Slashdot Mirror


30 Years of Ethernet

Babylon Rocker writes "An interview with one of the inventors of Ethernet." Metcalfe talks about the history of Ethernet as well as what he's been up to for the last couple years. (Not surprisingly, he's now a VC ;)

21 of 206 comments (clear)

  1. Bigmouth by Eric+Seppanen · · Score: 5, Informative

    Metcalfe has a habit of saying stupid things, I wonder why people keep listening to him. One great invention thirty years ago, paired with a huge ego, does not an oracle make.

    --
    314-15-9265
    1. Re:Bigmouth by OtisSnerd · · Score: 5, Funny
      One great invention thirty years ago, paired with a huge ego, does not an oracle make.

      Tell that to Larry Ellison.

      ---

      This sig intentionally left blank.

    2. Re:Bigmouth by Caligari · · Score: 5, Funny
      Damn straight. Anyone who makes such non-sensical, inflammatory comments as:

      "Stallman and Torvalds would have us return to the time when software was so new that one person working alone could change the world over the weekend. But modern software, [...] is more complicated than that."

      Should be ignored at all cost.

      --
      The moving cursor writes, and having written, blinks on.
    3. Re:Bigmouth by mcrbids · · Score: 4, Interesting

      An interesting quote from your linked to story:

      Why do I think Linux won't kill Windows? Two reasons. The Open Source Movement's ideology is utopian balderdash. And Linux is 30-year-old technology.

      Name a single networking infrastructure used more commonly than the 30-year-old ethernet!

      Why does this seem ironic to me?

      --
      I have no problem with your religion until you decide it's reason to deprive others of the truth.
  2. 30 Years of frustration by Malicious · · Score: 4, Funny

    Wow, it's been 30 years already, and i *still* haven't managed to get my mitts on a set of RJ45 crimpers...

    --
    01101001001000000110000101101101001000000110001001 10000101110100011011010110000101101110
    1. Re:30 Years of frustration by bluGill · · Score: 4, Informative

      RJ-45 wasn't used for ethernet 30 years ago. Back then it was 10base5 (for 500 meters max cable length), or thicknet. A thick cable (that I have never seen) running thorugh the ceiling, and a AUI cable running from your computer to a tranciever in the cable. AUI is that 15 pin connector (like a pc joystick connector, but a slide holds the cable on not screws or luck) on the back of many older computers. Mostly if you see it there is a 10baseT tranciever connected to it today.

      Sometime latter "thinnet" came out, or 10base2 (200 meter cable), which was a much thinner cable, and much cheaper. It is still cheaper than twisted pair for small instalations. Though almost everyone is using twisted pair because it is easier and more reliable.

      I don't know exactly when 10BaseT with the rj-45 connectors came onto the scene, but it started catching on in the early 90s.

    2. Re:30 Years of frustration by b1t+r0t · · Score: 4, Informative

      You forgot the best part of 10base5... the vampire taps! In order to hook up to thicknet, you have to stick a vampire tap into the coax cable, and that was hooked up through the appropriate interface box to the AUI connector.

      --

      --
      "Open source is good." - Steve Jobs
      "Open source is evil." - Microsoft
  3. Re:Maybe I'm Dumb by gwernol · · Score: 5, Informative

    What's VC stand for?

    Venture Capitalist. People and institutions invest large sums of money into the funds run by his partnership. He then decides how to invest that money in other companies - usually high tech. startups. Its risky but potentially high reward, depending on how successful the companies he invests in become.

    --
    Sailing over the event horizon
  4. Good Wired Article by R33MSpec · · Score: 5, Interesting

    An interesting but old article on wired about Metcalfe here: The Legend of Bob Metcalfe

  5. Re:Maybe I'm Dumb by GMontag · · Score: 4, Funny

    Apparently the old adage "A fool and his money are soon venture capital" does not apply here :-)

  6. Re:Maybe I'm Dumb by Beowulf_Boy · · Score: 5, Funny

    VietCong

  7. Photons vs Electrons by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Insightful

    According to Metcalfe, Ethernet is competing with SONET and Fibre Channel, although he claims that ethernet is winning due to its "internet-compatibility," among other things. To me, this seems like steps in the wrong direction. If fibre optics do not integrate well with the present structure of the internet, then we should be changing the structure, not sticking to the old concept of ethernet. When ethernet was invented, it took advantage of technology available 30 years ago. Since then, we have only been improving on the implementation. Despite the fact that SONET and Fibre Channel are the current "Godzillas," THEY are the ones with the novel technology, and avoiding them would not be in the best interest of advancing technology.

  8. Re:TCP/IP by spaceyhackerlady · · Score: 4, Interesting
    I think it might be younger. I think the internet switched to TCP/IP around 1983.

    One indicator of this is that the relevant RFCs (791 and 793) are dated in 1981. At the time there were all kinds of long-haul data links, and lots of short-haul stuff too. I remember the University where I was an undergrad developing their own network to connect terminals to mainframes. Then they added X.25 capability so you could talk to people in other places (and boy was it expensive!). Then they hooked it up to the Internet. Then they ditched it completely, but not before several hacks to hook those new-fangled PCs up to it. At the time I considered myself fortunate to have a 9600 baud SLIP link.

    It's clear from the earliest RFCs that people really didn't know what computer networking was going to look like, and were making it up as they went along. People were certainly networking computers prior to the final form of TCP/IP; just that the present implementation of TCP/IP gelled the same year MTV went on the air.

    ...laura

  9. Xerox, Broadband by fm6 · · Score: 4, Interesting
    Two interesting bits of trivia. First, note that Xerox, which did all the early R&D for Ethernet, is mentioned only in passing. As with the GUI revolution and OOP, Xerox did all the pioneering, but dropped the ball when it came to actually profitting from it.

    Second, Metcalfe defines "broadband" to mean "high bitrate" rather than "uses a broad frequency band". Nitpickers like me have been quibbling over this change in definitions, but if someone like Metcalfe has gone over, it's time to let it drop!

  10. But...but... by A_Non_Moose · · Score: 4, Funny

    "The technology is 30 years old...who'd want to use it?"

    Wasn't that one of Microsoft's arguments against Linux at one time?

    And, I *KNEW* I was a geek when this kept me laughing for 30+ minutes...laughing so hard I had tears rolling down my eyes and my sides hurt:

    Ethernet: A device used to catch the Ether-bunny.

    {snerk...hahahahaha}

    --
    Have you read the moderator guidelines? Well, have you, PUNK? (and I want a Karma: Gnarly option)
  11. never been in Silicon Valley during dotCom era? by lingqi · · Score: 4, Informative

    If you have, you would absolutely, certainly have the initials VC engarined in your mind. These are the overlords that controls your life and owns your soul.

    Especially toward the end when all of them were changing from benevolent take-all-you-want piggybanks* to bloodsucking vampires that fires off one coworkers after next with glee**.

    *note1: actually, from the beginning it was more like the inverse of beggars: they often *BEGGED* you to take their money if you just had the stupidest business plan involving the word "internet" and "e-commerce."

    **note2: okay, I have to admit they didn't want to see the company they have vested interest fail, but toward the end, most VCs took control of their companies directly, and had no quarrals about tossing people out like used rags.

    For all the geeks out there - the whole dot-com -> dot-bomb thing taught me one big lesson: unless you make it to upper management or start out on your own (really on your own, i.e. your own capital), you are just a (disposable) pawn in this game.

    --

    My life in the land of the rising sun.

  12. Re:The world without Ethernet by tmasssey · · Score: 5, Informative
    You're kidding me, right?

    Before 1993 or so and the advent of Switched Ethernet, Ethernet would melt down under the weight of its own traffic. 40% traffic for Ethernet is an emergency situation. I've seen TR networks hum along with 80-90% utilization and the users barely know.

    Token Ring has built-in QoS. It has several levels of error monitors. These are things that are kind of added by switches, but are not a fundamental part of the topology. And if you don't have a *good* switch, you don't even have that.

    Of course, in the early 90's Ethernet cards were under $100 and Token Ring cards were $400. *That's* why Ethernet won. Not speed: TR was doing 16MBit when Ethernet could only do 10, and remember, I can acually *get* 16Mbit from TR, instead of 4Mbit with Ethernet. Today, with good switches, I don't miss TR too much. But before switches...

    Maybe that's why many, many very large organizations were using TR even into the early '90's. Try running 300 computers on unswiched 10Mbit Ethernet (the best Ethernet had then)...

  13. The "gigalapse" that wasn't by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Bob Metcalfe once predicted that the internet would 'gigalapse' due to IP namespace exhaustion and sheer load. It didn't happen.

    Bob has made a career out of making an ass of himself with idiotic predictions coupled with a humongous ego. He fancied himself quite clever when he called the free software/open source movement "the open sores movement." Har har! You may have a career with ZDNET yet, Bob.

    Hey Bob we thank you for ethernet, but you're still a jerk.

  14. My favorite thing about Ethernet by sbwoodside · · Score: 4, Funny

    is CSMA/CD . What a brilliant MAC. You just start shouting, check to see if anyone else was shouting, and if they were, wait a random amount of time and start shouting again. It's so simple and stupid that no one would ever think it works.

    simon

  15. He still doesn't "get" open source. by nathanh · · Score: 4, Interesting

    He makes this rather ignorant comment:

    ... it is unlike open source in that competitors don't give their intellectual property away.

    Open source contributors who use the GPL never "give their intellectual property away". Copyrights are very strongly defended; the recent FSF vs OpenTV story is sufficient proof of this. Trademarks are very strongly defended: Linus and RedHat have both defended trademarks. Patents are a sticky mess but even then the GPL doesn't demand that you give up patents; only that you don't use them to restrict or impede licensing. The open source movement is not so stupid as to "give away" code. Strong ownership of intellectual property is at the very core of open source.

    The subtle but important distinction is that open source developers want to share their intellectual property. The philosophy is "you may use my IP if I can use yours". This is not giving anything away; it's building a community of cooperation. There is an exchange of value between two parties even though the exchange is not monetary.

    I suppose it's possible to argue that BSD zealots are giving their intellectual property away. Yet another reason to avoid the BSD license.

  16. No, YOU'VE got to be kidding ME by macdaddy · · Score: 4, Informative
    Before 1993 or so and the advent of Switched Ethernet, Ethernet would melt down under the weight of its own traffic. 40% traffic for Ethernet is an emergency situation.

    No, you're kidding me, right?

    I can't believe this FUD is still out there after 30 years. Contrary to popular and mis-guided belief, an Ethernet will NOT saturate itself at 37% utilization. Period. Anyone that honestly believes that should give the token ring and ATM salesdroids and spin doctors a great big pat on the back because that's exactly what it is: sales doubletalk and spin from vendors of competing technologies. For christ's sake, this myth was laid to rest in September of 1988 . This FUD relies on over-simplifications of assumptions in the theory and inadequacies in the testing procedures.

    I can't believe you'd honestly bring it up. Anyone with even a marginal amount of actual networking experience knows this to be FUD. Next time think before you speak about something you know nothing about.