriter. Finally, 'e' and 'r' are adjacent. Probably two of the most common letters to go together in the English language - if you're trying to avoid jamming, that was a poor choice. All of this together either means the 'slowing down typists' claim is either wrong, or it was an abject failure at what it was intended to do.

The third explanation is a recent one from Kyoto University, who claim QWERTY came about in response to typists working with morse code, which would be quite a lot of them. Slowing them down makes even less sense when appreciated in this context, as typists would receive morse at a speed set by the sender, and would thus need to type as quickly as possible. As for the layout; Z and SE are similar, as are C and S, and you frequently need the following morse in order to work out what you received - so they're best put in close proximity.

Molex is from the 60's

>>59111636
>Finally, 'e' and 'r' are adjacent
Not exactly. Visibly, yes, but not in the context of mechanical typewriters. Each key's lever extended directly forward from the center of the key, alternating between the different rows. Thus, everything was based entirely on the keys' horizontal positions on the keyboard. In terms of typebars, the order of keys (from Q to P) is QA2ZWS3XED4CRF5VTG6BYH7NUJ8MIK9,OL0.P.

>>59107704
>comparing something designed for making computer networks with something designed to connect simple devices to your computer

If being dumb would hurt, you would have died from pain already.

>>59107771
>>59107878

Why not make cat5 cable with USB plugs or USB over fiber?

>>59112869
Slow down there, Doctor Frankenstein.

>>59111376
>he doesn't have a NAS

A NAS running at 100Mbps is for all intents and purposes unusable as far as I'm concerned. Gigabit or bust. The day I add a caching SSD I'll have to get a 10G NIC for it and my rig.

>USB over fiber
https://www.amazon.com/s/ref=nb_sb_noss?url=search-alias%3Daps&field-keywords=optical+thunderbolt+cables+by+Corning&rh=i%3Aaps%2Ck%3Aoptical+thunderbolt+cables+by+Corning

For any serious cable lengths, it immediately becomes much more economical to just wire everything for 10Gbps Ethernet.

>cat5 cable with usb plugs
https://www.amazon.com/Tripp-Lite-Extender-Transmitter-B202-150/dp/B003WO40V6

Only about 30 meters range, and that's 2.0. For 3.0 there's no UTP extenders, you have to buy heavily shielded cables with repeaters on the end and they're about 100 bucks a pop for a 10 meter cable.

tl;dr if it were better the people making these things would have done it already because they're much smarter than you and you fail to understand that

>>59113469
Obviously meant for
>>59112869