8 posts • joined Monday 10th October 2011 19:46 GMT
What is up with all these people suggesting wireless technologies as a viable alternative to fiber for a NBN?
People, this is not a debate where everybody gets a vote, and nobody is wrong.
Wireless technologies are fine for casual use. They are insufficient for regular or heavy use. They need to be updated every 5 years or so to allow for more bandwidth (Look at UMTS -> HSDPA -> HSPA+ -> LTE).
YOUR data traffic while remaining light by comparison to the average will increase, and has been increasing over the years.
Fiber is the only technology that currently has sufficient bandwidth to not require an upgrade in the immediate future, while having plenty of upgrade options further down the track.
Ah, yeah. A little googling shows nobody else mentioning 6 Firewire ports, only the six Thunderbold 2 slots. The story's text should be amended.
As for the Thunderbolt ports - they can be useful since they are such high speed, although this method of connectivity is hardly ubiquitous, and I think most will have a USB3 adapter attached.
MAC AIR 13 in
I find your prices interesting, and amusing that Apple fell on the governent-agitated sword just as our currency took a dive. However I just went to the Apple site in the US to look up specs for the 13 in AIR, and prices start at 1099, not 1199...
OK so Thunderbolt ports for external high-speed connectivity makes sense, but 6 Firewire ports do not when one provides only 4 USB 3 ports!!!
Seriously can anybody even name 6 different firewire 2.0 products? I mean I would welcome a resurgence of Firewire tech, but I don't see it happening, so what has driven Apple's decission?
Re: the customer is always wrong
I run an Atom D510 as a "micro" server. I found the problem to be the bandwidth bottleneck of the CPU/Motherboard combo.
For me, it peaks at about 180* Mb/s through any combination of ports (Ethernet; built-in SATA; RAID card on PCI-E; PCI card on PCI). Now while that may seem plentyful, certain combinations were even slower (PCI --> PCI-E).
While the specific number is probably a motherboard limitation, the limited cpu bandwidth (in the form of PCI-E lanes) and associated motherboard support is probably the problem. This issues does not appear to be addressed in this new generation cpus.
* - To those noting that the gigabit is only capable of about 120 Mb/s anyway, I'd like to point out that the maximum network throughput when reading from disk for me was just shy of 80 Mb/s, and the 180 Mb/s figure was from SATA to PCI-E RAID. Meanwhile, network card was perfectly capable to read to and from RAM at close to 100 Mb/s.
I dream of such a day, but don't believe it will happen.
Even if it does happen, it will have only limited traction, since most of the porting to specific devices will have to be done by the users, not manufacturers.
I have witnessed and benchmarked the Telstra HSPA+ network at up to 150Kbps for the uplink (per connection), which is a fair bit better than the ADSL 2+ network. Unfortunately Annex M does not work for us as we are too far from the exchange. Of course this is subject to time of day, weather conditions etc... and it fluctuates greatly during a 24 hour period.
LOL This is Australia. There are no terrorists here. In any case methinks you have been sampling the koolaid just a bit.
Hackers, on the other hand.... Still multiple facilities with similar or identical systems are not hacker redundant LOL
- On the matter of shooting down Amazon delivery drones with shotguns
- Review Bring Your Own Disks: The Synology DS214 network storage box
- OHM MY GOD! Move over graphene, here comes '100% PERFECT' stanene
- IT MELTDOWN ruins Cyber Monday for RBS, Natwest customers
- Google's new cloud CRUSHES Amazon in RAM battle