100Mb? ok.
¿100GB?
It really depends on the type server I am using, workload, etc. I am usually quite happy with a couple of 1 GB connections
for each node.
If you are delivering VoD, on the other side, you will need 40 Gb connectivity per server.
As for clients, most people won't notice using 100Mb or 100Gb.. for them it is OK, and even for me, it's almost the
same, as long as the network is correctly setup, and I don't have too much "noise".
A 10GB ethernet connection has more bandwidth than a HDD IRL, and if you are using a CLIENT thay way, you have a problem,
that client is SERVER, or you like to make network backup of clients. If you do that, why not doing it at night?
In 10 hours, at 80% cap. a 100Mbit port can transmit some 35GB of data, more than enough if you are doing differential backups
(as you should), and, for what matters, you sould be using a central document repository..
So no, it is not that I don't want it (of course I do), it is just that it is not really needed in an office.
Note: at home I use 1Gb and would like to have 10Gb, but only because I have tons of hidef movies.. and this should not be the norm in an office!!
Note2: I do remember 10Mb. The problem wasn't those 10 Mb. The problem was (is) that Ethernet is no token ring: you have collisions unless you use
structured ethernet, and for that you need switches (not hubs), and of course get rid of the pesky 10baseT cables.. and structured 10Mb Ethernet was perfectly
ok for client/server software.. more than enough.
The problems we have now with the netword deride from web pages. We have to download the very same content time and time again.. for having less functionality
than "heavy" clients. That, and multimedia contentent.
Ho!! pass me the rum and 100Gb ethernet!