this post was submitted on 26 Nov 2023
373 points (98.7% liked)

Technology

73655 readers
3949 users here now

This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.


Our Rules


  1. Follow the lemmy.world rules.
  2. Only tech related news or articles.
  3. Be excellent to each other!
  4. Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
  5. Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
  6. Politics threads may be removed.
  7. No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
  8. Only approved bots from the list below, this includes using AI responses and summaries. To ask if your bot can be added please contact a mod.
  9. Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed
  10. Accounts 7 days and younger will have their posts automatically removed.

Approved Bots


founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 

Ethernet is Still Going Strong After 50 Years::The technology has become the standard LAN worldwide

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] Telodzrum@lemmy.world 18 points 2 years ago (6 children)

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.

[–] Eheran@lemmy.world 2 points 2 years ago (3 children)

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.

[–] WanderingCat@lemm.ee 8 points 2 years ago (1 children)

Well you can run 10 Gb/s over RJ45 these days too

[–] Eheran@lemmy.world 1 points 2 years ago

How much power does that need to run? What does it cost? How many people could actually use that bandwidth? How does it generally compare to fiber optic?

load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (3 replies)