Simon Pieman
Original Wanker
 Online
Posts: 36336
|
 |
« Reply #15 on: Tuesday, December 30, 2008, 15:33:02 » |
|
Cheers for the advice gents! Not sure what I'm gonna do... a new router would be ideal but I've been told virgin is a bit tempramental when it comes to using a non-OEM router. Hmmmmm
I setup Luci's ok, you just have to make sure you get a cable router modem not the one for adsl. |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
Peter Venkman
Past glories motivate us when times are bleak.
 Offline
Posts: 64800
Perfection is not attainable
|
|
« Reply #16 on: Tuesday, December 30, 2008, 17:21:49 » |
|
http://www.ebuyer.com/product/132429#Yer ya go, £19.99 wireless DSL 4 port should do ya.
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
From the station at Colchester
To the cells of Warrington
From the services at Leicester
To the slums of Northampton
We travel over England
And one day Europe too
Cos we all follow the Swindon
We're the famous Town End crew.
|
|
|
Batch
Not a Batch
Offline
Posts: 57838
|
|
« Reply #17 on: Tuesday, December 30, 2008, 17:30:33 » |
|
That doesn't have a cable modem does it? |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
Simon Pieman
Original Wanker
Online
Posts: 36336
|
|
« Reply #18 on: Tuesday, December 30, 2008, 18:15:23 » |
|
That doesn't have a cable modem does it?
No it doesn't, but it allows you to plug the virgin media modem into it |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
Batch
Not a Batch
Offline
Posts: 57838
|
|
« Reply #19 on: Tuesday, December 30, 2008, 19:04:50 » |
|
No it doesn't, but it allows you to plug the virgin media modem into it
Is it (the existing solution) just a modem then? Never seen one of their boxes, assumed it was a modem/router and so a switch would be cheaper. |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
tans
You spin me right round baby right round
Offline
Posts: 26823
|
|
« Reply #20 on: Tuesday, December 30, 2008, 19:23:33 » |
|
i have a spare netgear router somewhere if youre interested leggett?
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
Sippo
Living in the 80s
Offline
Posts: 15616
I ain't gettin on no plane fool
|
|
« Reply #21 on: Tuesday, December 30, 2008, 19:38:35 » |
|
When I used to work in cabling we'd never recomemnd cat 5 over 20ft or so.
All depends on the run.
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
If my calculations are correct, when this baby hits 88 miles per hour, you're gonna see some serious shit...
|
|
|
Leggett
Offline
Posts: 7870
|
|
« Reply #22 on: Tuesday, December 30, 2008, 21:24:01 » |
|
Jj, my sisters fella emailed her that very link earlier, so I've gone with that. Thanks chief  |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
Fuck you Leggett, fuck you.
|
|
|
Simon Pieman
Original Wanker
Online
Posts: 36336
|
|
« Reply #23 on: Tuesday, December 30, 2008, 22:41:47 » |
|
When I used to work in cabling we'd never recomemnd cat 5 over 20ft or so.
All depends on the run.
Not being clued up on such things, why? I'd have thought that even with some interference/signal degradation, the cable route is still going to be more stable than a wireless connection and unless you're using 802.11n, faster than the most stable WiFi. Of course that's not to say you're wrong, I'm just curious because I'm a geek and I like to know such trivial things. |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
Sippo
Living in the 80s
Offline
Posts: 15616
I ain't gettin on no plane fool
|
|
« Reply #24 on: Tuesday, December 30, 2008, 22:47:16 » |
|
Its just the data travel. Copper is more reliable than wireless obviously, but over such distance we've always advised fibre in cases over 25ft or so. Obviously not in a domestic sense, but i have known cat5 cables over a certain length to often fail after a few weeks. Most cat 5 pre-cabled are no longer sold over 5m nowadays. Very rare to get 15m especially.
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
If my calculations are correct, when this baby hits 88 miles per hour, you're gonna see some serious shit...
|
|
|
Simon Pieman
Original Wanker
Online
Posts: 36336
|
|
« Reply #25 on: Tuesday, December 30, 2008, 22:55:57 » |
|
My mate just got a reel of cat5 cable and the rj45 connectors straight on from Maplin (I think it was actually PC World but I have no idea if they still do this) and never had any problems.
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
Sippo
Living in the 80s
Offline
Posts: 15616
I ain't gettin on no plane fool
|
|
« Reply #26 on: Tuesday, December 30, 2008, 22:57:41 » |
|
you can buy reels of the stuff to make up you own cables, it would probably be fine domestically as it wouldn't carry much data. Its just a little slower over longer distances.
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
If my calculations are correct, when this baby hits 88 miles per hour, you're gonna see some serious shit...
|
|
|
Batch
Not a Batch
Offline
Posts: 57838
|
|
« Reply #27 on: Wednesday, December 31, 2008, 09:41:21 » |
|
I thought the standards say 10BaseT/100BaseT should be good up to 100m using cat 5. So I'm a bit confused by Sippo too, though I am not saying he is wrong.
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
Sippo
Living in the 80s
Offline
Posts: 15616
I ain't gettin on no plane fool
|
|
« Reply #28 on: Wednesday, December 31, 2008, 17:57:02 » |
|
You can use any length you want. In the past we've 'recommended' to people over a certain length that the speed/reliability of the cable will be more noticeable the longer you go. It also depends on the 'run' as said before. Copper can go around bends, 90 degree corners etc but the cable is likely to get damaged more...
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
If my calculations are correct, when this baby hits 88 miles per hour, you're gonna see some serious shit...
|
|
|
|
flammableBen
|
|
« Reply #29 on: Wednesday, December 31, 2008, 17:57:49 » |
|
Also the data can't go as far if it's uphill.
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
