Re: Do I really need CAT5?

["PatrickLidstone" <patrickl@xxxxxxx>]

--- In ukha_d@y..., "Mark Harrison" <Mark.Harrison@e...>
wrote:
> Tim,
>
> The only _current_ application that comes to mind is high-bandwidth
> networking.

I didn't install Cat5 when I moved in, because I thought wireless
would be sufficient. Sadly it wasn't for me.

- Wireless networking is great, but the range is limited. If your
house is long and thin, or has thick masonry (e.g. period property)
you may struggle to get coverage in the extremities.

- Not all network enabled products can be readily connected to
wireless. e.g. DDAR receivers, PVR's, some servers & printers. This
can be got round to a certain extent through the use of external
wireless access points - but they're ugly & expensive.

- Most current generation wireless hubs are limited to around 10
concurrent connections. I've hit the max. on mine...

- Non-network related stuff. Generally this doesn't require cat5 -
any old structured cabling will do, but cat5 is convenient - such as:

-- CCTV cameras
-- lo-fi audio (e.g. ceiling mounted speakers for announcements,
music in the bath etc.)
-- weather station / temperature sensing / local thermostatic control
-- occupancy sensors - as distinct from alarm monitoring (probably
not relevant with your dislike of automatic control)
-- Infra-red routing back to entertainment node 0 (e.g. satellite
receiver control)
-- direct control/interface of devices with serial interfaces (e.g.
caller id units, standalone mini terminals etc.)
-- direct control/interface of devices with proprietary interfaces
(e.g. curtain controllers)

so one drop of cat5 to each corner of each room would probably be
good insurance...

Patrick