Re: RG6 to RJ45

["dpw" <dpw168@xxxxxxxxx>]

I'm eating my share of crow this morning.  After more research on the
Multinet site I came across a higher bandwidth solution:

http://www.multilet.us/WhitePapers/IPTV.htm


dpw wrote:
> Reply to my own post after checking out Multinet product:
>
> Still have bandwidth issue because looks like specs are only up to
> 10/Mbps.  So not a good solution for this situation.  Definitely could
> be viable for other applications sucha as retrofit in multiple dwelling
> building.
>
> Thanks everyone for your replies!  Appreciate the opinions and advice.
>
>
> dpw wrote:
> > Bruce,
> >
> > Appreciate the reply.  I agree that the Cat3 would likely work fine for
> > most apps especially just some browsing of Internet and similar.
> > However, this is a new high-end house and it really should have been
> > wired to even future specs. (I would have gone with Cat6.)  Have no
> > idea what the homeowner will want to use the network for in the future.
> >
> > We are beginning to load up the "internal" network infrastructure with
> > so many new things these days, if I was this homeowner that ec would
> > certainly be told to find a way to replace all that Cat3. This is a BIG
> > problem we are seeing out there: ec's and others that don't understand
> > networks.  Not all; some are excellent.  But the ones that don't know
> > what they are doing need to stay away from it just as those of us that
> > do low-voltage stay away from the high-voltage.
> >
> > Brett in this thread gave me the link to the product I had seen
> > advertised. Not sure of the throughput and cost but certainly will look
> > into it.
> >
> > Thanks again for your response.
> >
> >
> >
> > bruceR wrote:
> > > I'm willing to bet that the throughput on the Cat3, particularly for the
> > > short distances involved in a residence will be higher than what will come
> > > out of any converter.  The contractor shouldn't be let off the hook though.
> > > I'd make him pull the Cat 5e in or write a healthy check.
> > >  As for the use of the Cat3, if there actually WAS a noticeable difference
> > > in throughput, he could always use 802.11g wireless.
> > >
> > > Years ago, we had a T1 line in our office. The telco made a big deal about
> > > cable quality and even pulled a new riser 10 floors to serve the T1.  When
> > > we moved the office to the 6th floor, the telco wanted a ton of money to
> > > relocate the equipmet so, instead, we dropped some Cat 3 (because it was
> > > handy) down the four floors, hooked the T1 to it and it ran just fine.  My
> > > point here is that while the contractor definitely screwed up and should be
> > > made to fix or repair the problem, Cat 3 will perform beyond the published
> > > spec and should be given a chance since it's already there.
> > >
> > >
> > > "Brett Crapser" <cmdrcody@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
> > > news:g6uf24-bg9.ln1@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> > > > dpw <dpw168@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> > > >> Appreciate the reply.  Checked with blackbox earlier today and they say
> > > >> they do not have a solution.  Homeowner says he isn't going to accept
> > > >> the Cat3 and is telling ec that either he finds a solution or is going
> > > >> to be fishing a lot new wire.  I think the throughput on these media
> > > >> converters from RG6 to RJ45 was good.  Unfortunately still cannot find
> > > >> company that had them.
> > > >>
> > > >> Thanks again.
> > > >>
> > > >
> > > > You could try  www.multilet.us  it lets you use the RF and the Ethernet.
> > > > I just a outlet box in size too.
> > > >
> > > > Brett