RE: Re: Do I really need CAT5?

["Phil Harris" <phillip.harris1@xxxxxxx>]

> 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...

All very good reasons but few - if any - of them apply to Tim's kind of
home ... Open plan, no interior walls, few obstructions etc.

Phil