Wiring a Wall Type RJ45 Jack

Fuck off you dumb shit. You use a lot of words without having the vaguest sense of what they mean.

or

Straight unencoded, 50 MHz because it takes two bits, 1 and 0, to make a 'cycle'.

100BASE-TX uses 4B5B MLT-3 coding that cuts bandwidth to 1/4 the baud rate.

The physical signal has 3 states, +, 0, and - voltage with a data '1' denoted by a state transition. A data '0' is no state change. Worst case is, then, 'all 1s' which results in +,0,-,0,... etc. so, from your 'MHz' perspective, '1 cycle' is (worst case) 4 state changes corresponding to 4 bits.

You're a goddamned retarded twit.

Bwuahahahahah! Ever make it past the age of 13 mentally?

I installed Thomas Conrad Network Systems networks 15 years ago. The hubs were VERY expensive(several thousand dollars each), and the cards were half a grand each. They were a mere 100 Mb/s claimed speed, and that only with their proprietary transfer protocol. So there wasn't a whole lot of bang for that buck.

The current (at the time) 10 base T solutions were a lot cheaper and used industry wide transfer protocols, and THAT is why businesses bought twisted pair, you retarded little piece of shit. Running light weight, cheap twisted pair is a LOT cheaper than running coax was, and coax topped out at 2Mb/s back then as it was ABANDONED by the ETHERNET standard, and was a hell of a lot harder to make the drops for.

10base2 was about 5 times faster than that over RG58A/U coax.

perhaps you are thinking of arcnet.

That is what *I* said!

Arcnet was 360kb/s!

Read it again.

No, you said coax Ethernet "topped out at 2Mb/s." 10base2 is (thin) coax Ethernet running 10Mb/s. As Jasen said, "5 times faster" than what you said.

10base Ethernet is 10Mb/s whether it's twisted pair (-T) or coax (2 or 5) or fiber (-FL). That's what the "10" means.

Arcnet is 2.5Mb/s and Arcnet Plus is 20Mb/s.

I rather think it is you who misread "10base2" as twisted pair and "than that" (over RG58AU) instead of "than that" (which you said).

His sentence could be a bit clearer rearranged as "10base2, over RG58AU coax, was about 5 times faster than that" with "that" being "what you said (2Mb/s)."

Except that the coax implementations were tied to the cards they were attached to and those were 2Mb/s. By the time the 10Mb/s stuff hit the streets, folks were buying twisted pair solutions, and coax was practically completely abandoned. The card makers stopped putting coax I/O ports on the cards, and rj45 became all you could get, Ethernet wise.

TCNS and MS had some proprietary protocol Star configurations, and there were a few others, but Ethernet ended up winning because it kept up speed wise, and was considerably cheaper. Now, I don't even know if any other methods exist, except for fiber, of course. What other wired solutions are there currently?

Maybe whatever the heck you had was 2Mb/s but my Ethernet cards were

10Mb/s and I've still got the cards, cable, and T connectors around here somewhere but it's been so long I don't recall where that 'old parts' box ended up.

The 10Mb/s cards with both coax and RJ45 connectors I can still find because some are in the PCI 'old parts' box.

Coax connectors on the cards ended with 100Mb/s

I may not know where the box is but this link

is an example.

Notice there's no RJ45 connector at all.

Or 8 bit ISA

Or, on EISA bus

How about Apple Nubus?

They're all 10Mb/s

I still have a 4 computer network running with 10base ethernet on coax, ending at a NetGear Etherhub, to connect to my router(Speedtouch).

And the speed is 10 Megabyte/sec, or 100Megabit/second, which it achieves without a problem.

10 was the hardware speed of the twisted pair connection. "Cheapernet" used the same card, but the comm protocols meant that you would only see about 2, and that only on a good day.

Yes, and the RJ45 DOES do 10Mb/s, but the coax does NOT.

Not in Ethernet. TCNS and a couple other proprietary bits of hardware made it out, but Ethernet was twisted pair only by the time is was actually able to push the 10Mb/s streams it touted itself as being able to push. The coax never did from my memory.

Not even going to try?

Ethernet is specified in Mbits/sec. 10-base- is 10 Mbits/sec.

10base2 is coax with RG-58A/U connectors. 10base5 is thick coax with vampire taps. 10baseT is Cat5 with RJ-45 connectors.

All of the above are 10Mbit/sec.

100baseT is 100Mbit/sec, and uses Cat5 with RJ-45 connectors; there are no coax versions.

Absolute Bullshit.

The interface (Ethernet) is declared in BITS per second, and they were NOT EVER 100 Mb/s on 10 base T. Not ever at any time.

That's a bizarre 'definition' to attempt on 10base5 (and 10base2) where there are no twisted pairs.

I don't think you know what Ethernet is or how it works. It specifies the entire 5 layers and the "comm protocols" are the same regardless of the physical layer.

"Cheapernet" refers to thin coax being cheaper than thick coax and doesn't help your argument as they're both coax.

10base5 (thick coax) was the original (standard) Ethernet and there were NO 'twisted pair' implementations in existence to use for your strange definition of 10Mb/s.

They both do 10Mb/s.

As I said, the "10" in "10base" means 10Mb/s, means 10Mb/s. means

10Mb/s/

Yes in Ethernet and, as already mentioned, I've got the 'real thing' sitting in boxes to prove it.

Rubbish. When 10base5 was the standard there were NO 'twisted pair' implementations at all.

There may be 'someone' who made a 10Mb/s card with only an RJ45 connector but I never saw one and that was the 'easy' way to tell if a card lying in the box was 100Mb/s. It was 10Mb/s if a coax connector was sticking out the back.

Then you have either a poor memory or limited experience from which to 'remember' because 10base existed long before someone dreamed up to make it 'cheaper' with twisted pairs.

Nope.

The speed is in bits per second, not bytes, but I'm not sure what you're trying to say with the 100Mb/s number. 10base2 is 10Mb/s and that's the speed. It isn't going to do 100Mb/s no matter what you try.

If I understood your description correctly, the router is simply autonegotiating to 10Mb/s regardless of the port being 100Mb/s capable. Has to be because the 10Mb/s hub, being a hub, can't have different speeds on different ports.