>it was a straight jump from 1GbE and it was relatively easy. It wasn't relatively easy, because you can't run 10GBASE-T over Cat5e, and because a 10GbE NIC wa

>it was a straight jump from 1GbE and it was relatively easy. It wasn't relatively easy, because you can't run 10GBASE-T over Cat5e, and because a 10GbE NIC was as expensive as the rest of the drive put together. Today you can run 2.5GBASE-T over Cat5e, but the standard was too late, and there was very little demand between 1GbE and 10GbE, so there are virtually no controllers. What controllers you can find are usually 10GbE controllers that can also do 2.5GbE. Until 2Gbps home internet and LANs become popular, there's no reason to expect change. >There were no intermediate steps to get to 10GbE That's the problem. Disk transfer rates can approach 1.5Gbps, so a 1GbE is a serious bottleneck. But 10 GbE hardware was significantly more expensive. What am I going to do, build a JBOD with a dozen disks and 1x10GbE, or put a dozen disks onto the network with 10GbE interfaces? So instead you need 2x1GbE on every disk, which complicates management and doubles cabling, switches, and cost. >We’ve gone from a single serialised stream to multiple parallel streams in order to reach next order speeds. Which is hilarious when you consider PATA.