RE: Do I Really Need To Run Coax?

["Neil Wrightson" <neilw@xxxxxxxxxx>]

Hi,
=20
If I was doing it all again, I would still put coax into all of the TV
locations.
In our house we have 5 TV's all of which are tuned into DTV (Digital TV).
Here in Australia we have approximately 15..20 free to air digital TV
channels.
=20
How do you handle that in a Node0 and Ethernet combo???
15 receivers connected to ...........????
And what do you put at the TV end???
=20
=20
Netgear had a Ethernet over coax solution, that superimposed an Ethernet
signal on top of the TV RF signal.
Thus giving Ethernet at every TV location.
=20

Regards,=20

Neil Wrightson.=20



_____=20=20

From: ukha_d@xxxxxxx [mailto:ukha_d@xxxxxxx] On Behalf Of
Alex Monaghan
Sent: Monday, 21 February 2011 10:42 AM
To: ukha_d@xxxxxxx
Subject: RE: [ukha_d] Do I Really Need To Run Coax?


=20=20

Mike

I've got nothing running over coax at present, seemed a good idea to
instal=
l
at the time, but never actually used it as the TV is digital and we out in
=
a
separate feed for the satellite dish as the server element of Node 0 moved!
Planned solution is to coax from dish to garage, then IP to MythTV
frontend=
s
round the house as needed. Current solution is coax to a Win 7 media centre
box in the lounge. The idea was to install a distribution amp in node 0 and
pump the video output along with the RF from the aerial to each room.

If I was doing it again, I'd probably only run to 1 or 2 points in the
lounge, and perhaps to bedrooms / kitchen, I currently have coax to each
point where I have cat5 as digital TV was still quite new, so it made sense
to put in analogue.

You could always run it to each room and leave it under the floor so it is
only a small job to enable it if required. People may want coax again in
th=
e
future, I even recall seeing an Ethernet over coax solution a little while
ago which bought back fond memories of running a thin Ethernet backbone in
my 1st house - geek alert - I had Internet access on my PC in the lounge
using an analogue TV out card networked to my main server which had a 28K
modem set for dial on demand Internet sharing using a second phone line,
this was long before most people had even heard of the Internet :)

Alex

-----Original Message-----
From: ukha_d@xxxxxxx <mailto:ukha_d%40yahoogroups.com>
[mailto:ukha_d@xxxxxxx
<mailto:ukha_d%40yahoogroups.com>
] On Behal=
f
Of
Michael Hims
Sent: 20 February 2011 09:42
To: ukha_d@xxxxxxx <mailto:ukha_d%40yahoogroups.com>=20
Subject: Re: [ukha_d] Do I Really Need To Run Coax?

Thanks Alex,

What do you run over co-ax though? Is it just a video stream?

Mike

From: Alex Monaghan=20
Sent: Sunday, February 20, 2011 7:58 AM
To: ukha_d@xxxxxxx <mailto:ukha_d%40yahoogroups.com>=20=20
Subject: RE: [ukha_d] Do I Really Need To Run Coax?

When I re-wired the house, I put cat5 and coax, however, with current
technology, you can run a lot more over cat5 either by convertors or via IP
than you could even just a few years ago. Think about the technology
available now and your immediate plans, then take a long "blue
sky" think
and put in a bit extra on top to be sure.

Personally, I'd just run a few trunks to key points in coax and run the
res=
t
in cat5.

Alex

-----Original Message-----
From: ukha_d@xxxxxxx <mailto:ukha_d%40yahoogroups.com>
[mailto:ukha_d@xxxxxxx
<mailto:ukha_d%40yahoogroups.com>
] On Behal=
f
Of
Michael Hims
Sent: 19 February 2011 21:14
To: ukha_d@xxxxxxx <mailto:ukha_d%40yahoogroups.com>=20
Subject: [ukha_d] Do I Really Need To Run Coax?

Hi,

I'm carrying out the final specs of my HA wiring plan and I've noticed that
co-ax has been repeatedly suggested for TVs on here.

With HDMI over Cat5 convertors coming in at sub =A320 now
(http://cpc.farnell.com/jsp/search/productdetail.jsp?sku=3DAV19971)
do I
really need to run co-ax? Or have I missed the point? Just seems extra
mone=
y
to run yet another cable type when there are already cables that will be
ru=
n
to support HD video.

Cheers,

Mike

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

------------------------------------