Slashdot Mirror


Ethernet Turns 40

alancronin writes "Four decades ago the Ethernet protocol made its debut as a way to connect machines in close proximity, today it is the networking layer two protocol of choice for local area networks (LANs), wide area networks (WANs) and everything in between. For many people Ethernet is merely the RJ45 jack on the back of a laptop, but its relative ubiquity and simplicity belie what Ethernet has done for the networking industry and in turn for consumers and enterprises. Ethernet has in the space of 40 years gone from a technology that many in the industry viewed as something not fit for high bandwidth, dependable communications to the default data link protocol."

159 comments

  1. Token ring ... by optikos · · Score: 5, Funny

    ... turns over in its grave.

    1. Re:Token ring ... by Lennie · · Score: 3, Insightful

      You might think so, but Token Ring based technolgies are still coming up every now and then, like FCoTR in 2010.

      --
      New things are always on the horizon
    2. Re:Token ring ... by scotts13 · · Score: 2

      ... turns over in its grave.

      (GRIN) At one time, ComputerLand was a big company. The Macintosh IIfx on my desk was the one and only token-ring equipped Mac in the entire outfit. Of course, the card WAS $1500.00...

    3. Re:Token ring ... by 0123456 · · Score: 4, Funny

      ATM is the future of networking.

    4. Re:Token ring ... by 50000BTU_barbecue · · Score: 1

      It's an excellent source of 93 ohm coax perfect for tooling around in old oscilloscopes.

      --
      Mostly random stuff.
    5. Re:Token ring ... by TechyImmigrant · · Score: 1

      >ATM is the future of networking.

      But I can't fit the last 11 bytes in the packet.

      --
      I should use this sig to advertise my book ISBN-13 : 978-1501515132.
    6. Re:Token ring ... by KGIII · · Score: 1

      ATM

      Slashdot is not your personal fetish site! ;)

      On a more serious note... Happy Birthday and thanks for the memories.

      --
      "So long and thanks for all the fish."
    7. Re:Token ring ... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Wouldn't connecting ATMs to the Internet make them vulnerable to hackers?

    8. Re:Token ring ... by hawaiian717 · · Score: 1

      ...and the computer it was in cost $10,000.00.

      --
      End of Line.
    9. Re:Token ring ... by mspohr · · Score: 1

      Token Ring was just a knock-off of real, authentic networking... ArcNet!

      --
      I don't read your sig. Why are you reading mine?
    10. Re:Token ring ... by Darinbob · · Score: 3, Funny

      Really the only problem with token ring was that you'd occasionally lose the token and have to stop work and try to hunt it down.

    11. Re:Token ring ... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Banyon Vines anyone?

    12. Re:Token ring ... by LoRdTAW · · Score: 1

      Cell, not packet.

    13. Re:Token ring ... by kasperd · · Score: 2

      Didn't Token ring evolve into a star topology just like Ethernet did? If things had turned out differently, and we had all been using Token ring today, the only notable difference might very well have been the name. How many people actually remember, what Ethernet looked like back when the technology had any resemblance with the name?

      --

      Do you care about the security of your wireless mouse?
    14. Re:Token ring ... by LoRdTAW · · Score: 1

      That was the old joke. Tell the user the token fell out the back of the computer and is behind their desk somewhere.

    15. Re:Token ring ... by TechyImmigrant · · Score: 3, Interesting

      >Cell, not packet.

      Just because the same idiots who thought 53 was a sane number of bytes to make packet also thought they had the right to just randomly rename things that standard network terminology calls packets or PDUs, and calls them cells instead.

      Let it be known, that when I'm master of the universe, I will not be tolerant of their mistakes.

      --
      I should use this sig to advertise my book ISBN-13 : 978-1501515132.
    16. Re:Token ring ... by sconeu · · Score: 1

      Didn't the token get lost in the ethernet?

      --
      General Relativity: Space-time tells matter where to go; Matter tells space-time what shape to be.
    17. Re:Token ring ... by rjstanford · · Score: 3, Funny

      Pity. Token ring gets even more interesting when there's a second computer to talk to :)

      --
      You're special forces then? That's great! I just love your olympics!
    18. Re:Token ring ... by Nutria · · Score: 3, Funny

      I can't tell if you're being funny or deserve to be beaten with a stick.

      --
      "I don't know, therefore Aliens" Wafflebox1
    19. Re:Token ring ... by AbsGeekNZ · · Score: 1

      Where are my mod points when I need them...."...or deserve to be beaten with a stick" excellent work!

    20. Re:Token ring ... by davester666 · · Score: 1

      The network runs faster if you get to hold the token all the time.

      --
      Sleep your way to a whiter smile...date a dentist!
    21. Re:Token ring ... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Not really, CAU's were invented and were able to remove failed nodes from the network instead of letting the whole network die because of 1 bad network card/cable. Computers no longer had to be connected to each other, instead they were connected to a LAM which was controlled by the CAU. Still a ring topology even though it's wired like a star topology. It was still a pain in the ass though, just not as much. Gigondo unbendable cables that weighed a ton that wouldn't stay connected properly to the LAM even with clips. I remember one of the buildings was wired with token ring. Management refused to stop using it even though all the computers had ethernet by that time. They wouldn't even let upgrade the cabling if they were so set in their ways. We still had to buy token ring cards(spendy) and install those. Management.

    22. Re:Token ring ... by Bengie · · Score: 2
  2. LANPARTY! by WillgasM · · Score: 3, Funny

    Break out the BNCs and coax.

    1. Re:LANPARTY! by OhSoLaMeow · · Score: 3, Interesting

      Break out the BNCs and coax.

      BNC? Break out the AUIs!
      10base5 was quite a bit more challenging to install, given that each cable tap had to be at a precise location and required special tools to drill the cable.
      Now get off of my LAN!

      --
      They can take my LifeAlert pendant when they pry it from my cold dead fingers.
    2. Re:LANPARTY! by guttentag · · Score: 1

      LAN parties never made much sense to me.

      Were you that overly-excited guy going from door to door in the dorms, announcing, "We're having a LAN party! Unplug your computer and bring it down to the 4th floor lounge!" To which I replied, "why don't I just stay here... I'm already connected."

      I always felt like the point of having a LAN was so you could be far enough away that I couldn't hear you shrilly giggling about the ginormous zerg rush you were preparing to unleash upon me.

    3. Re:LANPARTY! by i.r.id10t · · Score: 1

      With a multiplayer FPS, large parties with CTF or similar team settings were always a blast, esp with the smack talk going on.

      We have 2 labs here at work, separated by a sliding glass door. One team on each side, door open enough to hear the smack talk, but not necessarily the instructors from a team or squad type leader.

      --
      Don't blame me, I voted for Kodos
    4. Re:LANPARTY! by Andy+Dodd · · Score: 1

      Yeah. Mumble, TeamSpeak, Ventrilo - none are a good replacement for just shouting out loud.

      Some of the most fun I've ever had gaming was a DAoC LAN party many years ago - I drove down to visit one of my guildies, and his GF (now wife), some friends, and their GFs (also guildies) were all there. We broke out the beer and the switches and went RvRing the whole weekend. "HIBS INC NW!" sounds so different when shouted in a friends' apartment. :)

      --
      retrorocket.o not found, launch anyway?
    5. Re:LANPARTY! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Informative

      Many people who went to LAN parties were also not college students and not living in dorms an. Before high speed internet was a "thing" you had to be on the LAN to get optimal multiplayer. Personally for my LAN culture died off when pings fell below 100ms over the internet instead of the 500-1000ms over 56K

    6. Re:LANPARTY! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Informative

      LAN parties never made much sense to me.

      Were you that overly-excited guy going from door to door in the dorms, announcing, "We're having a LAN party! Unplug your computer and bring it down to the 4th floor lounge!" To which I replied, "why don't I just stay here... I'm already connected."

      Some of us figured out how to LAN before they taught us how in college... And even before building-wide Ethernet was the norm for homes, offices, dorms, etc, and LONG before internet access with sub-250ms latency was available to anyone outside of a university or major corporation. So yes, there were motivations to LAN before you got to college and decided the best way to spend your time was alone in your dorm room. Bro.

    7. Re:LANPARTY! by captbob2002 · · Score: 1

      ahh, thanks for the return of the nightmares! My hands still show the scars.

    8. Re:LANPARTY! by WillgasM · · Score: 1

      I've done vampire taps, but I'm really not sure why. They were well before my time. I guess our teacher was just bored in lab that day.

    9. Re:LANPARTY! by NorbMan · · Score: 1

      There always was something dramatic about hearing "NUCLEAR LAUNCH DETECTED" coming from a dozen PCs at once, though.

    10. Re:LANPARTY! by Hatta · · Score: 2

      Fortunately you can find RJ-45 ports on many 16 bit ISA cards that will work in an 8-bit port(e.g. 3c509). With such a card, and mTCP, you can network any IBM PC back to the 5150.

      There's something awesome about booting an XT class machine, logging in via FTP, uploading a game, and then just playing. No messing with floppy disk images, xmodem, or any such headaches.

      --
      Give me Classic Slashdot or give me death!
    11. Re:LANPARTY! by TheDarkMaster · · Score: 1

      Lanparty with all slashdotters participating? What can go wrong? :-))

      --
      Religion: The greatest weapon of mass destruction of all time
    12. Re:LANPARTY! by Darinbob · · Score: 1

      Yup, when I was doing IT type stuff, it was all vampire taps on expensive and heavy teflon cables. It also felt like a real ethernet in that it was CSMA/CD with one single cable supplying several users. Today most of the ethernet I see are point-to-point cables using full duplex to a distant switch, one cable per computer, thus you've got something like a star network.

    13. Re:LANPARTY! by Darinbob · · Score: 1

      I'm still jealous as I never got invited to cool parties like that.

    14. Re:LANPARTY! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

      LAN parties never made much sense to me.

      Were you that overly-excited guy going from door to door in the dorms, announcing, "We're having a LAN party! Unplug your computer and bring it down to the 4th floor lounge!" To which I replied, "why don't I just stay here... I'm already connected."

      When I was in college dorms, we had no network connections in dorm rooms. All we had was RJ11 phone service, so the highest speed network connection was a dialup ISP. LAN interfaces weren't even standard equipment on every personal computer yet. If you bought a Mac you got an AAUI port, which required an external transceiver ($100 IIRC) to be useful. If you bought a PC you'd get nothing and would have to add a LAN card, and maybe an AUI transceiver too (depending on whether the card had a built-in transceiver for a particular network media type). In both cases you'd need additional software just to have a networking stack. As for the games, only a pioneering few supported LAN play at all, and in those days, it was far more common for them to use Novell IPX than TCP/IP.

      So yeah, we had LAN parties. Sometimes we moved computers around, sometimes we just strung really long 10Base2 coax cables down the hallways, annoying the non-computer-geeks. That was the era in which the "LAN party" was born.

      But there's more to it than merely needing to do inconvenient things to play. Face-to-face networked gaming is actually more fun. Believe it or not, it's pretty awesome to be in the same room as everyone you're trying to destroy in a first-person shooter deathmatch, or everyone you're trying to cooperate with to overcome the evil computer AI in a giant WC2 game that lasts three or four hours. And no, headsets aren't quite the same (not that we had them back then anyways).

      You kids these days... (shakes cane)

    15. Re:LANPARTY! by fisted · · Score: 1

      APK's network can and will go wrong, since his HOSTS file filters all those corrupt slashdot lusers .

    16. Re:LANPARTY! by Ghostgate · · Score: 1

      Before high speed internet was a "thing" you had to be on the LAN to get optimal multiplayer. Personally for my LAN culture died off when pings fell below 100ms over the internet instead of the 500-1000ms over 56K

      You are seriously exaggerating ping times on old dialup connections. I played a lot of Quake in the late 90s and even on my 28.8 modem I could get 200-350ms pings to most servers and 300-500ms to distant servers. I never had 56k because although my ISP offered it, my phone lines then couldn't support it. Also, 200-350 was actually very playable because most other players had similar pings at the time, unless you went to an LPB server. But online multiplayer did thrive even before everyone had a high speed connection.

    17. Re:LANPARTY! by styrotech · · Score: 2

      I'm still jealous as I never got invited to cool parties like that.

      You really missed out! Sometimes all the molecules in the hostess's undergarments would simultaneously leap one foot to the left!

    18. Re:LANPARTY! by Voyager529 · · Score: 1

      LAN parties never made much sense to me.

      Well then let me break it down for you.

      LAN parties make sense even if everyone has Google Fiber. See, you're focusing on the LAN part of the description, and ignoring the "PARTY" half. Some people like dancing at parties, others like getting wasted, still others paint fingernails, and others still dress nicely and have a fancy dinner. There are people who prefer playing video games to those activities. When a group of people who enjoy video games wish to congregate and share in the activity of playing video games in a competitive or cooperative context, we have a "Lan Party".

      While you might not have had the best group of friends with whom to play a multiplayer video game, my friends and I still enjoy a nice round of Unreal Tournament, Starcraft, or Counterstrike every now and again. In our cases, not everyone brings a computer to the table. Sometimes we'll rotate people in, and those who are 'out' this round will socialize, face to face. When we play over a LAN, we know that everyone has the same games and the same maps. We can take turns teaming up on the person sitting across from us, strategize in real time without headsets or VoIP, and all have a shared experience in the process.

      It annoys me how few games released as of late don't include offline LAN play anymore, but some of the UT3 mods are amazing, and there's always GamerLinux - Alien Swarm is quite fun, actually.

    19. Re:LANPARTY! by antdude · · Score: 1

      LAN parties are rare, but still exist. It's fun to hang out with people in person beside being online.

      --
      Ant(Dude) @ Quality Foraged Links (AQFL.net) & The Ant Farm (antfarm.ma.cx / antfarm.home.dhs.org).
    20. Re:LANPARTY! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      yes, I recall working my way through overhead crawl-spaces dragging the orange garden hose, AUI/vampire tap, drill and drop cable. And the terminator... must not forget the 50 ohm terminators.

    21. Re:LANPARTY! by Shimbo · · Score: 1

      10base5 was quite a bit more challenging to install, given that each cable tap had to be at a precise location

      Well, sort of. There were markers on the cable, so you didn't install taps too close together and screw the transmission line characteristics. There weren't dead spots between them though.

    22. Re:LANPARTY! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Every tap always creates a change in impedance (i.e. harms transmission line characteristics) no matter how close or far away you space them. The distance between taps doesn't really change that.

      Based on wikipedia research it seems that the distance between cable marks was chosen to avoid an integer relationship with the Ethernet carrier wavelength. Installing taps only on the marks prevents resonance between taps, which is important because every tap does cause signal reflections. If taps are installed at a spacing which causes resonance, this would cause reflections to constructively sum into large noise pulses.

      So actually, the tap markers themselves are in a sense "dead zones". ;)

    23. Re:LANPARTY! by metaforest · · Score: 1

      I actually still have an Ethernet to Appletalk bridge that supports 10BT and 10B2 and it still works... well my local switch will show a link active, and dump packets onto it.

  3. Invented by this guy by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Interesting

    Q&A with the inventor: http://www.reddit.com/r/tabled/comments/1erztm/table_iama_youre_probably_connecting_to_reddit/

  4. Yay! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    40 years of crappy networking! But at least it was cheap...ish.

  5. good Ole Days by SuperTechnoNerd · · Score: 4, Informative

    " Ethernet is merely the RJ45 jack on the back of a laptop"
    When I started using it we had coax cables in daisy chain with 50 Ohm terminators at each end. I never forget spending all day trying to find out why the network was acting flaky, when just for kicks I changed the terminators and it worked. One of them was an open circuit. Go figure... We also had the 3Com 3C501 Ethernet cards the size of a bus (ok a full high/length AT card) which cost $500 each at the time. Ahh the good ole days...

    1. Re:good Ole Days by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "When I started using it we had coax cables in daisy chain with 50 Ohm terminators at each end."
      Youngster. I started with vampire taps on 75 ohm cable, 3 megabits/sec and PUP packets.

    2. Re:good Ole Days by smittyoneeach · · Score: 1

      I was all on 32-pin cables with cannon plugs going into my UYK-7. 80MB removable disk packs the diameter of LPs. Good times.

      --
      Get thee glass eyes, and, like a scurvy politician, seem to see things thou dost not.--King Lear
    3. Re:good Ole Days by gewalker · · Score: 2

      I also remember doing Arc-net and g-net networks, as well as 4 & 16 MBit token ring. When the PS/2 came out, we were paying $895 for 16 MBit token ring cards. Sometimes the good old days were actually the bad old days.

    4. Re:good Ole Days by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      N00bz, the lot of you!

      We were all on smoke smoke signals. And we liked it!

      Then that Samuel Morse and his hippie friends has to come along and ruin everything.

    5. Re:good Ole Days by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      GET OFF MY LAWN!

    6. Re:good Ole Days by AliasMarlowe · · Score: 2

      80MB removable disk packs the diameter of LPs.

      80MB in a single disk pack??? Do you know how many RL01 disk packs that would need? We used PDP-11 with DECnet (which was upgraded to thickwire ethernet years later). Mind you, the PDP-11 was already light years ahead of where we started - IBM 360 with a quarter megaword of drum storage and 300baud links...

      --
      Those who can make you believe absurdities can make you commit atrocities. - Voltaire
    7. Re:good Ole Days by SuperTechnoNerd · · Score: 1

      Dam your old -- smoke signals before that no doubt? :)

    8. Re:good Ole Days by SuperTechnoNerd · · Score: 1

      My father worked on drum storage at IBM for the saber system.. Talk about being old..

    9. Re:good Ole Days by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      What do I need make a dam for, and what possession of mine is old? GET OFF MY LAWN!!!!!

    10. Re:good Ole Days by cameloid · · Score: 1

      Smoke signals?! You kids and your communicating-instantly-over-long-distances, in my day we carved our messages into stone tablets, and some poor bastard had to physically carry them (sometimes with the help of a surly camel) to their destination. A shattered tablet, I mean dropped packet, meant that the stonewright had to start chiseling all over again!

      --
      -- Cisk for the Cisk God
    11. Re:good Ole Days by zaft · · Score: 1

      OMG the UYK-7. I think you and I are the only ones here who know what the hell those were. Ah the stories I could tell!

    12. Re:good Ole Days by SuperTechnoNerd · · Score: 1

      No CRC?

  6. Invented by this guy by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    and Boggs made it work.

  7. You damm kids. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

    Get off my lan.

    1. Re:You damm kids. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Anyone remember having to use a corer to set a vampire tap into ThickNet so you could ratchet an AUI coupler onto the colored band every 1m? Does anybody here remember... laughter?

    2. Re:You damm kids. by TeknoHog · · Score: 4, Funny

      OMG, I just realized that WLAN is an anagram of LAWN.

      --
      Escher was the first MC and Giger invented the HR department.
    3. Re:You damm kids. by Nefarious+Wheel · · Score: 1

      You mean we're not supposed to still be doing that?

      Anyone who doesn't have a sculpture of pivoting 10base2 connectors, and know how to turn them into a replica USS Enterprise, is insufficiently senior to talk to.

      --
      Do not mock my vision of impractical footwear
    4. Re:You damm kids. by drcheap · · Score: 2

      OMG, I just realized that WLAN is an anagram of LAWN.

      Then get of my WLAN you high bandwidth whippersnapper!

    5. Re:You damm kids. by UnderCoverPenguin · · Score: 1

      Anyone who doesn't have a sculpture of pivoting 10base2 connectors, and know how to turn them into a replica USS Enterprise, is insufficiently senior to talk to.

      I have a small sculpture of those connectors. It's a very lame replica of the Enterprise. If I had more connectors, I certainly could improve it.

      --
      Don't try to out wierd me, three-eyes. I get stranger things than you, free with my breakfast cereal. --Zaphod Beeblebr
  8. Yeah, it drinks pretty heavily now by TWiTfan · · Score: 4, Funny

    Ethernet's fiber-optic wife left him for Wifi. His kids call the new guy daddy. The child support leaves him living in a run down shithole where he can barely even do 10 Mbps. Life just wasn't what he'd hoped it would be.

    --
    The cow says "Moo." The dog says "Woof." The Timothy says "Thanks, valued customer. We appreciate your input."
    1. Re:Yeah, it drinks pretty heavily now by VortexCortex · · Score: 1

      Should have shacked up with that hot little MIDI number who was left out in the cold as the poor man's network.
      Then again, any pair would probably end up twisted anyway. At least they could have made beautiful music together...

    2. Re:Yeah, it drinks pretty heavily now by KGIII · · Score: 1

      *groan*

      2/3rds of "pun" is "P-U."

      And that was a stinker.

      --
      "So long and thanks for all the fish."
  9. Ethernet is really only 33 by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Interesting

    The spec might be 40, but 40 years ago was 1973. You could not buy anything Ethernet that early. None of it was actually available for sale until the early 1980s. I was there; I was involved in early implementations (anyone remember "thick wire" Ethernet, or the early DEC routers and bridges? Kinks and reflections?).

    That was actually one of the genius bits of Ethernet. It was designed (DEC, Xerox, and Intel) to do what needed to be done, not what could be done with the available tech. It took a while for the state-of-the-art tech to catch up with the spec. Which is why you couldn't buy any Ethernet equipment until around 1980.

    I'm just sayin', that for the people who were there, actually working in the field (not in a Xerox research lab), Ethernet is only around 33 years old. And it sure as hell didn't start out with RJ45 connectors!

    1. Re:Ethernet is really only 33 by K.+S.+Kyosuke · · Score: 2

      And it sure as hell didn't start out with RJ45 connectors!

      Ethernet is the hardware equivalent of Fortran in the old prediction: "I don't know what the program^H^H^H^H^H^Hnetworking standard of the year 2000 will look like, but I know it will be called FORTRAN^H^H^H^H^H^H^HEthernet." :-)

      --
      Ezekiel 23:20
    2. Re:Ethernet is really only 33 by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      This is kind of like saying a 22-year old is only 4 years old because they've only been "on the market" for the last four years.

    3. Re:Ethernet is really only 33 by rjstanford · · Score: 1

      Guess that depends on where they live.

      --
      You're special forces then? That's great! I just love your olympics!
    4. Re:Ethernet is really only 33 by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yes I remember those with a great fondness. Thats when you actually had to get your hands dirty doing networking, and actually know what you were doing

    5. Re:Ethernet is really only 33 by KGIII · · Score: 1

      Digital Equipment Corp had a fab and R&D facility not too far from where I live. (Side note: Anything under a few hours isn't too far away in Mainiac lingo.) Chances are that any networking equipment from DEC came from Augusta, Maine. Here's a newspaper article:

      http://news.google.com/newspapers?nid=2209&dat=19761210&id=UaYrAAAAIBAJ&sjid=3_wFAAAAIBAJ&pg=6509,2109951

      I never did a whole lot with them. I worked with some of the DEC Alpha systems, which were a 64 bit RISC ISA, I dimly recall them being quite sound and advanced for the day. The sad thing is I don't recall a damned thing specific about it... *sighs* I either burnt those braincells out or I've written new information over them. I should probably spend some time re-familiarizing myself with it just for old time's sake.

      http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/DEC_Alpha

      I doubt that there are many in use today. A lady friend of mine was on the manufacturing line and I had a couple of friends in research. I'd be surprised if there were any of the systems still alive today but not too terribly surprised (if that makes sense) to find someone running one in their closet somewhere. Yeah, it would be surprising but not too surprising to find a small local bank or business that still has one churning out payroll or the likes.

      Hmm... A quick Google (which is a verb I tells ya!) reveals this:

      http://wwwasd.web.cern.ch/wwwasd/cgi-bin/listpawfaqs.pl/148

      There also appears to be an AlphaLinux so, wow... I guess there probably are a few boxes left that still have life in them. I recall Compaq had some cloned Alpha boxes as well. I seem to recall some of their tech making it into a desktop but I'm going to stop searching before I get locked into a maze that takes me a few hours to negotiate and I'll post this now before it becomes a novella.

      --
      "So long and thanks for all the fish."
    6. Re:Ethernet is really only 33 by Smallpond · · Score: 2

      To be fair, we were running 3 mbit CSMA/CD at C-MU until we could design 10 Mbit interfaces around 1980. I still have the DEC-Intel-Xerox blue book.

    7. Re:Ethernet is really only 33 by JimtownKelly · · Score: 1

      yeah I remember thicknet from working at Cal in the early 90s. you had to be precise about where to tap in, as it was all about knowing wavelengths and how improper termination attenuates signals, not much different from an earlier job I had working with waveguide and microwave systems.

      --
      -- Jimtown Kelly
    8. Re:Ethernet is really only 33 by zaft · · Score: 1

      Um, the Alpha is considerably newer than Ethernet. We were using Ethernet (yes the thick version) in the mid-80s with our MicroVAXen.

    9. Re:Ethernet is really only 33 by KGIII · · Score: 1

      Oh, I know that. I was just commenting on the parent's mention of DEC. Sort of going off on a tangent, if you will. I was also a bit high as I recall. They made me think of DEC back in the day and I was responding to that. ;)

      --
      "So long and thanks for all the fish."
  10. ??? Weird wording in OP. by Jane+Q.+Public · · Score: 2

    "For many people Ethernet is merely the RJ45 jack on the back of a laptop, but its relative ubiquity and simplicity belie what Ethernet has done for the networking industry and in turn for consumers and enterprises."

    This is one of the strangest sentences I have encountered in quite a while.

    First, "belie" is very definitely the wrong word to use here. It means "to show to be false". And second, Ethernet is ubiquitous largely because of its simplicity... there is nothing surprising about that.

    1. Re:??? Weird wording in OP. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The comment is saying that even though it looks simple, it has done a lot for the networking industry. As if its stupid looking face could not possibly move the heaven and earth as it has.

    2. Re:??? Weird wording in OP. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      but... that's a totally different sentence than what they were trying to convey...
      they're using the definition of belie that means

      "Fail to give a true notion or impression of "

      and yes it's ubiquity and simplicity do fail to give a true notion or impression of what Ethernet has done for the networking inddustry.

    3. Re:??? Weird wording in OP. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I do not think that word means what they think it means. Underlie?

    4. Re:??? Weird wording in OP. by hairyfeet · · Score: 1

      Yeah anybody who had used the old thinnet could have told you why Ethernet was gonna win, everything else was a bigger PITA, not to mention how one bad spot or flaky terminator could take out an entire LAN whereas with Ethernet if one went down it didn't break everything else.

      So lets hear it for Ethernet, something that won NOT because some corporation rammed it through,or slipped enough money to the right hands, but because it was better than the alternatives.

      --
      ACs don't waste your time replying, your posts are never seen by me.
    5. Re:??? Weird wording in OP. by Nethead · · Score: 1

      Friend, 10BASE2 AKA ThinNET is Ethernet.

      http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/10BASE2

      --
      -- I have a private email server in my basement.
    6. Re:??? Weird wording in OP. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It can also mean to give a misleading impression (his strength belied his size), you stupid heifer.

    7. Re:??? Weird wording in OP. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "Thinnet" was Ethernet, you numbskull. So was its predecessor, "Thicknet". You're talking about how star-topology twisted-pair Ethernet (aka 10Base-T) displaced earlier coaxial-cable versions of Ethernet (10Base-5, 10Base-2).

      Your little anti-corporate screed is bizarrely misguided too. Ethernet had major corporations backing it and "ramming it through" -- Digital, Intel, Xerox, and 3Com are notable examples. The fact that Xerox PARC was willing to open it up to industry participation and standardization played a far greater role in Ethernet's success (and eventual domination) than technical superiority -- most of the competitors in the 1980s were proprietary (such as ARCnet), or at best nominally "open" e.g. IBM's Token Ring.

    8. Re:??? Weird wording in OP. by djlowe · · Score: 1

      everything else was a bigger PITA

      Not really. Back then, Ethernet was purely CSMA/CD (and later CSMA/CA), and at 10 Mbps a heavily populated network segment could quickly become saturated. Compare that to ARCNET, which, although it only ran at 2.5 Mbps, was token-based, and so scaled much better as nodes were added to a segment. In fact, overall throughput on an ARCNET LAN was BETTER than that of Ethernet then with equal numbers of nodes per segment as the node count increased.

      Later, Ethernet networks would move to twisted pair at 10 Mbps on Category 3 twisted-pair wiring connected to Ethernet concentrators (what you youngins all call "hubs" now)... and performance was easier manage due to centralization of the wiring at the concentrators: You could lower the node count by adding network cards to the server and then having each one connect to a concentrator, and then judiciously daisy-chain concentrators together to increase the node count per segment.

      NetWare made this easy to do, as it handled all of the routing internally. Later, it supported IPX load balancing at the server level, and you could have multiple NICs in a server connect to the SAME segment, which helped a LOT (http://support.novell.com/techcenter/articles/ana19941201.html - from 1994, and WOW do I feel old now).

      not to mention how one bad spot or flaky terminator could take out an entire LAN whereas with Ethernet if one went down it didn't break.

      You seem to be confusing the protocols with the infrastructure. "One flaky terminator" most likely refers to the 52 ohm Thinnet terminators used in 10BASE2 networks.

      In any event, once the first 10Mbps Ethernet switches became available, and later 10 Mbps/100 Mbs switches, concentrators and NICs, and prices dropped both for the switches, concentrators and NICs, the end for Token Ring and ARCNET was near.

      Still, in the SMB LANs that I installed and maintained back then, I preferred ARCNET over Ethernet or Token Ring, for its lower overall cost, better scalability and reliability at the time. I used to joke "You could run ARCNET on a pair of (metal) coathangers if you had to!"

      Regards,

      dj

    9. Re:??? Weird wording in OP. by SleazyRidr · · Score: 1

      belie /bil/Verb
      1.(of an appearance) Fail to give a true notion or impression of (something); disguise or contradict: "his alert manner belied his years".
      2.Fail to fulfill or justify (a claim or expectation); betray.

      Synonyms
      contradict

      People look at it and think it's just a type of cable, without realising that it's the infrastructure that the entire networking industry relies upon. I score this as a correct usage of the word. Also, people assume that things going on behind closed doors must be more complex than they understand, so they imagine there must be something more complex than ethernet under the hood.

    10. Re:??? Weird wording in OP. by drcheap · · Score: 1

      It's saying that the person who wrote it fails at using English.

    11. Re:??? Weird wording in OP. by KGIII · · Score: 1

      Be in contradiction with. That is the second definition in TheSage.

      So... Hmm... ...its relative presence everywhere and ease of is in contradiction with what the Ethernet has done for the networking industry...

      Maybe the author is trying to convey that many things tech related are complicated and difficult and thus this is surprisingly easy and effective?

      I'm not entirely sure, I'm not the author of course, but I agree that it is awkward as all hell. I'm thinking the above parsing may be what was intended.

      Hmm... Indeed.

      OED has this as the third verb use:

      a. to belie the truth : to misrepresent or pervert the truth. Obs.
      b. To give a false representation or account of, to misrepresent; to be misleading with regard to. Also: to be at variance or incompatible with. Also intr. (obs. rare).

      So, yeah, it's a rather unusual sentence but with some twisting and imagination I guess we can probably make it work as the author intended.

      -----

      "belie, v.2". OED Online. March 2013. Oxford University Press. http://www.oed.com/view/Entry/17366?rskey=LvhK03&result=1 (accessed May 23, 2013).

      --
      "So long and thanks for all the fish."
    12. Re:??? Weird wording in OP. by Jane+Q.+Public · · Score: 1

      The problem however was that the ARCNET daisy chain had a fairly short maximum physical length before you got signal degradation. And repeaters usually only handled a few lines unless you wanted to spend a boatload of money, so it was common to extend your daisychains as long as you could before resorting to a hub or bridge.

      The reliability was good but moving machines (which happened a lot at the time there) was a pain in the butt.

      I, for one, welcomed Ethernet when it became affordable. I had become so tired of crawling through ceilings and fishing down walls whenever someone moved to a different office. When the company moved to a new building, I had them run Cat 4 cable to each office (this was early 90s), and I put a big Ethernet hub in a rack in the new "comm closet", and a big patch panel on the wall. My life became SO much easier after that. I could actually take a Sunday off once in a while.

    13. Re:??? Weird wording in OP. by Jane+Q.+Public · · Score: 1

      "I score this as a correct usage of the word."

      I don't know what dictionary you used, but the first definition at dictionary.com was the one I wrote above.

      While it might be an "acceptable" use, it is still an abandonment of the word's etymology and historical meaning, which was literally to "put the lie to", not just something that was deceptive. Acceptable? Maybe. But it's a definite distortion of the word's actual connotations. Remember that words have not just denotations but also connotations, and that ain't it.

    14. Re:??? Weird wording in OP. by hairyfeet · · Score: 1

      Uhhh...the article was discussing what we consider "modern" Ethernet, your classic Ethernet jack (RJ45 I think? Its too damned early for me to be technical) running a star topography, so I didn't think I needed to spell out what I was talking about since TFA was talking about the same thing. I have heard of grammar nazis but who would have thought there were networking nazis? Not talking about you, the 40 ACs that all rushed to "correct" me without even bothering to look at TFS much less TFA.

      And I never got to set up an ARCNET so I can't speak to that but I set up waaay too many of the token ring thinnet and I personally was damned glad when it died. Now if we can only get 1Gbps routers that do IPV6 as cheaply as we get the old 100Mbps IPV4 routers I'll be a happy camper.

      --
      ACs don't waste your time replying, your posts are never seen by me.
    15. Re:??? Weird wording in OP. by djlowe · · Score: 1

      The problem however was that the ARCNET daisy chain had a fairly short maximum physical length before you got signal degradation.

      No offense, but, I NEVER deployed ARCNET in a "daisy chain" configuration, EVER. ARCNET, by definition, was a token-passing network, deployed upon a physical star topology [1], and was VERY flexible with regards to cabling..., and it MIGHT have supported such, but *I* never used it, ever, in such a configuration as you state.

      We ran RG-62 coax, from end nodes, to active hubs, in the early days, and occasionally split those with 4-port passive hubs, which, while allowed, DID limit overall cable length. By specification, any active to active run (whether end point or active hub ) run could be up to 2000 feet [2], which was one of the great things about ARCNET back then: You could use the same coax cable, everywhere, so long as you abided by the overall length per network segment rules. And, 2000 feet is a LONG distance, in the real world, especially when you're running cable to tie together buildings on a campus, for example. I could do that, with ARCNET, and DID, using just RG-62 coax, and judiciciously-placed active hubs.

      I, for one, welcomed Ethernet when it became affordable. I had become so tired of crawling through ceilings and fishing down walls whenever someone moved to a different office

      No offense, but that's not a failure of ARCNET, as a cabling system, but rather, a failure of planning, I think. Certainly, I had my share of "cabling angst", back in the day: Ran *miles* of ARCNET coax cabling, NO lie. Later, the same for Ethernet twisted pair: CAT 3, then CAT 5, when I had my own business, I finally subbed it out, because I couldn't do it properly: I couldn't cost-justify the time, labor, nor tools needed to do it properly, for my customers, myself. So, I gave all my cabling jobs, back then, to a small, local company whose owner I knew, and I knew they'd do a good job. Never asked for a kickback, nor anything other than they take care of my customer, and remember me for referring them. Never got a ounce of business from him in return, but it didn't matter to me: He does good work, and so my customers were well served, as I wished.

      However, to wrap this up? Regardless of time, network cabling is just something to be done. In the OLD days, we did it ourselves, as part of being nerds, we ran the cabling, connected it, tested it - how else were we going to connect everything, and be sure that it was done correctly?

      Now days, it's just another "thing", like electricity.

      Still, I *miss* those days, you know: Networking was NEW, and people appreciated it... ,

      Regards,

      Notes:

      [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ARCNET

      [2] ibid

      [3] This note has no reference. However, I have, in a filing cabinet, the complete specifications for ARCNET, as published by Datapoint Corporation, circa 1980. Send me an email at djloweathotmaildotcom and I'll scan them and email them to you :)

  11. Ah, the terminators. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I certainly recall the terminators (named after what they did to your network at the most inopportune times). The cheap screw-on connectors were great, too. They'd work for an arbitrary amount of time, but gradually they'd tarnish or corrode inside, the impedance making the network more and more flaky over time.

    Of course, I never had the $500 NICs. I was lucky if I could get my hands on an el cheapo ne2000 clone. :D

    1. Re:Ah, the terminators. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I certainly recall the terminators (named after what they did to your network at the most inopportune times).

      Speaking as an electrical engineer: no, no they weren't. Terminators have been around far before they were incorporated into 10base2.

    2. Re:Ah, the terminators. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Whoosh.

  12. Screw Ethernet! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    TOPS over AppleTalk will never die!

  13. Ethernet is only 33 years old by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Us old farts who were actually working in the field at the time know you couldn't actually buy any Ethernet equipment until around 1980. I remember installing a "thick wire" LAN using DEC routers / bridges around then. The spec. might be 40, but you sure as hell couldn't buy anything in 1973.

    The genius of Ethernet was that DEC, Xerox, and Intel speced out what needed to be done, then went about developing the technology to implement it. Would that that methodology were used more!

    1. Re:Ethernet is only 33 years old by LVSlushdat · · Score: 1

      The genius of Ethernet was that DEC, Xerox, and Intel speced out what needed to be done, then went about developing the technology to implement it. Would that that methodology were used more!

      Thus gave us the DIX ethernet connector... From DEC, Intel and Xerox...

      --
      THANK YOU, Edward Snowden!! Americans owe you a debt of gratitude (whether they know it or not..)
    2. Re:Ethernet is only 33 years old by bobthesungeek76036 · · Score: 2

      Did y'all know that the original spec for Ethernet was to be a wireless network???

      --
      Karma: Bad
    3. Re:Ethernet is only 33 years old by Guy+Harris · · Score: 1

      Did y'all know that the original spec for Ethernet was to be a wireless network???

      One of the earliest networks allowing collisions and using collision detection was the ALOHA network, and that was wireless, but that also wasn't Ethernet. Are you thinking of ALOHAnet?

      I can't find a copy of Metcalfe's "Alto Ethernet" memo, but this Wired article has a diagram from the memo that does include "radio ether" but also includes "cable ether" and "telephone ether".

    4. Re:Ethernet is only 33 years old by makapuf · · Score: 1

      and yet, those geniuses and 33 years of improvement devised the most horrendous plug with this brittle plastic thing (no nylon, only super breakable transparent plastic) which breaks every. single. fucking. time and thus render your cable to something that unplugs when you look at it funny. Then begins the hunt of a new, perfect and all clicky cable which lasts 3 days and ... aaaargh ! who broke my plug !!!

      (* slow claps* well played, fucking geniuses.) - I know I'm bad faith, but still.

    5. Re:Ethernet is only 33 years old by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Usually that's caused by retards pulling patch cables in reverse without securing the latch. Hirose has you covered.

    6. Re:Ethernet is only 33 years old by KGIII · · Score: 1

      Cite? Not that I doubt you but, rather, that I think that the reading would be interesting. I did try the mighty Google with the terms "original spec ethernet wireless" and skimmed a couple of pages (including the history section at Wikipedia) and didn't find anything.

      Again, it is not that I doubt you or the likes - I'm just curious and would like to read.

      --
      "So long and thanks for all the fish."
    7. Re:Ethernet is only 33 years old by real-modo · · Score: 1

      What you're talking about is the "registered jack type 45" (RJ45, or 8P8C modular) plug latching clip, which has approximately nothing to do with ethernet as originally specified. A telephone company invention... surprised?

      Bad faith? Bad general knowledge, bad research.

    8. Re:Ethernet is only 33 years old by real-modo · · Score: 1

      As a nomenclature Nazi I am also bound to point out that it's not a "cable", it's a patch lead that you are hunting for. The main cause of failure for cables is being chewed by rats, electricians, HVAC duct maintainers, earth-moving equipment operators and/or fishing trawlermen. Their connectors mostly get broken by vehicular impact.

    9. Re:Ethernet is only 33 years old by Jesrad · · Score: 1

      Thank you. I was born on September the 30th in 1980.

      --
      Maybe we deserve this world ?
  14. Thank you by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Switches in a chip for saving me from collision based hell.

    Best regards,
    Ethernet

  15. LANtastic! by CohibaVancouver · · Score: 1

    Now, where did I put those LANtastic disks? I need to get this 386SX on the network so I can share its Epson printer.

    1. Re:LANtastic! by HornWumpus · · Score: 1

      Left eyelid twitches uncontrollably. Fuck LANtastic, before I met _that_ I never thought anything could make Netmare 2 look good.

      --
      John McAfee 'It was like that time I hired that Bangkok prostitute; to do my taxes, while I fucked my accountant'
    2. Re:LANtastic! by drGreg · · Score: 1

      I can loan you my QEMM settings file so you can load the drivers and still have enough memory to load Quake...

    3. Re:LANtastic! by zaft · · Score: 1

      HA! I worked for Artisoft from '92 to '98. It was a great place to work, and the whole development group and corp offices ran LANtastic.

  16. Proud Papa??? by bobthesungeek76036 · · Score: 1

    Where is Zerox ... I mean Xerox these days???

    --
    Karma: Bad
  17. Xerox Parc turns over in it's grave by goombah99 · · Score: 2

    Yet another technology created a xerox that they never profited from. Yeah for xerox!

    --
    Some drink at the fountain of knowledge. Others just gargle.
  18. Most people would be wrong. by SpeZek · · Score: 2

    It's an 8P8C connector on their laptop, not RJ45.

    1. Re:Most people would be wrong. by Dynedain · · Score: 5, Funny

      You use KiB instead of KB, don't you?

      --
      I'm out of my mind right now, but feel free to leave a message.....
    2. Re:Most people would be wrong. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I always wonder how people that are overly literal with terminology ignoring common usage don't realize they are making a bigger faux paux than people who use the common use term that is technically incorrect.

    3. Re:Most people would be wrong. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I don't think they understand the difference between "faux pas" and "incorrect."

    4. Re:Most people would be wrong. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      And they probably changed all the Wikipedia entries they could find to KiB too...

    5. Re:Most people would be wrong. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Since "a telephone-system-standard RJ45 plug has a key which excludes insertion in an un-keyed 8P8C socket" I'd said the distinction is quite practical.

    6. Re:Most people would be wrong. by evilviper · · Score: 1

      You use KiB instead of KB, don't you?

      KiBbles & bits? Absolutely!

      --
      Slashdot gets worse every day... Pipedot: News for nerds, without the corporate slant
    7. Re:Most people would be wrong. by sjames · · Score: 1

      And yet, I have never seen a jack marked as Rj45 that didn't work just fine.

    8. Re:Most people would be wrong. by metaforest · · Score: 1

      Yeah... well. The industry has called it RJ45 as long as it has been available. While you are technically correct....
      It doesn't matter any more.

  19. The name Ethernet is 40 years old... by rafial · · Score: 4, Insightful

    ...but what happens to the bits is almost completely different. The original layer 1 (physical) layer stuff has evolved from the original idea of a shared broadcast medium (thick and thin coax up through the age of hubs) to nowadays being a point-to-point network managed through a centralized intelligent switch. And the layer 2 stuff (data link) evolved from the original spec of 1973 to the notably different 802.2 spec in 1983. In some ways, the great success of Ethernet is that it became the name we gave to whatever technology won out.

    1. Re:The name Ethernet is 40 years old... by ebno-10db · · Score: 1

      In some ways, the great success of Ethernet is that it became the name we gave to whatever technology won out.

      Of course, the only cooler name than ethernet would be æthernet. What other networking standard has a name that's a joke?

    2. Re:The name Ethernet is 40 years old... by fisted · · Score: 2

      No, you're mistaken. It can still operate on a shared medium, the abundance of cheap-ass switches (which aren't 'intelligent' as you call them) hasn't changed the actual technology.

      /. - get modded insightful for pointing out ethernet is point-to-point...

    3. Re:The name Ethernet is 40 years old... by LDAPMAN · · Score: 1

      It can only operate on a shared medium at obsolete speeds. Gigabit Ethernet won't do shared.

    4. Re:The name Ethernet is 40 years old... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      If you want a shared medium you can still buy hubs. It'll still work.

    5. Re:The name Ethernet is 40 years old... by evilviper · · Score: 3, Insightful

      In some ways, the great success of Ethernet is that it became the name we gave to whatever technology won out.

      No, ethernet remained relevant because it was able to improve, while maintaining backwards compatibility along the way, so your investment was never wasted.

      10Base-T cards still had BNC connectors on them, letting you transition smoothly from one to the other.

      100Base-Tx was backwards compatible with 10Mbps hubs & NICs.

      Gigabit offered backward compatibility with 100Base-Tx.

      Switching between fiber and copper is just a matter of swapping the GBIC/SFP transceivers in a switch, with the underlying device having no clue that the media is different.

      Newer standards retained backward compatibility with older, less robust cabling... From CAT-3 to CAT-5, to CAT-5e/6, to CAT-6a.

      Even though ethernet of today doesn't look like it did, originally. The upgrade path was always simple, smooth, and inexpensive, so it is very much an unbroken chain back to the beginning, and hooking up a modern PC to one of the first ethernet devices is a simple matter of physical-layer conversion.

      --
      Slashdot gets worse every day... Pipedot: News for nerds, without the corporate slant
    6. Re:The name Ethernet is 40 years old... by metaforest · · Score: 1

      That explains why WiFi is still at it's base standard called IEEE 802.... duh! Along with all the other variants of the 802 protocol family. Hint... it is not really about the phys-layer... it is about the data link layer... that is what really defines the 802 protocols.

  20. "...to connect machines in close proximity.." by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    as opposed to distant proximity?

  21. Actual content here by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Actual content here

    http://www.reddit.com/r/IAmA/comments/1erq51/youre_probably_connecting_to_reddit_through_a/

    You’re probably connecting to reddit through a technology I invented. I’m Bob Metcalfe and I invented Ethernet – AMA

    On May 22, 1973 with David R. Boggs, I used my IBM Selectric with its Orator ball to type up a memo to my bosses at the Xerox Palo Alto Research Center (PARC), outlining our idea for this little invention called “Ethernet”, which we later patented.

    I worked with the IEEE Standards Association to develop the IEEE 802.3 standard for Ethernet, which specifies the physical and lower software layers. Today Ethernet and the IEEE 802.3 standard are the foundation for today’s world of high-speed communications used in billions of homes and businesses around the world.

    I submitted this [1] to the mods awhile back so I could get on the calendar but I figured you’d like to see it, too. Now, ask me anything!

  22. Not exactly. by leandrod · · Score: 1

    For many people Ethernet is merely the RJ45 jack on the back of a laptop

    Laptops have no RJ45 jacks. Nor have desktops. They have 8P8C connectors.

    --
    Leandro Guimarães Faria Corcete DUTRA
    DA, DBA, SysAdmin, Data Modeller
    GNU Project, Debian GNU/Lin
    1. Re:Not exactly. by real-modo · · Score: 1

      Citation? They've always been considered as the same thing nearly everywhere. And it's 8P8C modular connector, thank you. There are other types of eight pin, eight conductor connectors.

    2. Re:Not exactly. by leandrod · · Score: 1

      Citation?

      https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/RJ45 directs you to eiðer https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/RJ45_(telecommunications) or, thru a link named ‘RJ45 (computers), to https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Modular_connector#8P8C. Ðen read up.

      They've always been considered as the same thing nearly everywhere.

      Yes, but they are not even compatible.

      Most people think SQL is relational, and it is not. It is definetly based on ðe relational model, but it has always violated ðe most basic principles of the model. In the case of RJ45, the misnaming seems to be based on simple visual resemblance.

      And it's 8P8C modular connector, thank you. There are other types of eight pin, eight conductor connectors.

      I did not know, thank you for ðe correction. But... citation? ;-)

      --
      Leandro Guimarães Faria Corcete DUTRA
      DA, DBA, SysAdmin, Data Modeller
      GNU Project, Debian GNU/Lin
  23. Re:Broken thing ... by Hognoxious · · Score: 1

    I have a PCMCIA token ring card somewhere. Same physical connector - once spent an hour wondering why it wouldn't connect to an ethernet hub. Because actually looking which card was in there would have been a waste of thirty seconds, right?

    --
    Confucius say, "Find worm in apple - bad. Find half a worm - worse."
  24. ReInvent already. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    Can we reinvent the ethernet jack already? We don't need that bulky Ethernet connector, a thin form factor is more than possible. Make a new connector/jack for new hardware and release cheap adapters for people how can't upgrade their network just yet. Or better yet, made it so we can replace the bulky RJ45 jack with the thinner one, make the tools required for it and what not. Cable can stay the same, just change the damn jack.

    1. Re:ReInvent already. by newcastlejon · · Score: 1

      Can we reinvent the ethernet jack already? We don't need that bulky Ethernet connector, a thin form factor is more than possible.

      Possible? Certainly, but is it necessary? It seems to me that anything small enough to need a smaller connector probably has wi-fi already. GigE is rapidly becoming the standard and I'm struggling to think of a device that would need that much bandwidth but still be so small that a normal sized port wouldn't fit.

      --
      If God forks the Universe every time you roll a die, he'd better have a damned good memory.
    2. Re:ReInvent already. by UnknowingFool · · Score: 1

      You can run Ethernet over Thunderbolt which uses a smaller connector.

      --
      Well, there's spam egg sausage and spam, that's not got much spam in it.
    3. Re:ReInvent already. by sjames · · Score: 2

      Yes, it''s been so long since the last incompatible connector hell, we're just inching for a new one!

    4. Re:ReInvent already. by real-modo · · Score: 1

      Can we reinvent the ethernet jack already? We don't need that bulky Ethernet connector, a thin form factor is more than possible. Make a new connector/jack for new hardware and release cheap adapters for people how can't upgrade their network just yet..

      Done. It's called the 802.11n patch antenna.

    5. Re:ReInvent already. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      No, you can run PCIe over Thunderbolt to connect a PCIe Ethernet NIC. That's what those little Apple Thunderbolt-to-Ethernet dongles actually have inside. The Thunderbolt connector never carries Ethernet signals.

      While you could in theory use that connector for Ethernet, it's not a real great idea. They're not really designed for the same kinds of cable media or applications.

  25. OK, So I'm Old by jasnw · · Score: 2

    This really makes me feel like retiring! I worked at the USAF Global Weather Center (AFGWC) near Omaha in the 1970s where there was this mysterious computer referred to as a TIP which plugged into an even more mysterious ARPANET thing. We'd hang 9-track tapes and ship data back to research and archive centers on the east coast once a day. As a 2nd LT my time was deemed cheap enough to spend babysitting the transfer process (which often broke down). Time flies when you're on the 'net.

  26. And still no 100Mbit to the house by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    We went from 5 Mbit to 10Mbit to 100Mbit to 1000Mbit to 10 Gig in my professional lifetime.
    Ethernet cards went from $400, to $200, to $100, to $40 to $15, to basically free.
    WHY do I have to beg Google or Verizon to bless me with anything close to this??

  27. Who remembers InterOp? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    The good ol' days - when corporate executives didn't assume that things just worked, and deferred to engineers where decisions required engineering input, instead of cherry-picking answers from their MBA-certified CIO.

  28. You don't use 'KB' by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    One of the things I like about 'The Adolescence of P-1' is the fact that the author charmingly, painfully spelled out every reference to storage capacity in the entire novel.

  29. Unbreakable BNC Connections by MrSteveSD · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Those BNCs were pretty tough connectors. When I first got an IT job, the network consisted of two 486s connected via a BNC cable dangled over the carpet across the room. A clumsy co-worker tripped over it and both machines flew off the desks, hit each other in mid air like conkers and crashed onto the floor. The BNC cable and connectors were completely undamaged though.

  30. Ethernets great but let's compare to 1981/1982 by tarpitcod · · Score: 1

    Consider 10 mbit ethernet on an early PC. It could push maybe 500K/sec. Figure a 4.77 Mhz 8088 had about 2500 K/sec of memory bandwidth. Ratio - 1/5.

    Now imagine if the common ethernet on your machine was 1/5th of the Memory bandwidth. Take a PC with 40 GB/sec of memory bandwidth. Imagine having 8 GB/sec over ethernet at a reasonable cost.

    Imagine the things we would be doing if we had that. Instead we commonly have 100 MB/sec. 1/40th of the memory bandwidth.

    Just think for a minute about how different things would be with a network that pushed 8 GB/sec. You could swap over the network, you could do all kinds of cool things.

    So while I really *like* ethernet I wish we hadn't slipped so far down the slippery road of lousy I/O/

    1. Re:Ethernets great but let's compare to 1981/1982 by tarpitcod · · Score: 1

      Ugh tired brain syndrome - off by an order of magnitude!

      100 MB/sec over 40 GB/sec = 1/400th of the memory bandwidth. So a modern machine with 40 GB/sec of memory bandwidth and 1 gigabit ethernet has 1/80th of the network IO of the old PC.

    2. Re:Ethernets great but let's compare to 1981/1982 by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You could get 10gbit ethernet.

      But that would cost you the equivalent of putting in 10mbit ethernet did back in the early 80's.

      The amazing thing about ethernet is not so much the technology ... but that prices have come down so far. From hundreds or thousands per node back in the the early 80's, to less than $10 per node today.

    3. Re:Ethernets great but let's compare to 1981/1982 by metaforest · · Score: 1

      I've been running GigE on my LAN for almost 5 years. It is almost as fast as sneaker-netting a FW800 drive over to the other computers on the LAN... with the time lost to juggling power and dealing with finicky crap external drives... screw it. Ethernet FTW!

  31. Time to bring back ARCnet gentlemen by TheRealHocusLocus · · Score: 1

    Moving information through wires faster than a human being can write and communicate a letter is an invitation to crass waste and lewd pornography.

    ARCnet fulfilled its promise to preserve the essential triumphs of human civilization. Through this staid networking protocol that moved with the steady and measured clip-clop of horse-drawn bits, our missive and monograph and manifesto could traverse the landscape at the calm pace of a cultured mind.

    Just as the act of serious writing required a deliberation of ink-dipping and quill smoothing, so did ARCnet provide the nation's youth with cheaply wired schools whose nodes tended to work even if adjacent nodes did not.

    ARCnet did also provide the engineer and the apprentice with a practical way to demonstrate man's triumph over the ether. Its bursty communications were often audible on the FM and AM radio bands. I spent many a pleasant hour lecturing students on the joy of packets and protocols as I moved from node to note probing with the antenna, its burbles underscoring my words.

    When one opened up an ARCnet hub and looked inside to see by what magic connections could be shared and the words of man thus transported, one could instantly and completely grasp its nature.

    "See here!" I would lecture, "how the works of man follow the same natural laws as flora and fauna, how the skeletal network branches out like the trunk of a vertebrate..." as my scalpel would clip the lead of a resistor and the radio across the room fall silent, "whose necessary conduction commands the invisible sinews of data, without which thought is impossible. But by the melding of man and machine and applied science... those sinews can be mended!"

    And I'd moisten my thumb in my mouth and press it firmly across the severed connection and the radio would burst to life again, a gasp of astonishment would pass through the room. "This then is your legacy, to serve as human bridges to move these bursts of information to the far corners of the planet. Our dominion will be complete."

    And my students went on to produce large scale integration with protocol and discrete components all branded into tiny chips manufactured in the Orient that either work mysteriously or fail mysteriously. This wholly Unrepairable deeply integrated all-or-nothing crap.

    Because I had failed as a teacher to communicate the value of simplicity.

    Now with a wet thumb you can't fix shit.

    --
    <blink>down the rabbit hole</blink>