Fiber optic cable links are a reality and can be ruggedized much like copper cable. Eventually cost will dominate, and there will be cross-over to active optical cables (when is the question…?)

There is a LOT of pull for higher density cabling in the data center, and if you’ve seen the pictures of copper cabling

Really bad idea.

Gerald, while Wimax might be cool if it ever gets deployed I don’t see enterprises moving to that for internal communications for quite some time. It’s been an uphill battle just getting them to accept WiFi and it’s never a replacement, rather an augmentation.

If they do (and I don’t know about cat-7), you might as well replace it with fibre. The Dr John invention from Melbourne though seems different as it promises to make what is already there much more able to reliably deliver the speeds we want in the future.

I wrote about this issue a few weeks ago, just after the news broke from Melbourne. Sorry for polluting your site with external links, but this is relevant!

Cheers

Jeremy

The point I was trying to make is that it takes much more than just the cable. There are a lot that have the perception that you buy into a cable that can perform to that spec, you are going to get that speeds.

Yes, agreed… the speeds always start from the backbone and main core as it’s the one that govern the network.

Now, you’ll get no argument from me that the OS’s aren’t capable of supporting that kind of throughput.

However, with speeds like this it always starts in the backbone between core network devices before it trickles down to the end user. Some big iron like a Cisco 6500 might be able to push 100gbps in a few years. They are already pushing x10gbps without trouble.

Also, you mention that Cat7 has 4 pairs of twisted wires. That’s true of all of these. The big difference is that each pair is shielded and then the bundle is shielded as well. Shielding adds $$$. Add in the cost of a different connector architecture and it’s easy to understand why it will take several years before anyone gives this serious consideration.

Still, copper is the cockroach because it’s magnitudes easier to install than fiber. Fiber requires very specialized (ie, expensive) tools to terminate and test. Copper’s also more resilient. You can really toss it around without worrying much about getting a kink in it. Try that with fiber!

And finally, it’s a lot harder to send power over fiber. :)

I have to also state that making cables capable of that speed is one thing but it all depends on the interfaces at both ends. If you didn’t know, Cat6 copper cables out there currently support up to 1000 Mbps but no commercial NIC out there on the market currently supports it i.e. you can just go out to a Best Buy to buy one. So what I am trying to say is the speed the data sent down the cable is only as good as the interfaces on the ends (no matter what the capability of the cable is).

Unless the major manufacturers buy into the fact that it is profitable to commercially mass produce interfaces that support so called 100 Gps Cat7 speeds, we’ll probably never see it. My opinion is that if we haven’t seen 1000 Mbps NICs sold commonly now for the average user, we probably will never see 100 Gps ones. Most manufacturers probably see the future in fiber instead of copper and are reluctant to make the initial investment.

I have to also state that making cables capable of that speed is one thing but it all depends on the interfaces at both ends. If you didn’t know, Cat6 copper cables out there currently support up to 1000 Mbps but no commercial NIC out there on the market currently supports it i.e. you can just go out to a Best Buy to buy one. So what I am trying to say is the speed the data sent down the cable is only as good as the interfaces on the ends (no matter what the capability of the cable is).

Unless the major manufacturers buy into the fact that it is profitable to commercially mass produce interfaces that support so called 100 Gps Cat7 speeds, we’ll probably never see it. My opinion is that if we haven’t seen 1000 Mbps NICs sold commonly now for the average user, we probably will never see 100 Gps ones. Most manufacturers probably see the future in fiber instead of copper and are reluctant to make the initial investment.