5 ms·
Good luck with 40Gb/s speeds or pushing 100W on ethernet. (Sure you could use HDBaseT for 100W but we're talking about getting rid of adapters right?) It's defi
by givinguflac 10y ago
Good luck with 40Gb/s speeds or pushing 100W on ethernet. (Sure you could use HDBaseT for 100W but we're talking about getting rid of adapters right?) It's definitely not just for political reasons, that's disingenuous at best.
- cm2187 10y agoIs there any reason we couldn't switch to a dual optic fibre (for signal) and copper (for power) ethernet?
- joelwilliamson 10y ago100Gb ethernet has been around since 2010.
- bsder 10y agoThere is no good reason why USB 3.0 wasn't USB 2.0 spliced with Ethernet other than politics. It wasn't cheaper. It wasn't faster. The drivers weren't better. The connector wasn't smaller. However, HDMI (which is primarily four pairs of high speed serial--just like Ethernet) and later Displayport became the "solution" because of all the people pushing HDCP. Thunderbolt was the "solution" to the fact that USB 3.0 wasn't coming down the pipe fast enough. And that drivers were just too complicated. Why solve the simple problem of loading a driver at boot time when you can just give the peripheral complete control over a system bus? What could possibly go wrong? USB 3.0 is an "evolution" over 2.0 in the way that a jackalope is an evolution--splicing two completely unrelated things together (USB 2.0 spliced with 4 high speed pairs--just like Ethernet). But you can't charge a licensing fee for Ethernet ...