On Sun, 21 Apr 2002, Chad Fernandez wrote: A set of cheap auto-sensing 10/100 switches is plenty for most home networks. I have a $2500 managed Netelligent 8-port switch in the closet, unplugged. The main switch for my network is a $70 NetGear.... It's _quieter_. Under VERY heavy load the Compaq outperforms the NetGear, but only then. If I have an unruly NIC or host, the management features are nice, but the real solution to that is still to replace the NIC or reconfigure the host. I can't justify the increased power requirements and noise of the Netelligent unit. If it hadn't been cheaper than the NetGear, I wouldn't have it at all. The extra $20 or so for a switch over a hub is well worth it, though. Doc

Search for the name "Skylink" and "switch" (you may have to include description as well as title). I have 2 of these 10/100 switches (as opposed to a hub) that absolutely fly - cost me about $40 each (new) 6 months ago. I even have print servers and printers with internal NICs that are 10baseT and they don't lag at all. Much is since a switch will full duplex where a hub goes half duplex. A switch is less prone to collision and can effectively give you 20/200. All that I have on mine ncluding a PowerMac the unmanaged switch has been fine, and easy to use. I might have 2 to sell for what I paid for them. They usually end around $55 each plus shipping, they are that popular. I'm considering getting a 16 port version just to consolidate them. My present set of 2 hardly used 8 port switches (in the box) would be available then. => -----Original Message----- => From: owner-classiccmp(a)classiccmp.org => [mailto:owner-classiccmp@classiccmp.org]On Behalf Of Chad Fernandez => Sent: Sunday, April 21, 2002 1:35 AM => To: classiccmp(a)classiccmp.org => Subject: Network Hub selection help needed => => => I'm finally going to work on hooking up a home network, so I guess I => need a hub. What should I look for? I don't know much about networks => yet. I have potentially 7 computers that I'd like to have connected. => It'll need to be 10Base-T, but 100base-T may be involved too. I thought => I'd look for something on Ebay, hopefully, not too expensive. Maybe => something commercial grade, However. I thought about something from IBM => or 3Com, any suggestions?? => => Chad Fernandez => Michigan, USA => =>

There are lots of reasons not to do this, but if low cost and neatness of wiring is of any interest to you, don't forget about 10Base2 (coax) as a medium. Few applications really require the 100baseTX, though there's no reason not to use that, since it's the current default. If you use COAX, however, there's no need for a hub, which means that there will be less cabling, etc. While the 10/100 NIC's cost under $20, the typical (second-hand) 10Base2 NIC costs $2. There's only one coax, and it reaches It matters not whether you use a client/server or peer-to-peer network with COAX, since the fewer than 2 dozen computers will all share the same segment. I had my computers set up this way for years, until I thought I'd get noticeably better performance with 100BaseTX. I didn't get noticeably better performance, though there was a significant measurable difference. Back then, I had about 8 stations on the LAN, while I now use only 5. I intended to use the higher speed because I wanted to write CD's over the LAN, but that seldom worked out in spite of the higher performance. Another motivator was the need to run backups over the LAN. With the standard ethernet, it took nearly a whole 24 hours to do the daily full backup, while it took about 1/3 that time over the fast ethernet. Aside from that, the performance of the standard ethernet was quite adequate. Without a hub, there's no one place to which all the cables have to be routed, so there's less congestion, and less wire. I still use 10BaseT and coax to attach a couple of printers and the occasionally used *nix and DOS-only hardware. I have physically and economically small hubs (NetGear, which was cheap at the time and Thomas Conrad, which was left over from setting up the ISP) though the older (TC) hub was more costly and much bigger. It's just another option with low entry cost. Dick ----- Original Message ----- From: "Chad Fernandez" <fernande(a)internet1.net> To: <classiccmp(a)classiccmp.org> Sent: Sunday, April 21, 2002 12:34 AM Subject: Network Hub selection help needed