Slashdot Mirror


Ask Slashdot: Is It Time To Shrink the Ethernet Connector?

New submitter jimwelch writes: HDMI has shrunk to mini, then micro. USB has shrunk to mini, then micro. The wired Ethernet connector has not changed since 1988! On the Raspberry PI, it is the largest of the standardized connectors. Is it time to come up with a new version? What if, anything, would you like to see replace that suddenly clunky RJ-45 port? I rather like that (in theory) RJ-45 cables can't be easily dislodged, but at the same time dislike that its locking mechanism can be awfully fragile. And for that matter, I'm glad that on most of my computers so far there's been full-sized USB ports as well as full-size ethernet jacks.

23 of 566 comments (clear)

  1. Yes by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Let's rewire miles of data centers for no discernible purpose.

    1. Re:Yes by jellomizer · · Score: 4, Insightful

      One of the biggest advantage of the rj-45 port is the relative ease of making a connection. Having smaller ports means we will need factory built connectors. And need all wires to be presized for all jobs. Making wiring much more difficult.

      Besides most small tech that cannot handle the RJ-45 sized ports are built fore wireless networking. Which for most used is fast enough.

      --
      If something is so important that you feel the need to post it on the internet... It probably isn't that important.
    2. Re: Yes by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Wireless? You mean that shit that never connects at top speed, is highly susceptible to outside interference and has a very limited range?

    3. Re:Yes by jandrese · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Not while fiber transceivers cost 20x as much as copper.

      --

      I read the internet for the articles.
    4. Re: Yes by amRadioHed · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Yes, exactly. The stuff that's good enough for most consumers. And it's funny to complain about range as a downside of WiFi. What's the range of a 10" Ethernet cable?

      --
      We hope your rules and wisdom choke you / Now we are one in everlasting peace
    5. Re:Yes by Lehk228 · · Score: 3, Insightful

      it's probably going to be another 30 years, we keep getting faster rates over copper, and copper is cheaper and easier to work with, and more robust

      --
      Snowden and Manning are heroes.
    6. Re: Yes by Pentium100 · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Almost nobody uses desktops? Really? Or is it just the fact that desktops 1) can be upgraded and 2) last longer anyway, so people are not buying a new one every year like they do with a phone?

  2. As with so many "is it time" questions... no. by PsychoSlashDot · · Score: 4, Insightful

    No. Leave it alone. Devices that are too thin for a standard jack are perfect candidates for a micro-USB ethernet adapter. The default assumption for RJ45 should remain as it is. No need for yet another connector to require we carry five different possible adapters and cables.

    --
    "Oh no... he found the .sig setting."
    1. Re:As with so many "is it time" questions... no. by Harlequin80 · · Score: 3, Insightful

      I've never understood why docking stations aren't absolutely everywhere. They are one of the biggest reasons I keep buying Dell latitude laptops. Docking stations is permanently plugged in with all my peripherals and a power supply and I just sit down to start work.

    2. Re:As with so many "is it time" questions... no. by Carewolf · · Score: 1, Insightful

      It is easy to understand once you see the price they demand. The problem is specifically that use proprietary connectors and then demand absolutely insane prices for the docks.

      New ones for $172 CAD: http://accessories.us.dell.com...,

      I wouldn't call that insane pricing.

      I would. They are port extenders. Anything above 100$ is crazy, 172$ is insane. 50$ from new would make more sense for what they are.

  3. Please don't by iris-n · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Ethernet is the one reliable standard that will always work, everywhere, no questions asked. And I need it. I can go on for days without eating. I can go on for hours without drinking. Without Ethernet? Good old, reliable, wired, Ethernet? What am I alive for? And don't come with your fancy "Wi-Fi" b/g/n. It never works when you need it. Airport? Conference? eduroam? It does not work! And I need it to work, this is the Internet we're talking about!

    --
    entropy happens
  4. Re:One showstopper by Shadow99_1 · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Not just this, but I can go and cut and make a new cat 5/6 cable in a couple minutes. Anything smaller and I'm certainly not running a length of cable out and crimping my own RJ45 heads on. We could probably come up with something to use 'from the wall', as those 'short' runs to a PC or laptop are the smallest of all runs of the cable itself and if you really want to do that you already can with USB (though it requires an adapter and is therefore expensive).

    Any replacement to Cat 5/6 and it's trusty RJ45 connectors needs to be as easy and offer as much bandwidth as the current tech to gain any traction. If it requires premade cables in a variety of lengths I just don't see it gaining any traction in a typical office or business environment. Heck one of the last places I worked for wanted me to make cables for everything because they were to cheap to have a variety of common lengths (7, 10, & 15 foot cables for instance) on hand, when we had a spool of Cat 5e cable for our wall/ceiling wiring needs.

    --
    we are all invisible unless we choose otherwise
  5. Field installation by Smidge204 · · Score: 4, Insightful

    One of the reasons, I think, that the RJ-45 connector has lasted so long is it's very easy to field install. A bag of cable ends and a relatively inexpensive crimp tool is all you need, and the wires are easy to insert. Making a connector that's appreciably smaller would make field installation of ends that much more difficult.

    Introduce a new standard and now you'll need new cables (wall jacks to device) or adapters (cables to device) to keep new things interchangeable with existing things. That doesn't simplify anything.

    That's assuming it CAN be made smaller, given the cable is unlikely to change.
    =Smidge=

  6. Re:Uhhhhhhhh... No connector and no cables maybe?! by CAOgdin · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Sure; let's set up WIFI only for Corporations with 10,000 people on a campus! Great idea!!!

  7. What is this I don't even by TWX · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Ethernet is an attempt to use the cheapest cable possible for the longest distance possible for the highest bandwidth possible. That's part why TIA/EIA standards do not specify the cable, they specify the performance characteristics that must be met. This is why it's possible to run Gigbit over some particularly short distances over Category 3, or why it's possible to get 10G out of 6 or 5e for some short distances.

    Changing the connector means that the horizontal cable gets more expensive, the jacks get more expensive, the patch cord material and plugs get more expensive.

    There already has been interest in changing the connector, larger. There was a cable that put four pins on the top to attempt to electrically separate the pairs to reduce crosstalk. It didn't take off, probably because the developer didn't want to license it cheaply enough, ie, free. There were attempts at hermaphroditic cables, but they were larger and had licensing issues.

    The 8P8C jack used as RJ-45 for Ethernet, RJ-48 for T1 and ISDN, and RJ-61 for telephone is not going anywhere.

    --
    Do not look into laser with remaining eye.
  8. Re:In practice by bloodhawk · · Score: 5, Insightful

    yeah.. no. WiFi sucks balls for for anything you actually want to be reliably connected even in the home.

  9. Re:What is an "Ethernet Connector"? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

    The IP-phone on my desk uses POE, no power cable. Wifi sucks, in our building with lots of concrete walls, metal bookshelves, and equipment generating interference sometimes you struggle to connect even when standing underneath the thing and then throughput is crap.

    Try updating a lab of 45 machines using Deploy Studio over wireless.

  10. Re:In practice by Gojira+Shipi-Taro · · Score: 5, Insightful

    I live in a high rise apartment. There are no less than 200 Wifi networks within range of my unit. There is a FUCKTON of interference. Connections themselves may be somewhat reliable, but lag and pausing and delays are inevitable. There's not a single channel that can reliably be used. There is a tremendous amount of bandwidth connection, and there's no reasonable way to eliminate it.

    For anything requiring reliable, fast, usable connections; gaming, media streaming, etc, I use a wired connection. There is no substitute in an environment like this.

    --
    "Oh my God. This is terrible. This is the end of my Presidency. I'm fucked."; ~ Donald J. Trump
  11. A reliable standard by pz · · Score: 5, Insightful

    The beauty of the RJ-45 standard is that it has low insertion force, a positive engagement report (the click when the cable seats properly), and it is essentially impossible to put in the wrong way. It remains in place without screws, and yet releases easily. The only shortcoming it has is the fragility of the catch mechanism when pulling cables through walls or cable trays, but various manufacturers have come up with a range of boot designs to circumvent that problem. You can recognise the connector port by feel, and know the orientation blindly (ie, around back of the equipment you can't get your head behind to be able to see). Other people might disagree, but in my experience, it's the most reliable connector in common use. Maybe the RJ-11 (standard telephone jack) was, in its heyday, more commonly deployed, but probably not. I have never, ever, not once, found a panel-mounted RJ-11 or RJ-45 that had failed.

    Compare with the micro USB: insertion force is high enough that it's close to the force required to plastically deform the connector when putting it in the wrong way, yet, it can easily fall out under many circumstances. There is no positive feedback on proper seating. The holes for a micro USB are indistinguishable by feel from many other ports (at least to me). There is no retention mechanism other than friction. The connectors are very fragile, and nearly impossible to join to the cable in the field (read: you can't make your own cables). The insertion count lifetime is quite low, and I've worn out quite a few of them myself. It's a poor standard.

    The folks designing the RJ-45 and its sister standards were frelling brilliant. The people designing the more recent stuff ... not so much.

    --

    Put my fist through my alarm clock with its ding-dong death inside my ear. - The Blackjacks.
  12. Re:Yes (Nonsense!) by Zeio · · Score: 5, Insightful

    USB is horrible. Every display port since VGA has been horrible Pick a standard and STOP.

    These are the current USB:
    USB 3.0 type C, USB 3.1 Type C, USB type A, USB 3.0 Type A, USB 2.0 Micro, USB 3.0 MicroB 10-pin, USB 2.0 mini-B 5 pin, USB 2.0 type B, Apple lightning

    These are the current video cables:
    HDMI, HDMI micro, HDMI mini, DVI dual, DVI-D single, DVI-I dual, DVI-I single, Display Port, Mini-Display Port, VGA (d-sub 15 , PC-RGB),, Thunderbolt, 3-wire component, 5 wire componen video, composite video, s-video, 13w3, 5 BNC RGB.... Cant think of more.

    This rubbish has to stop. I have probably 50 cables in various card and places where computers and phones live to deal with this horrible mess.

    You know how much waste this creates having to chuck cables all the time or keep piles of old ones around to deal with the fact my phones,DSLRs, camcorders currently have micro, mini and type-c all at the same time.

    This is stupid, wasteful and out of control. And now with Type C there is horrible problems with getting rapid charging even from 2A chargers with certified cables (the expensive ones).

    Please, for Pete's sake, please dont muck with ethernet or do it exactly one more time at most. Its sickening to think of the billions of miles of CAT5e and CAT6, even some CAT3, that would be obsoleted if the 8P8C plug was EVER changed.

    --
    Legalize the constitution. Think for yourself question authority.
  13. Re:Yes (Nonsense!) by KGIII · · Score: 3, Insightful

    I'm presuming that there's a diminishing law of returns there at some point. But, and this is a question - I simply do not know, is there really any reason we can keep expanding to having multiple twisted pairs all sending/receiving with well-timed off-sets so that it was a bit round-robin-esque and perhaps multiple simultaneous connections? A bit like poor-man's broadband where you multi-linked a couple of dial-up connections...

    I imagine it'd be fragile as hell but I don't see why it's not realistic - to a certain point where it becomes impractical. I'm thinking something akin to the trunks or OCs running into buildings and the likes - only more specifically aimed at a closer to the desktop, such as the router, the cable to the NIC even, etc...

    I know a bit about networking - the fundamentals. I've done some work with it because I had to but it's vital to point out that I've not touched anything professionally (really) since about 2000. I don't really see a reason why a thumb-width cable full of twisted pairs of copper can't be brought to the unit or even to the end-point. It's more resilient than fiber is, in the physical sense. Hell, with error correction it could just send notice and then function in limited capacity as it routes around failures. At least it can in the picture that I have in my head. ;-) (The picture in my head may not actually fit reality as well as I'm thinking.)

    What am I missing? Why is this not done? Why is there no CAT-55, CAT-60, or the likes? Things already support multiple streams. Even if they didn't, splitting stuff into that wouldn't be too damned hard. I imagine that it'd be a bit frail, potentially. I imagine that scaling might be a problem but that's what error correction is for. I imagine that error correction is going to add a bunch of computational overhead and that there's a diminishing return at some point but - are we at that point? Is there anything I'm missing that prevents us from going further?

    Why am I fixated on copper? More so, why am I fixated on copper when the rumor mill assures me that my *very* remote area is going to get a fiber service? 'Cause I've seen copper on the ground, bent by trees, and blown completely off multiple poles and buried under ice and *still* had reasonable throughput. They'll be hanging the fiber from the poles and not laying it in the ground - yes, they're going to and yes they already do. I'll take something slower but more reliable. Oh, I'll be jumping on fiber the minute it arrives. I'll also be keeping DSL and figuring out a way to automatically fail-over to DSL when the fiber inevitably goes down.

    --
    "So long and thanks for all the fish."
  14. Re:Yes (Nonsense!) by KGIII · · Score: 4, Insightful

    I don't know if I'd say "STOP." That seems less than intelligent to say. I'd say stop doing so for trivial reasons. I'd say stop doing so without good reasons. I'd say stop doing so for proprietary reasons. But, I'd not say stop doing so entirely.

    Why? I speculate that improvements will be had in the future. I say that gains will be made and technology will advance even further. I'd rather not prevent that. I'd rather not force them to not make new standards. I'd rather they had the freedom to make newer, better, and different.

    I just wish they'd not do so for trivial reasons.

    Make sense?

    --
    "So long and thanks for all the fish."
  15. Re:Yes (Nonsense!) by Half-pint+HAL · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Nobody's talking about changing the wiring or the standard, as far as I can see. What people are discussing is a new standard for connectors at the end of the cable. This would not obsolete any existing equipment, as the RJ45 connector is perfect in data centre installations etc. The new standard would be targeted at portable end-user devices, things that the RJ45 connector was never designed to cope with anyway.

    --
    Got them moderator blues I blieve I walk out the do', With these mod-points I been gettin', I 'most never post no mo'