I'm typing this entry on a laptop PC that has the following ports: Sound out, sound in, modem, Ethernet, TV, Monitor, Serial, Parallel, Docking station, USB, and AT mouse/keyboard.
Across the room is our TV/entertainment system. We have an amplifier. It connects to six speakers, S-video and S/PDIF from the Ultimate TV, S-video and S/PDIF from the Xbox, stereo audio from the CD player, composite video and stereo audio from the VCR, and S-video and composite video to the TV. This is in addition to the Ethernet running to the Xbox for Xbox Live.
In my backpack is an iPod. It uses a FireWire (aka IEEE 1394) interface for power and for data. In my pocket is a cell phone with a custom power / data connector, and a PocketPC with another. My wife has a different cell phone, with a different custom power / data connector.
I could go on.
The point is that there is an insane number of different connectors. Not only that, but there is an insane amount of wiring necessary to support all this. The area behind our entertainment console looks like a small animal could get trapped in there. And when we go on a trip, we end up taking enough different cables to fill a small bag.
Many modern PCs today have Gigabit Ethernet. Gigabit Ethernet can transfer data at 1000 Megabits per second. Uncompressed 6-channel 16-bit sound uses only 4.4 Mbit/sec. Uncompressed full-resolution SD video content is only 140 Mbit/sec, and modern video compression can reduce this dramatically (DVDs, for example, are usually at 4-6 Mbit/second -- and MPEG-2, which DVDs use, is hardly state-of-the-art anymore).
So why doesn't everything use Ethernet? Ethernet switches are so cheap now that you practically pay more for the box they come in than for the switches themselves. Ethernet cable is similarly cheap. It is the single most ubiquitous data connector around today. A mouse should use Ethernet. Same for a keyboard, digital camera, printer, stereo, TV, etc. No more having to have 75 different types of connecting cables, and instead of dozens of wires behind my TV, there would be just two per device: Ethernet and AC power.
Obviously, there are some problems with this scheme. My cell phone, for example, isn't even big enough to support an Ethernet port. Ethernet also can't carry power, which USB and FireWire can. That poses problems for the small devices like a mouse and keyboard, which need some power to run.
But it seems like the right idea. We are getting overrun with different connector types. Putting everything on an Ethernet network solves lots of problems. It is the right direction to move in.
You could make a better case for either USB or firewire than for ethernet, what with the power supply thing.
Posted by: russell on November 10, 2003 01:44 PMEasily overlooked in this argument is the EXCELLENT case it makes for a new entertainment cabinet. one cabinet to rule them all.....
Posted by: meredith on November 11, 2003 03:25 PMBut both USB and Firewire have other, more serious, limitations. USB needs a single host (PC), and doesn't allow multiple hosts. In the model of trying to connect A/V appliances together, which one is the host? That seems like a fatal flaw for using USB for this kind of application. USB is also slower than Gigabit Ethernet, can support only 127 devices on a chain, and (another big problem) can't have a cable length greater than 5 meters.
Firewire doesn't have the idea of PC/peripheral like USB does, so hooking multiple PCs together is easy, but it's still slower than Gigabit Ethernet, and is limited to just 63 devices on a chain.
It seems like it's probably easier to add power to Ethernet than it is to solve the connectivity problems that USB and Firewire have.
But I do like the idea of a new entertainment cabinet ;)
63 devices would seem sufficient to me for most homes, and FW isn't that much slower than gigabit ethernet.
On the other hand, you could certainly allocate the 4/5 no-connect pair of an ethernet connection to power...
Posted by: russell on November 12, 2003 10:00 AMhttp://www.hyperlinktech.com/web/bt_cat5_p1.php
Posted by: russell on November 12, 2003 10:01 AMYikes. Such very subversive comments.
In one fell swoop you are trying to put Molex, Amphenol etc. out of business. Under your plan the gross margins of Radio Shack, Best Buy and Circuit City will fall.
This isn't about smaller traveling bags, it's about diversity and how it applies to cables and connectors.
But then again I agree with Russell. Go Firewire!
Posted by: Just Al on November 13, 2003 11:10 AMI just remembered the other example I had heard of where power and Ethernet are run in a single company: my company's wireless network deployment. When Microsoft started running a wireless network across the entire MS campus, running two cables to each access point added enough cost that Microsoft's IT group came up with a solution to run the two in a single cable.
(http://www.microsoft.com/resources/casestudies/CaseStudy.asp?CaseStudyID=13779)
And it's not my job to support the gross margins of Radio Shack. I did enough of that as an EE student in college. I'm done now. ;)