going wireless

[neilo1978]

your PC (assuming it has a LAN card already of course).

What, is it 1996 again?

You never know, it may be an ancient machine.

 

[Skyhigh]

Wireless router = probably free from ISP

Wired home plugs = £30 to £80. Performance depends on house wiring, can also perform poorly depending on appliances used in house.
Plus, there's no need for them unless you're paranoid about wireless signals or have really thick walls

They won't necessarily give you better speed or reliability than wireless - both technologies reliability and speed depend on your house and location.

Go with the wireless first - if you've already got a wireless router-modem, or can get a free one from your ISP.


>>>> Here, I fed a troll and helped them derail the thread. I should know better.<<<<


Give wireless a go first, come back if you need more help

 

[Monkeh]

Continuing to de-rail the thread...

A: It's not 'RJ45'.

Yes it is. Referring to networking cable as 'RJ45' is commonplace. Why argue over semantics? Sad.

Commonplace and wildly incorrect. The connector is called an 8P8C. You want to give it a 'technical' name, use the right one, or just call it a damn ethernet cable. Why knowingly use the wrong name? Sad and stupid.

B: cat5 is sufficient for gigabit operation, cat5e is recommended. cat6e doesn't even exist.

Better tell Belkin that, and a few other cable manufacturers. Although cat6 has been available longer.

Belkin sell to people with too much money and too little sense. How about you tell the IEEE that their standards are incorrect? Cat5 will do for 1000BASE-T. Cat5e is perfectly fine. Cat6 and cat6a are not required for gigabit operation. And cat6e doesn't even exist.

For the price difference between cat5 and cat6 you might as well future proof if you're running cables.

Never said running cat6 or cat6a was a bad idea. I said your statement that cat5e only functions at up to 100Mbit is bullshit.

And actual transfer rates are far, far lower than that.

And.. wrong. If you've got a good signal and you're moving a decent sized file (to use the full rate) then you can. I trust you realised Mbps.
But for most 'standard internet users', they'll rarely use the full rate.

And.. you're wrong, not me. 802.11 simply does not provide transfer rates as high as advertised in the real world. Not at 2.4GHz, and nobody gives 5GHz equipment away for free. It's also very, very dependent on hardware and software.