RE: Re: KAT5 - an alternative viewpoint

[Mark Harrison <Mark.Harrison@xxxxxxx>]

I don't have co-ax.

However, I could live with a second run of CAT5 if I needed to...

Mark Harrison
Head of Systems, eKingfisher

****************************************************************************
Kingfisher plc
Registered Office: North West House, 119 Marylebone Road, London NW1 5PX
Registered in England, Number 1664812

This e-mail is only intended for the person(s) to whom it is addressed and
may contain confidential information.  Unless stated to the contrary, any
opinions or comments are personal to the writer and do not represent the
official view of the company.  If you have received this e-mail in error,
please notify us immediately by reply e-mail and then delete this message
from your system.  Please do not copy it or use it for any purposes, or
disclose its contents to any other person.  Thank you for your
co-operation.
****************************************************************************



-----Original Message-----
From: patrickl@xxxxxxx [mailto:patrickl@xxxxxxx]
Sent: 5 June 2001 14:03
To: ukha_d@xxxxxxx
Subject: [ukha_d] Re: KAT5 - an alternative viewpoint



> 	Now I want the version with the IR control back

Do most people, like me, have conventional aerial co-ax from node 0
to most (all?) rooms in the house, and place their TiVO's, sat
decoders etc at node 0? IR superimposed on co-ax makes more sense to
me than IR over cat5 since it saves wire and sitting an IR reciever
on top of the telly is the natural place for it.

I guess a hybrid system would be perfect...

Patrick





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



_____________________________________________________________________
This message has been checked for all known viruses by the
MessageLabs Virus Scanning Service. For further information visit
http://www.messagelabs.com/stats.asp



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