Registered: Jan 2001
Location: Garden City, MI, USA
It might work, but you obviously don't understand how hard I hammer on the equipment I have in my house. If someone was to sucker me into installing 1tb of storage in my closet, you can bet I'm not going to be using it to stream a few movies. It'd better handle internet web caching, file serving, unattended downloads, file storage for drive ghosting, etc etc etc. All stuff I wouldn't mind hacking into the functionality of the box, of course.
For 100mbps to work, it would have to understand and fairly address packet prioritizing. If I'm watching a DVD in my room, my friend is watching a DVD in his room, the stereo in the living room is listening to uncompressed (or losslessly compressed) audio, and I'm downloading a cached Linux ISO on my computer, the server had better understand that network packets get the lowest priority, streaming audio gets medium priority, and DVD packets get highest or critical priority. The biggest buzzkill in a movie is watching jittering or pixelation... audio not only uses less packets, but is less annoying when you get the occasional dropped packet... and network traffic can take a back seat to everything else. There's no reason I need 100mbps data transfer with all of the other more important time-sensitive packets flying around my house.
So even though it could work with packet queueing and other tricks, I'd rather have the extra bandwidth to work with. After all, transfering 6 nightly multi-gig hard drive ghosts to a terabyte server over a 100mbps line just doesn't make a heap of sense when you can do it much faster on a different wire. Of course, then there's the newly announced 10gbps ethernet... mmMMmMMmMmmmMmmMmm...
"Wit is educated Insolence." -Aristotle
Last edited by controlio on 05-13-2002 at 03:18 PM
POST #7 | Report this post to a moderator
| IP: Logged