Re: PBXs

[Calum Morrell <calum@xxxxxxx>]

or maybe I have and I'm just teasing Stuart :P

Keith, what can be used on fibre at present? anything you design an
interface for I believe the answer is. both cat5 and fibre have
different limitations, and for the next few years at least it's still
going to be a case of cat5 appearing the best option ... but since I was
talking about future proofing, that's not really relevant.

More and more business are moving their networks to fibre, the costs ARE
REDUCING SHARPLY and will continue to do so as all products do the more
they are used. At the moment I am still running cat5 as I have little
other choice. If I was starting from scratch elsewhere, I would be
seriously tempted to run primarily fibre, probably with some cat5 for
current apps I need that hadn't been ported by that point. Then I would
start hassling people to convert their products to fibre until they gave
in, or stopped talking to me.


Calum

Alancc wrote:

>I don't think Calum has seen the cost of making off fibre ends or the
price
>of kit to go onto them!!!
>
>Alancc
>----- Original Message -----
>From: Keith Doxey <ukha@xxxxxxx>
>To: <ukha_d@xxxxxxx>
>Sent: Sunday, December 30, 2001 8:50 PM
>Subject: RE: [ukha_d] PBXs
>
>
>>Are you suggesting Fibre INSTEAD of CAT5?
>>
>>What do you have that will currently work over fibre?
>>
>>I have lots that works over CAT5.
>>
>>Fibre is extremely high bandwith, but CAT5 can now handle Gigabit
>>
>ethernet.
>
>>At the same time, all the previous high bandwidth users such as
streamed
>>video, are shrinking in size due to faster PC's and improved
compression
>>techniques.
>>
>>Keith
>>
>>-----Original Message-----
>>From: Calum Morrell [mailto:calum@xxxxxxx]
>>Sent: 30 December 2001 18:44
>>To: ukha_d@xxxxxxx
>>Subject: Re: [ukha_d] PBXs
>>
>>
>>Shouldn't we forward thinking chappies [ and chappettes :-) ] be
saying
>>"screw cat5, I use fibre" to ensure a little bit more
life in our
>>systems than cat5 can offer?
>>
>>
>>Calum [ not looking at 'im who's just laid over 7km's of cat5
>:) ]
>>
>>Stuart Grimshaw wrote:
>>
>>>On Saturday 29 December 2001 19:49 pm, Timothy Morris wrote:
>>>
>>>>The BIG advantage is that it will handle 8 cordless
extensions without
>>>>ANY CAT5!
>>>>
>>>lol, I think we've found the Anti-CAT5, someone check the back
of his
>>>
>head
>
>>>for a tiny "2.4GHz" birthmark.
>>>
>>>:-)
>>>
>>
>>
>>
>>For more information: http://www.automatedhome.co.uk
>>Post message: ukha_d@xxxxxxx
>>Subscribe:  ukha_d-subscribe@xxxxxxx
>>Unsubscribe:  ukha_d-unsubscribe@xxxxxxx
>>List owner:  ukha_d-owner@xxxxxxx
>>
>>Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>For more information: http://www.automatedhome.co.uk
>>Post message: ukha_d@xxxxxxx
>>Subscribe:  ukha_d-subscribe@xxxxxxx
>>Unsubscribe:  ukha_d-unsubscribe@xxxxxxx
>>List owner:  ukha_d-owner@xxxxxxx
>>
>>Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
>>
>>
>>
>
>
>
>For more information: http://www.automatedhome.co.uk
>Post message: ukha_d@xxxxxxx
>Subscribe:  ukha_d-subscribe@xxxxxxx
>Unsubscribe:  ukha_d-unsubscribe@xxxxxxx
>List owner:  ukha_d-owner@xxxxxxx
>
>Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
>
>
>



For more information: http://www.automatedhome.co.uk
Post message: ukha_d@xxxxxxx
Subscribe:  ukha_d-subscribe@xxxxxxx
Unsubscribe:  ukha_d-unsubscribe@xxxxxxx
List owner:  ukha_d-owner@xxxxxxx

Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/