Ask Slashdot: Is It Time To Shrink the Ethernet Connector? 566
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.
Yes (Score:4, Insightful)
Let's rewire miles of data centers for no discernible purpose.
Re:Yes (Score:5, Informative)
Re: (Score:2, Interesting)
Servers would probably maintain full size connectors.
Yes they will, but not the ones that you think. Not RJ-45, but LC.
The world is moving to fiber. Copper is so 1999.
Re:Yes (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:Yes (Score:5, Interesting)
The world is moving to fiber. Copper is so 1999.
The world won't make any serious move to fiber until the key Amphenol patents on Lightcrimp Plus expire making field terminations easy and cheap. (Lightcrimp Plus already makes them easy but not at all cheap)
Until then specific applications will use fiber but common networking will continue to use twisted pair.
Re:Yes (Score:5, Funny)
Re: Yes (Score:5, 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?
Re: Yes (Score:5, Informative)
Someone clearly has never come in contact with a business class laptop. Your complaints about laptops are so 2004. And giving your employees laptops means making them work from home for free! Only the most important employees at my last company were issued both desktops and laptops, everyone else just got a laptop and a docking station at work.
Business class laptops are easy to repair and for the most part upgrade hard drives, ram, and in most cases, even the display (higher res). Not to mention "drop it on the concrete out of your car" reliable. Dell, HP, Lenovo (formerly IBM) have been doing this for years and years and years.
Re: Yes (Score:5, Informative)
I was not saying that laptops are difficult to repair or upgrade, though the consumer class laptops are (and business class laptops are more expensive). I just noticed that people usually keep a desktop for a long time before buying a new one (with repairs/upgrades or without), while a laptop is more easily damaged (by spilling liquid on its keyboard or something) and people buy new laptops slightly more often than desktops. OTOH, people replace phones/tablets with newer models even more often.
Which means, that the desktop sales are lower than phone sales, that makes some people say that "the desktop is dying, phones are taking over", even though pretty much everybody has a desktop or at least a laptop at home.
As for businesses, some companies that I know tend to buy desktops unless the employee needs to carry the computer with him outside of the office. The reason is that a desktop is cheaper, you can reuse an old monitor etc. Some other companies I know use 10 year old desktops ("If it was good enough when I bought it new, it's good enough now").
Re: (Score:3)
Re: Yes (Score:4, Interesting)
Bullshit. And I say this as a guy with a laptop on his desk, rather than a desktop. The laptop is convenient for working on the train and bringing work home on the weekends, but, in general, I'd be better off with a more powerful desktop at work (the lack of dedicated graphics memory absolutely sucks on this laptop). And there's no way in hell I would be happy with a wifi connection at the office, rather than the fast wired connection I have.
Re: Yes (Score:4, Interesting)
Wifi is laden with corner cases. Works great when it works and a b**ch to debug when you have issues. Not to mention randomly spotty. Great in your cubical, suddenly goes to crap when you get into the meeting room.
I am posting this from the 4G on my phone rather than the wifi, because my (fairly bleeding edge, though consumer grade) wireless router Just Can't See This Part of the House. That's 35ft away.
I don't know about wired ethernet going gentle into that good night. At least in new home construction (and certainly in offices), it seems like a no brainier to me: run the cabling up front to support ample power and wired connections. Amount of regret you'll experience later --> 0.
Re:Yes (Score:4, Insightful)
Re:Yes (Score:5, Interesting)
I want to see the fibre cable that can be bent in half on itself and survive intact. It's what makes copper so useful in buildings whether in the walls/ceiling or under a desk (which inevitably gets moved around).
Re: Yes (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?
Re: Yes (Score:4, 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?
Re:Thin laptop (Score:5, Informative)
Re: Thin laptop (Score:4, Interesting)
Re:Yes (Score:4, Informative)
A bunch of datacenters are already switching to RJ point 5, because it halves the amount of space taken up by top-of-rack switches and patch panels. There's no need to rewire anything, as they both terminate to the same Cat6 cable, and patch cables are available for RJ.5 to RJ-45.
See here [te.com].
I'm really curious as to what sites actually have so much shit in their racks that they need to reclaim 1U by replacing the 2U 96 port ToR switch with a 1U 96 port ToR switch. I guess it might be micro, sub 1U servers, but then I wonder why they don't use backplane ethernet in these racks. Anyway someone clearly thought there was a need, and now there is RJ.5; Also microSFP, apparently, because 96 ports of 10G in 2U is not enough these days... I'm amazed they can make the thermals work to get 96x10G ports into a 1U switch or line card.
-puddingpimp
Re: (Score:3)
Straight through would actually make the signal-to-noise much worse than the current standard. The current standards T568A and T568B has the split pair separate to act as a grounding plane between the transmit and receive connectors cabling to stop the cross talk since the wires aren't twisted in the connector. A straight through would just expose those pairs to the cross-talk and make the signal worse, especially at speeds higher than 1G.
Re:Yes (Score:5, 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.
Re: (Score:3)
I would be all for it if there was a discernible purpose and it's easy to see a half dozen of them. For instance moving to fiber optic. 10G is 10 years overdue but still stupidly expensive. TOSLINK delivered consumer $0.10/foot fiber optic cabling to the masses 20 years ago. We need to move to 10G at consumer prices and we should upgrade to a consumer priced fiber optic option based on plastic.
What I would love is a push release/lock system like Micro-SD cards and sims. Press in and it will depress
Re:Yes (Nonsense!) (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.
Re:Yes (Nonsense!) (Score:5, 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?
Re: (Score:3)
Stop improving things? Don't think that's a good idea. Stop changing ports without good reasons? That would be better _but_ not possible in general.
However you are listing things that don't change without good reasons: USB. You list USB 3.0 and 3.1 type C separately while it is one port, you also list USB A twice while it is one port. Plug a USB 3.x device into a USB 2.x port and it will work, plug a USB 2.x device into a USB 3.x port and it will work. While the USB 2.x micro and USB 3.x micro ports are dif
Re:Yes (Nonsense!) (Score:5, Interesting)
I might be one port but things dont work right. I know, I have the entire bevy of these connectors, both USB and Video, and USB speed and behavior has been terrible since 3.0. Speed isnt right, amps isnt right. You can look on Amazon reviews on cables - massive complaints. There is a Google engineer "Benson Leung" that reviews cables as a hobby and checks them to see if they violate USB spec. Even with Benson approved cables the ports often do not charge correctly. Sometimes its 1A even on a 2A port. Sometimes its 2A. Its almost never does the 100 watts / 20 volts / 5A - unless you buy a charger. And type-c chargers are bloody expensive and hard to find. You need a Benson approved one and test it to see if it really rapid charges.
So yes, while type C might be closer to the ideal its a stupid joke how much they cost and how little benefit they provide over a regular stinky 2.0 micro cable these days.
So do I want more unversiality like 8P8C / "RJ45" - hell yes. Id rather wait a bit longer for 10GBASET to become practical. But wait, since there are literally TEN 10GbE standards - that would be 10 different transceivers that can be 10GbE - making fixed port SFP+ and 10GBASET restrictive and SFP+ twinax expensive and SFP+ other types of transceivers very expensive...
You know how much the cables and transceivers cost in a DC? I've seen figures in the 30% range.
You know much more expensive 10GbE because of the number of lunatic standards we had and how much cabling cost?
You see the advantage of CAT5e/CAT6 was it was useful for a VERY, very long time - since 1991. That reduces waste and cost and keeps wiring in the walls good. It was more universal then power adapters, other anything today. It was and is the entire world standard, along now with WiFi - ABGN - I've never had an issue connecting with WiFi or wired ethernet. Ever.
But the diarrhea mess of Apple and phone cables I keep in a backpack at all times. Joke. Custom power cables for laptops. a thunderbolt Ethernet, a DVII, a DVID, a display port, HDMI, mini-displayport, a VGA, type C-C, type A-C, a rapid charger, lightning-cable - all this trash being lugged around. But there is one thing I have one of. Ethernet and the wifi (wherever that is buried.within the laptop). I have a gaggle of dongles and a gaggle of USB cables and chargers because these standards suck horribly.
Re:Yes (Nonsense!) (Score:5, Insightful)
Terminator? (Score:5, Funny)
What do you mean I need a terminator, the cable just plugged right in?
Re:Yes (Nonsense!) (Score:4, 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.
Re: (Score:3)
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.
Like them?
http://www.extremetech.com/wp-... [extremetech.com]
It's more resilient than fiber is, in the physical sense.
It's much, much, much, much more expensive. As for resilliance, it depends what you mean. On long links, the crosstalk, resistance and capacitance will kill the datarate of the copper so much, that you could replace that with a small fiber bundle and make most of the rest
One showstopper (Score:4, Interesting)
Namely, existing infrastructure. With CAT5 and CAT6 cables everywhere, you will need some little box to convert the existing cable into a slimmer one which in turn would end with a slimmer connector.
There are far, far more RJ45 connectors in the world than USB, for example.
Re:One showstopper (Score:5)
It is one of the few connectors you can feel in the dark and get the damn plug in the right way on the first try, every time.
Could it be doable to make it a 'flat' connector like HDMI? Sure.. that would lower the 'vertical' footprint, but I am not sure if that would be worth the hassle.
It reminds me of the PCMCIA-connector to rj45 converters... *shudder*
If there is something I would like to never have to deal with again is having a bunch of these suckers hanging around waiting to break:
http://ep.yimg.com/ay/videowar... [yimg.com]
Re: (Score:2)
On the other hand, the 3Com XJACK was nice, if still rather fragile. A breakaway version that could be yanked out of the device and easily replaced would be a good solution for ultrabooks and tablets.
But wireless is where it's at in the mobile space these days, and the few mobile device makers that even bother with Ethernet probably won't for much longer. Despair not; a USB Type-C adapter will give you a nice small plug, or you can buy a wireless bridge (battery-powered, even) if you don't want to sully you
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:3)
It is one of the few connectors you can feel in the dark and get the damn plug in the right way on the first try, every time.
I can manage to plug my headphone jack in the right way around most of the time, so why not a variant of that?
Re:One showstopper (Score:4, Informative)
Connector that goes in both ways (Score:5, Informative)
All ethernet devices of the last 10+ years can autonegotiate between straight and cross-over wire configuration. So with wires on the connector organized as tx+ tx- rx- rx+ (4-wire example), a flippable connector would not require any changes in the electronics. And it would get rid of the impedance-killing central pair split in today's standard connector.
Of course, the question is whether you could make a flippable connector that's field-crimpable with simple tools.
Re:One showstopper (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.
Re: (Score:2)
What if it is the exact same wire and almost the exact same connector, just one third of the height?
That could still work and be easy to deal with, though I would prefer to also replace the locking mechanism with something that lets go instead of breaking.
Re: (Score:2)
you will need some little box to convert the existing cable into a slimmer one which in turn would end with a slimmer connector.
So, kind of like my MacBook Pro. RJ45 to a cable with a small, thin, Lightning connector (USB on pre-Lightning Macs).
I'm happy with this solution for the laptop, but this would just be stupid for all of the HTPC's (Minis) and my iMacs.
In practice (Score:5, Informative)
it has been replaced in consumer equipment by the (very small) WiFi connector
Re:In practice (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:In practice (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.
Re: (Score:2)
s/connection/contention.
freaking autocorrect.
Re: (Score:3)
OK, that sucks.
But each of those networks is someone paying something on the order of $50/month for internet, right? You're talking about $10K/mo for the networks you can see. Doesn't it make sense for the entire building to get wired using something industrial and cooperative instead of competing for RF?
Re: (Score:3)
Lots of people do video streaming to their RPi... Even in better conditions, highdef video streams over WiFi are subject to a lot of stuttering. Works fine for me ONLY if I'm less than 30ft (~10m) from my AP.
Re: (Score:3)
It took me 90 minutes to copy 13GB between a couple of laptops yesterday. Both have SSD and were connected to the WIFI point 2m away at 450mbs. The drives aren't the limitation here, but I'd still expect the theoretical time to be a few minutes. The trouble with wifi is latency and interference, which really slows it down. My wifi router itself is probably a bit crappy too, but again, that's part of the wifi problem.
As with so many "is it time" questions... no. (Score:5, Insightful)
Re: (Score:3)
Re:As with so many "is it time" questions... no. (Score:4, 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.
Re: (Score:2)
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.
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. If the docks were standard they would be cheaper and everywhere, but they are not going to open up that market voluntarily.
Re: (Score:3)
They're not that non-standard. Lots of them are USB3 nowadays, and the prices aren't THAT insane (e.g. $100-$300 depending what you need [dell.com]).
I've had a comparable one for my notebook and work notebook, it's two cables to be up and working with the high-res screen, mouse, keyboard, anything else USB and a GbE. It's almost easier than a model-specific dock because you don't have to work out where the locating pins go (but you do need to deal with the 4-dimensional USB connector). It's a short step from that to U
Re: (Score:2, 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 $172 CAD: http://accessories.us.dell.com... [dell.com],
I wouldn't call that insane pricing.
I would. They are port extenders. Anything above 100$ is crazy, 172$ is insane. 50$ from new would make more sense for what they are.
Re: (Score:3)
Please don't (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!
Slashdot rule. (Score:5)
Any reduction would be at the expense of compatibility with everything which already exists. Modular connectors are reliable, cheap, easy to install, they work. Wired Enet is near end of it's capabilities (10G reduces the distance from 100 m to 15), so you'd be better off looking toward smaller fiber connectors as we move forward.
It already has been replaced by RJ.5 connectors (Score:5, Informative)
Whoever wrote this article obviously didn't do any research first.
There is already a new standard for physical ethernet cabling, calling RJ.5 (that is, ar-jay-point-five): http://www.alliedtelesis.com/videos/RJpointfive
"Allied Telesis is one of the first networking vendors to embrace the new RJ point five Ethernet connectivity standard. Built to replace the RJ-45 standard copper Ethernet connector, the new RJ point five connectors are half the size, so you save valuable space and double your port density."
They're not popular in the marketplace because the cables are uncommon and therefore expensive, and similarly the physical jacks are uncommon and therefore expensive.
Re: (Score:3)
I believe it's possible to build a round Ethernet connector the same diameter as the cable itself.
With a nice little locator pin that doubles as a bayonet lock.
Re: (Score:2)
Standard? In what way? 8 pin modular connectors are ingrained in Ethernet/data standards (802.3 and IEC 60603-7), and RJ.5 doesn't support 10G. What standard includes RJ.5 (which is an obvious misnomer, since RJ... are telephony standards, although Ethernet shares the use of modular connectors).
Re:It already has been replaced by RJ.5 connectors (Score:4, Informative)
There is already a new standard for physical ethernet cabling, calling RJ.5 (that is, ar-jay-point-five)
"RJ point five is a trademark of TE Connectivity used here under license."
Nope. Not a standard. A wannabe "standard" that hasn't replaced anything at all. It's just a money-grab, as these things always devolve into these days.
When will people learn, corporate greed does not breed standards?
Doable...Eminently doable (Score:2)
As long as you can build a patch cable from an RJ-45 to the new connector, you'd be compatible enough with installed infrastructure.
Require that every cable be a right-angle, 90 degree cable - i.e. when plugged into something like a flat laptop or tablet, the cable lies flat against the side of the device when plugged in, not sticking awkardly straight out the back. My laptop dock can't get closer than 7-10 cm from the back wall of my cube because of the old-style cables (RJ-45, HDMI, USB) sticking out.
Field installation (Score:5, 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=
Re: (Score:2)
Making the connector smaller shouldn't be the priority though, I'd be happy if they just got rid of the flimsy locking mechanism
Re: (Score:2)
This point right here. The ability to cut and crimp to make a cable the exact length you need in an installation is why the RJ-45 is the end.
Maybe we get 2 sizes. The RJ-45 for installation and some downsized consumer cable. But the big boys need it the way it is. Cheap and customizable.
Ability to patch your own (Score:2)
What is this I don't even (Score:5, Insightful)
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.
I'd love to see the SNAG... (Score:2)
-inducer removed. If you don't have boots on the existing RJ45, you're going to waste a lot of time pulling that cable back out of the route it's on.
The problem is that impedance matching could be a problem over very long runs of cable with a smaller connector at very high speeds. It probably wouldn't be just a "scaled down" RJ-45 with a mandatory boot over the snag-inducing tab.
And, of course, you'd need to have (and keep in stock) RJ-45 to "New" connectors, both M/F and F/M genders, 'cause one has to ac
My $.02 (Score:4, Interesting)
My opinion: leave it as is
My thinking is;
Most connected items that are portable or IoT already use WiFi now so having a smaller connector wouldn't really be a benefit.
For the larger systems like desktops and servers there would be little to no benefit from the smaller connector.
A standard RJ45/8P8C connector/jack is already about as small as you can get it and still be able to see what your doing when you install them.
Currently the tools and connectors used for CAT X cabling are completely standardized and interchangeable with most of the telephone hardware still out there. Things like the line testers and punch down tools work on both systems so I have less I need to buy and carry when in the field working with mixed systems.
All the older hardware, the Smart TV's, the server patch panels, the home routers, hubs, etc. use the full size connector. I don't think people would be happy if they bought a new router and had to get all new cables to boot.
Just some of my thoughts on the subject, I'm sure there are going to many other valid reasons for and against that other commenters will bring up.
Backward compatibility (Score:2)
How about a smaller plug with 4 contacts (RX pair and TX pair). But make it with the same contact pitch as the RJ-45 and include a space to correspond to the RJ-45 pin 3 (unused for Ethernet). Then, make a plastic backshell that snaps onto the new connector, making it as thick and wide as the old RJ-45. So it will plug into older equipment.
Re: (Score:2)
Uh, gigabit ethernet uses all 8 wires. A special connector that only works with slower speed would just clutter the market with yet another failed standard..
Re: (Score:2)
Oops. You are right. However, I still like the idea of a thinner plug, even with 8 pins, that can be adapted to an old RJ-45 jack with a simple plastic clip. Connector width isn't so much a problem with thin laptops, tablets, etc. It's thickness that makes the jack tough to design around.
There are laptops with no RJ-45 (Score:3)
Re: (Score:3)
There [i]are[/i] some quite thin laptops with a smaller smarter type of RJ-45 socket.
The bottom part is on a hinge that you open with the RJ-45 plug when you need to insert it, thereby making the port large enough to accept the plug.
When you unplug the cable the hinge springs back to its small, closed state.
Of course this would need to be engineered as a part of the laptop's enclosure -- not just as a hole in it. And that might in turn imply patent licensing issues.
Copper-based Ethernet you mean (Score:4, Informative)
Fiber-based Ethernet has already different kind of connectors.
Is there a good reason? What would be gained? (Score:2)
I want an ethernet standard... (Score:2)
...that can recognize the wire ordering as part of the handshake on device connection. That's the only way you could make smaller connectors and still have it be relatively easy to make up your own cabling.
Hand Made Cables (Score:3)
No, leave it as is. For one reason, ethernet cables are often hand made or hand terminated. I've terminated 1000s of cables in my career, various lengths and runs. The current connector, while not perfect, is just about the right size for hand termination without expensive or specialized equipment. My bag always has a crimper and spare connectors in it. I can easily whip up a cable on a moments notice. If you go to a mini or micro connector, more specialized equipment will be involved that may not allow one to hand terminate a cable easily. If we lose that, we lose the versatility of the connector in general.
Ethernet has lasted as long as it has (Score:2)
Because it's versatile. With the right tools, it's incredibly easy to terminate and repair in the field. Parts are cheap. And I can crimp any length cable whenever I need it.
But copper has its limits. To get beyond those limits, pair twists are tighter, cables are getting thicker, pull specs more delicate, and installation more complex. As conductors get thicker and shielding becomes mandatory, backwards compatibility is proving a challenge. We're now at the point where manufacturers like Leviton are
Not Needed or Helpful (Score:2)
The physical size of a connector is related to whether it needs to be handled by human hands, and if so, whether a locking mechanism is part of the connector, which also must be handled by human hands. Beyond that, it's the physical size of the necessary cable that forms the final parameter.
The Ethernet Connector could be made slightly smaller and satisfy the above, but not by much. There is no need for change when it's for the sake of change. So, the current RJ-45 is perfectly adequate and need not be furt
Solution in search of a problem (Score:2)
Ethernet is fine as it is and the bandwidth is going up and up so shrinking the cable could only force us to expand it again later when we decide we need more bandwidth or something.
Leave it alone.
A reliable standard (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.
RJ22 instead (Score:2)
RJ22 (the little connector on the coiled cable going to your telephone handset) could be an alternative if there's not a lot of crosstalk induced by having the pairs up against each other.
Thunderbolt could have been a contender, but as usual no one other than Apple adopted it because it was too expensive (and I'm sure there's an Intel tax or something).
Re: (Score:2)
USB could have been a contender, but as usual no one other than Apple adopted it because it was too expensive (and I'm sure there's an Intel tax or something).
FTFY — Thunderbolt is not the only technology Apple adopted that found its way into PCs.
little spring lock tag things = bad design (Score:2)
They can be a bitch to press especially if covered with a thick rubber cover, and they often break off
USB-C (Score:2)
servers? (Score:3)
Nope. They're hard enough to crimp while drunk. (Score:3)
From the question's comparison to a bunch of cables that you can't (easily) terminate yourself, I'm going to assume you buy all your ethernet cables. That's great except when you want to fish cable through walls, and use punchdown jacks in patch panels. Or make one that's a custom length. Or repair a 30m cable with a broken wire 5mm from one end.
The only thing wrong with RJ45 is the fragility of the locking tab, and plastic overshields do a pretty good job of protecting that.
Classic Supply/Demand (Score:3)
You only change based on the need.
a. HDMI to micro: the need was super slim laptop output, try finding a 1" thick laptop nowadays
b. USB to micro USB: the need was super slim smart phones, try finding a 0.4" thick smartphone nowadays.
c. Ethernet: there are plenty of 1U+ blades, desktop computers, and industrial stuff (Ethercat) that are fine using RJ45. There is no need.
d. RPi could use a smaller ethernet connector but:
a few 100K pi's vs a million blade servers.... spanning models from 2000 to 2016 (not everyone is Google, Facebook, or Amazon that can replace their 2015 servers asap).
Designs like the RPi should goto a connect that makes sense. If the users want less size, then listen to them (add the RJ.5).
RPi really gets is chops via WiFi anyway.
What a nightmare! And how to terminate? (Score:3)
Re: (Score:2)
I know this is a discussion about the plug, but with so many devices connecting to a router wirelessly, there's been no need to redesign it at all. Would be nice to see it merged with a USB-Type C style of connectivity, but the simple answer it that it's probably just not needed.
And if you need that, USB3 gigabit network cards aren't exactly expensive.
Re: (Score:3)
And should be included on the power brick of any notebook that changes via USB-C. No idea why no one is doing this already
Re:Uhhhhhhhh... No connector and no cables maybe?! (Score:5, Insightful)
Sure; let's set up WIFI only for Corporations with 10,000 people on a campus! Great idea!!!
Re: (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.
Re: (Score:2)
Not seeing mobile data doing that until coverage is perfect and the price plummets - at least for Canada [crtc.gc.ca]. Considering how long people were/are still [cnn.com] on dialup past people saying 'everyone has broadband'?
Re: (Score:3)
I'll take that bet.
You think that a major corporation with thousands of devices in close proximity is going to be able to reliably count on the local cellular carrier to provide enough reliable bandwidth to meet their needs?
No, over the next 5-10 years you'll see more fiber deployment which will get closer to the homes. Last mile will be copper for quite some time.
Re: (Score:2)
And if you don't like it its really easy to convert your cables to non-locking cables.
They also self convert in fairly short order unless you buy snag less cables or ends if you make them yourself.
Re: (Score:2)
And what Apple may or may not do has absolutely no bearing on the networking within my data center
Yes (Score:3)
Yes, I did, three years ago. And for a lot less than $200. Five terminations total (three bedrooms, living room, & basement rec room). 250' of 5e by Sewell for $40 [sewelldirect.com] (it's even cheaper now), connectors and wall jacks for another $30, and $10 for some cable fasteners and 1-gang boxes from the local hardware store. It helped a lot that my basement was unfinished at the time. Finally, a simple $50 dual-band wireless router w/ a 4-port switch, and I was done. $130 total, plus my own time. (Though, you
Re: Don't bother (Score:2)
I suppose the cost of the cable itself is not bad, but to wire every room in a house with wall jacks and such is expensive, especially after labor is accounted for.
Re: (Score:2)
Make a suitable teeny-tiny 8-pin connector that has the key features of the current jack, namely that you can't plug it in wrong and you can't just "pull it out" thanks to the locking tab.
Then have low-cost adapters that convert it into a standard RJ-45.
The advantage of this is you can also create standard, small, self-contained USB2/3, USB-C, or what-not-to-"new"-Ethernet-adapters that fit in a thin form-factor from the computer to the wall.
It might look like this:
[RJ-45 wall jack] [RJ45 to "thin" adapter"] [Ethernet wire with "thin" adapters at both ends] ["thin"-adapter ethernet to USB2/3 or USB-C adapter] [computer].
For the data center and other places where you typically crimp your own cables, continue to use existing wiring standards.
For your "go bag" have a variety of male-to-female adapters of both "thin" and "classic" varieties, much like techs used to have 9- and 25-pin serial adapters in various gender configurations in their "go bag" back in the day.
This is supposed to be a solution? Sounds like everyone making their own proprietary ethernet connectors. I remember the days of having to have a ton of adapters some which were never used, but you'd never know....