I have an application (Smart TV) which calls for a "Ethernet Cable
(Screened)".

Are they all screened as a quick look on Amazon doesn't make any
differentiation.


Regards

John

"DerbyBoy" wrote in message ...

I have an application (Smart TV) which calls for a "Ethernet Cable
(Screened)".

Are they all screened as a quick look on Amazon doesn't make any
differentiation.


Regards

John
Sorry - the actual wording in the manual is "LAN Cable (Shielded)"

DerbyBoy wrote:

I have an application (Smart TV) which calls for a "Ethernet Cable
(Screened)".

Are they all screened as a quick look on Amazon doesn't make any
differentiation.


Regards

John

No - you do not need screened cable for regular ethernet upto 1 gig/sec over
medium distances.

HTH

Tim

--
Tim Watts

On Wed, 4 Jan 2012 17:23:07 -0000, "DerbyBoy" No-one
wrote:



"DerbyBoy" wrote in message ...

I have an application (Smart TV) which calls for a "Ethernet Cable
(Screened)".

Are they all screened as a quick look on Amazon doesn't make any
differentiation.


Regards

John
Sorry - the actual wording in the manual is "LAN Cable (Shielded)"

I wonder if you really need shielded cable.
The expression Smart TV covers a multitude of things so you need to
be more specific about the application.

If it's just to carry (up to) Gigabit Ethernet in a normal
environment, then you won't need shielded.




--
Graham.
%Profound_observation%

On Wed, 4 Jan 2012 17:09:44 -0000, DerbyBoy wrote:

I have an application (Smart TV) which calls for a "Ethernet Cable
(Screened)".

Are they all screened as a quick look on Amazon doesn't make any
differentiation.

Ethernet cable (normally Cat5e) isn't normally screened. For most
applications screening isn't required. I doubt that a Smart TV in a
domestic enviroment needs screening on it's ethernet connection.

What maybe an issue is any RFI generated in the TV getting out on an
unscreened cable. Our panny set came with a couple of large ferrite
cores to put around the ethernet cable.

--
Cheers
Dave.

In article ,
"DerbyBoy" No-one writes:
I have an application (Smart TV) which calls for a "Ethernet Cable
(Screened)".

Are they all screened as a quick look on Amazon doesn't make any
differentiation.

Ethernet cable isn't normally screened, because it doesn't need
it, and it's a nightmere to get the screening earthing done right
throughout an installation, and it doesn't work unless you get it
exactly right.

(At least, I assume we're talking about modern twisted pair/RJ45,
and not 10Base2 or 10Base5 ;-)

--
Andrew Gabriel
[email address is not usable -- followup in the newsgroup]

On Wed, 4 Jan 2012 17:23:07 -0000
"DerbyBoy" No-one wrote:

Are they all screened as a quick look on Amazon doesn't make any
differentiation.

Sorry - the actual wording in the manual is "LAN Cable (Shielded)"

Modern "twisted pair" cabling (aka 10baseT) has no shielding. This is
what is commonly available now, and often known as "Cat 5". Older
ethernet cables were shielded co-ax, the common ones being 10base5 (aka
"thickwire") and 10base2 (aka "thinwire" or "BNC" from the connectors used).


You're going to need a better description from the supplier, preferably
with a reference to an actual specification.



Mike

On 04/01/2012 17:09, DerbyBoy wrote:
I have an application (Smart TV) which calls for a "Ethernet Cable
(Screened)".

Are they all screened as a quick look on Amazon doesn't make any
differentiation.

No, generally 10/100/1000 Mbit/sec ethernet uses Unshielded Twisted Pair
(UTP) cables. However you can get Shielded Twisted Pair (STP). You may
find suitable leads labelled as CAT6 STP rather than the more common CAT5E.

Having said that, you will find it will almost certainly work fine with
normal CAT5E UTP cables.


--
Cheers,

John.

/================================================== ===============\
| Internode Ltd - http://www.internode.co.uk |
|-----------------------------------------------------------------|
| John Rumm - john(at)internode(dot)co(dot)uk |
\================================================= ================/

On Wed, 04 Jan 2012 17:09:44 -0000, DerbyBoy No-one wrote:

I have an application (Smart TV) which calls for a "Ethernet Cable
(Screened)".

Are they all screened as a quick look on Amazon doesn't make any
differentiation.


Regards

John

My Smart TV (well, TV that can talk Internet) works just fine on a
standard Cat 5e cable. I would be amazed if you need anything better.

--
Rod

On 04/01/2012 19:51, DerbyBoy wrote:

I have ordered one of these:
http://www.amazon.co.uk/Shielded-Net...6527&s r=1-11



It will at least be tidier that the 3 metre lead I have - which may not
be shielded.

Yup, although the STP stuff is a bit stiffer and harder to get to stay
where you want it ;-)

I have a tech prob and want to be sure I have met the instructions in
the manual.

Fair enough...


--
Cheers,

John.

/================================================== ===============\
| Internode Ltd - http://www.internode.co.uk |
|-----------------------------------------------------------------|
| John Rumm - john(at)internode(dot)co(dot)uk |
\================================================= ================/

Mike Causer wrote:
On Wed, 4 Jan 2012 17:23:07 -0000
"DerbyBoy" No-one wrote:

Are they all screened as a quick look on Amazon doesn't make any
differentiation.

Sorry - the actual wording in the manual is "LAN Cable (Shielded)"

Modern "twisted pair" cabling (aka 10baseT) has no shielding.

Some has shielding

This is
what is commonly available now, and often known as "Cat 5". Older
ethernet cables were shielded co-ax, the common ones being 10base5 (aka
"thickwire") and 10base2 (aka "thinwire" or "BNC" from the connectors used).


You're going to need a better description from the supplier, preferably
with a reference to an actual specification.



Mike

"DerbyBoy" No-one wrote in message
...
I have an application (Smart TV) which calls for a "Ethernet Cable
(Screened)".

Are they all screened as a quick look on Amazon doesn't make any
differentiation.


Regards

John

My employers have miles of ethernet cables (we're programmers) and it's all
twisted pairs, no shielding.

If you need a really long cable, you might consider WiFi instead. Something
like a DLink DAP 1160 will convert "wired" to "wireless" and I happily
stream HD iPlayer over exactly that from my Dlink WiFi router/ADSL modem
which is some inconvenient distance form the TV.

Paul DS.

Paul D Smith wrote:

If you need a really long cable, you might consider WiFi instead.
Something like a DLink DAP 1160 will convert "wired" to "wireless" and I
happily stream HD iPlayer over exactly that from my Dlink WiFi router/ADSL
modem which is some inconvenient distance form the TV.

Does the lower speed of WiFi compared with ethernet become relevant
when dealing with TV (video) data?

--
Timothy Murphy
e-mail: gayleard /at/ eircom.net
tel: +353-86-2336090, +353-1-2842366
s-mail: School of Mathematics, Trinity College Dublin

On Jan 5, 12:46*pm, Timothy Murphy wrote:
Paul D Smith wrote:
If you need a really long cable, you might consider WiFi instead.
Something like a DLink DAP 1160 will convert "wired" to "wireless" and I
happily stream HD iPlayer over exactly that from my Dlink WiFi router/ADSL
modem which is some inconvenient distance form the TV.

Does the lower speed of WiFi compared with ethernet become relevant
when dealing with TV (video) data?

Not really. The Ethernet in a smart TV is mostly for streaming content
from the web which, for most people, will be limited by their
broadband connection.

MBQ

On 04/01/2012 17:09, DerbyBoy wrote:
I have an application (Smart TV) which calls for a "Ethernet Cable
(Screened)".

Are they all screened as a quick look on Amazon doesn't make any
differentiation.



This is made for Denon, but probably will work just as well as many others.

"Denon AKDL1 Dedicated Link Cable"
http://www.amazon.com/dp/B000I1X6PM

A keen review ...

"Believe me I didn't need any more convincing but when I listened the
digital remix of 'Snoop Dog Plays Vivaldi' well, words simply cannot
describe."

--
Adrian C

Man at B&Q wrote:
On Jan 5, 12:46 pm, Timothy Murphy wrote:
Paul D Smith wrote:
If you need a really long cable, you might consider WiFi instead.
Something like a DLink DAP 1160 will convert "wired" to "wireless" and I
happily stream HD iPlayer over exactly that from my Dlink WiFi router/ADSL
modem which is some inconvenient distance form the TV.
Does the lower speed of WiFi compared with ethernet become relevant
when dealing with TV (video) data?

Not really. The Ethernet in a smart TV is mostly for streaming content
from the web which, for most people, will be limited by their
broadband connection.


well yes and no.

Wifi is not full duplex for a start, and if other people are using it it
can become a limiting factor.

As can the DSL connection if while you are watching that HD video, your
email client wakes up and starts downloading a huge email attachment..

DSL itself is good for about one decent HD video stream and nothing
else. (well my sort of 4Mbps BRAS type DSL anyway).

WiFi is good for 2 or three such...
Wifi is a best efforts 50Mbps or so half duplex *shared* connection..

100Mbps Ethernet is a guaranteed 100MBPS FULL DUPLEX link to wherever.


MBQ

On Thu, 05 Jan 2012 13:46:51 +0100, Timothy Murphy wrote:

If you need a really long cable, you might consider WiFi instead.

Ethernet will run out to 100m in an single segment. How long is your
"really long cable"? I think you'd be pushing WiFi to work through
100m of building, at least at a sensible speed. That ethernet would
be 100Mbps full duplex.

Does the lower speed of WiFi compared with ethernet become relevant
when dealing with TV (video) data?

Depends what you mean by "TV (video) data".

If you mean iPlayer type stuff that only needs about 2Mbps but is
only just watchable, OK for catch up of something you missed but
otherwise it's not that good.

If you mean streaming a ripped HD bluray disc from a local media
server then you need not far short of 50Mbps.

If you mean watching stuff as it come out the back of a broadcast HD
camera you need over 1Gbps.

--
Cheers
Dave.

In article 20120104181526.7bf3475e@surya,
says...

On Wed, 4 Jan 2012 17:23:07 -0000
"DerbyBoy" No-one wrote:

Are they all screened as a quick look on Amazon doesn't make any
differentiation.

Sorry - the actual wording in the manual is "LAN Cable (Shielded)"

Modern "twisted pair" cabling (aka 10baseT) has no shielding. This is
what is commonly available now, and often known as "Cat 5".

Oh! I must be dreaming this Cat 5 SHIELDED cable connecting this laptop
to my router, then!

And take a look at this:

http://uk.farnell.com/te-connectivit...0-1/plug-rj45-
emt/dp/4739504

or http://tinyurl.com/8xb88to

which clearly has a metal screen with cable entry designed to crimp on
to cable with a braided screen (other cables use a foil screen and drain
wire and use slightly different connectors).

If you at this current list ...

http://tinyurl.com/6tjzg9n

(I'm not even going to attempt posting a 605 character link on here!)

.... and hover over he thumbnails one by one, you'll see a lot of the
connectors have screens (obviously, connectors intended for use on
unscreened cables don't have them).

Unfortunately, despite allowing you to filter your search by any number
of parameters, Farnell don't offer the option of shielded/un-shielded!


You're going to need a better description from the supplier, preferably
with a reference to an actual specification.


That would certainly help. It would also help if you gave some detail of
what you are doing - the length of the cable run and if it is going to
be in an (electrically) hostile environment, for example.

I have a number of fully screened Cat 5 patch cords here - free to a
good home. [1] But they are only 3m long, which may be a tad short for
your purposes!

[1] Genuine offer. Brand new and unused. Probably around 20 to 30
available, possibly more. Location: SW Essex/NE London. E-mail me if
interested:

cat5patch (at) tiscali (dot) co (dot) uk

--

Terry

Dave Liquorice wrote:
On Thu, 05 Jan 2012 13:46:51 +0100, Timothy Murphy wrote:

If you need a really long cable, you might consider WiFi instead.

Ethernet will run out to 100m in an single segment. How long is your
"really long cable"? I think you'd be pushing WiFi to work through
100m of building, at least at a sensible speed. That ethernet would
be 100Mbps full duplex.

Does the lower speed of WiFi compared with ethernet become relevant
when dealing with TV (video) data?

Depends what you mean by "TV (video) data".

If you mean iPlayer type stuff that only needs about 2Mbps but is
only just watchable, OK for catch up of something you missed but
otherwise it's not that good.

If you mean streaming a ripped HD bluray disc from a local media
server then you need not far short of 50Mbps.

If you mean watching stuff as it come out the back of a broadcast HD
camera you need over 1Gbps.

BBC HD i-player/internet stream is about 4Mbps for comparison.

And its very watchable - I managed to catch one of the formula one
practices. Very nice EXCEPT when they were panning past loads of
spectators..the spectators sort of turned into a smear of multicoloured
vomit. I guess the picture was simply changing too fast for the
compression algo to do a decent job...

On 05/01/2012 12:46, Timothy Murphy wrote:
Paul D Smith wrote:

If you need a really long cable, you might consider WiFi instead.
Something like a DLink DAP 1160 will convert "wired" to "wireless" and I
happily stream HD iPlayer over exactly that from my Dlink WiFi router/ADSL
modem which is some inconvenient distance form the TV.

Does the lower speed of WiFi compared with ethernet become relevant
when dealing with TV (video) data?

Potentially yes... but it does depend on what you are using the ethernet
connection for.

If all you want is access to Youtube via the internet, then it makes
little difference, since whatever wifi speed you get will still be well
in excess of most broadband connections.

If however you have a DLNA media server stuffed full of HD movies etc,
and you want to stream them to the TV, you may find the wifi ruyns out
of puff. Hence the popularity of "Homeplug AV" data over mains gizmos
for this application.


--
Cheers,

John.

/================================================== ===============\
| Internode Ltd - http://www.internode.co.uk |
|-----------------------------------------------------------------|
| John Rumm - john(at)internode(dot)co(dot)uk |
\================================================= ================/

Dave Liquorice wrote:
What maybe an issue is any RFI generated in the TV getting out on an
unscreened cable. Our panny set came with a couple of large ferrite
cores to put around the ethernet cable.

Speculating wildly, I wonder if the set is just about on its permitted RFI
limits, and specifying STP enables them to creep under the threshold. They
know that nobody's going to use STP, but they put it in the manual to tick
the regulatory box. Same reason that your set came with ferrite cores... as
a quick'n'dirty fix.

Theo

On Jan 5, 1:29*pm, The Natural Philosopher
wrote:
Man at B&Q wrote:
On Jan 5, 12:46 pm, Timothy Murphy wrote:
Paul D Smith wrote:
If you need a really long cable, you might consider WiFi instead.
Something like a DLink DAP 1160 will convert "wired" to "wireless" and I
happily stream HD iPlayer over exactly that from my Dlink WiFi router/ADSL
modem which is some inconvenient distance form the TV.
Does the lower speed of WiFi compared with ethernet become relevant
when dealing with TV (video) data?

Not really. The Ethernet in a smart TV is mostly for streaming content
from the web which, for most people, will be limited by their
broadband connection.

well yes and no.

Like I said not really.

Wifi is not full duplex for a start, and if other people are using it it
can become a limiting factor.
As can the DSL connection if while you are watching that HD video, your
email client wakes up and starts downloading a huge email attachment..

The question was about the WiFi link. Why do you think I said that
most peoples broadband will be the limit?

DSL itself is good for about one decent HD video stream and nothing
else. (well my sort of 4Mbps BRAS type DSL anyway).

Indeed. Except we get 16Mbps+ to the exchange from here.

WiFi is good for 2 or three such...

So, like I said, the limit will be the broadband connection, not the
WiFi.

Wifi is a best efforts 50Mbps or so half duplex *shared* connection..

Still many times most peoples broadband connection.

100Mbps Ethernet is a guaranteed 100MBPS FULL DUPLEX link to wherever.

The point being that smart TVs, for most users, don't do "to
wherever".

Do you have anything of value to contribute?

MBQ

On 05/01/2012 17:52, Theo Markettos wrote:
Dave wrote:
What maybe an issue is any RFI generated in the TV getting out on an
unscreened cable. Our panny set came with a couple of large ferrite
cores to put around the ethernet cable.

Speculating wildly, I wonder if the set is just about on its permitted RFI
limits, and specifying STP enables them to creep under the threshold. They
know that nobody's going to use STP, but they put it in the manual to tick
the regulatory box. Same reason that your set came with ferrite cores... as
a quick'n'dirty fix.

Theo

I have a portable Sony Minidisc recorder like that. MZ-RH910.

It came with a whole kit of ferrite cores (3!) with instructions for the
user to wind small loops around each for microphone, power and line
input connections when the recorder is connected to a computer via USB.

The reason is plainy stated in the manual as "You must attach a clamp
filter to comply with the applicable EMC standards" - and that's it. No
proper explanation to the consumer on what on earth EMC is all about,
and why Sony couldn't have resolved this in a neater fashion.

Guess the goods were a bit too close to leaving the factory gates ...

--
Adrian C

"John Rumm" wrote in message
o.uk...
On 05/01/2012 12:46, Timothy Murphy wrote:
Paul D Smith wrote:

If you need a really long cable, you might consider WiFi instead.
Something like a DLink DAP 1160 will convert "wired" to "wireless" and I
happily stream HD iPlayer over exactly that from my Dlink WiFi
router/ADSL
modem which is some inconvenient distance form the TV.

Does the lower speed of WiFi compared with ethernet become relevant
when dealing with TV (video) data?

Potentially yes... but it does depend on what you are using the ethernet
connection for.

If all you want is access to Youtube via the internet, then it makes
little difference, since whatever wifi speed you get will still be well in
excess of most broadband connections.

If however you have a DLNA media server stuffed full of HD movies etc, and
you want to stream them to the TV, you may find the wifi ruyns out of
puff. Hence the popularity of "Homeplug AV" data over mains gizmos for
this application.

WiFi is quite quick.
I can saturate my 18M DSL connection with ease using WiFi.
The laptop will be doing other things over WiFi at the same time.
I can be streaming a HD video into the laptop and then out to my TV, both
over the same WiFi without any problems.
That is on either band although I prefer to use the 5G band.

Man at B&Q wrote:
On Jan 5, 1:29 pm, The Natural Philosopher
wrote:
Man at B&Q wrote:
On Jan 5, 12:46 pm, Timothy Murphy wrote:
Paul D Smith wrote:
If you need a really long cable, you might consider WiFi instead.
Something like a DLink DAP 1160 will convert "wired" to "wireless" and I
happily stream HD iPlayer over exactly that from my Dlink WiFi router/ADSL
modem which is some inconvenient distance form the TV.
Does the lower speed of WiFi compared with ethernet become relevant
when dealing with TV (video) data?
Not really. The Ethernet in a smart TV is mostly for streaming content
from the web which, for most people, will be limited by their
broadband connection.
well yes and no.

Like I said not really.

Wifi is not full duplex for a start, and if other people are using it it
can become a limiting factor.
As can the DSL connection if while you are watching that HD video, your
email client wakes up and starts downloading a huge email attachment..

The question was about the WiFi link. Why do you think I said that
most peoples broadband will be the limit?

DSL itself is good for about one decent HD video stream and nothing
else. (well my sort of 4Mbps BRAS type DSL anyway).

Indeed. Except we get 16Mbps+ to the exchange from here.

WiFi is good for 2 or three such...

So, like I said, the limit will be the broadband connection, not the
WiFi.

Wifi is a best efforts 50Mbps or so half duplex *shared* connection..

Still many times most peoples broadband connection.

100Mbps Ethernet is a guaranteed 100MBPS FULL DUPLEX link to wherever.

The point being that smart TVs, for most users, don't do "to
wherever".

Do you have anything of value to contribute?

MBQ
You have totally missed the point which was,. if the wifi is being used
by other machines to talk to each other at the same time then its NOT
good enough.

I now you spend YOUR time talking to ourself, but here at least my wife
and I share a server and we found WiFi simply not good enough to watch
videos off it, if someone else was using it to do - say - a file save
onto the server.

dennis@home wrote:


"John Rumm" wrote in message
o.uk...
On 05/01/2012 12:46, Timothy Murphy wrote:
Paul D Smith wrote:

If you need a really long cable, you might consider WiFi instead.
Something like a DLink DAP 1160 will convert "wired" to "wireless"
and I
happily stream HD iPlayer over exactly that from my Dlink WiFi
router/ADSL
modem which is some inconvenient distance form the TV.

Does the lower speed of WiFi compared with ethernet become relevant
when dealing with TV (video) data?

Potentially yes... but it does depend on what you are using the
ethernet connection for.

If all you want is access to Youtube via the internet, then it makes
little difference, since whatever wifi speed you get will still be
well in excess of most broadband connections.

If however you have a DLNA media server stuffed full of HD movies etc,
and you want to stream them to the TV, you may find the wifi ruyns out
of puff. Hence the popularity of "Homeplug AV" data over mains gizmos
for this application.

WiFi is quite quick.
I can saturate my 18M DSL connection with ease using WiFi.

I can saturate my wifi with a single file transfer.

The laptop will be doing other things over WiFi at the same time.
I can be streaming a HD video into the laptop and then out to my TV,
both over the same WiFi without any problems.
That is on either band although I prefer to use the 5G band.

"The Natural Philosopher" wrote in message
...
dennis@home wrote:


"John Rumm" wrote in message
o.uk...
On 05/01/2012 12:46, Timothy Murphy wrote:
Paul D Smith wrote:

If you need a really long cable, you might consider WiFi instead.
Something like a DLink DAP 1160 will convert "wired" to "wireless" and
I
happily stream HD iPlayer over exactly that from my Dlink WiFi
router/ADSL
modem which is some inconvenient distance form the TV.

Does the lower speed of WiFi compared with ethernet become relevant
when dealing with TV (video) data?

Potentially yes... but it does depend on what you are using the ethernet
connection for.

If all you want is access to Youtube via the internet, then it makes
little difference, since whatever wifi speed you get will still be well
in excess of most broadband connections.

If however you have a DLNA media server stuffed full of HD movies etc,
and you want to stream them to the TV, you may find the wifi ruyns out
of puff. Hence the popularity of "Homeplug AV" data over mains gizmos
for this application.

WiFi is quite quick.
I can saturate my 18M DSL connection with ease using WiFi.

I can saturate my wifi with a single file transfer.

So?
That's not what the OP is likely to do.
And if that causes you a problem then run some better software which
prioritises the AV stuff so it works.

The laptop will be doing other things over WiFi at the same time.
I can be streaming a HD video into the laptop and then out to my TV, both
over the same WiFi without any problems.
That is on either band although I prefer to use the 5G band.

On 05/01/2012 19:38, dennis@home wrote:


"John Rumm" wrote in message
o.uk...
On 05/01/2012 12:46, Timothy Murphy wrote:
Paul D Smith wrote:

If you need a really long cable, you might consider WiFi instead.
Something like a DLink DAP 1160 will convert "wired" to "wireless"
and I
happily stream HD iPlayer over exactly that from my Dlink WiFi
router/ADSL
modem which is some inconvenient distance form the TV.

Does the lower speed of WiFi compared with ethernet become relevant
when dealing with TV (video) data?

Potentially yes... but it does depend on what you are using the
ethernet connection for.

If all you want is access to Youtube via the internet, then it makes
little difference, since whatever wifi speed you get will still be
well in excess of most broadband connections.

If however you have a DLNA media server stuffed full of HD movies etc,
and you want to stream them to the TV, you may find the wifi ruyns out
of puff. Hence the popularity of "Homeplug AV" data over mains gizmos
for this application.

WiFi is quite quick.

Sometimes... much depends on if you are running 802.11 n or g. And with
g, in particular how many folks in the neighbourhood you are being
forced to share spectrum with. That is before you start taking into
account losses due to range or attenuation from the building fabric.

I can saturate my 18M DSL connection with ease using WiFi.
The laptop will be doing other things over WiFi at the same time.
I can be streaming a HD video into the laptop and then out to my TV,
both over the same WiFi without any problems.
That is on either band although I prefer to use the 5G band.


--
Cheers,

John.

/================================================== ===============\
| Internode Ltd - http://www.internode.co.uk |
|-----------------------------------------------------------------|
| John Rumm - john(at)internode(dot)co(dot)uk |
\================================================= ================/

dennis@home wrote:


"The Natural Philosopher" wrote in message
...
dennis@home wrote:


"John Rumm" wrote in message
o.uk...
On 05/01/2012 12:46, Timothy Murphy wrote:
Paul D Smith wrote:

If you need a really long cable, you might consider WiFi instead.
Something like a DLink DAP 1160 will convert "wired" to "wireless"
and I
happily stream HD iPlayer over exactly that from my Dlink WiFi
router/ADSL
modem which is some inconvenient distance form the TV.

Does the lower speed of WiFi compared with ethernet become relevant
when dealing with TV (video) data?

Potentially yes... but it does depend on what you are using the
ethernet connection for.

If all you want is access to Youtube via the internet, then it makes
little difference, since whatever wifi speed you get will still be
well in excess of most broadband connections.

If however you have a DLNA media server stuffed full of HD movies
etc, and you want to stream them to the TV, you may find the wifi
ruyns out of puff. Hence the popularity of "Homeplug AV" data over
mains gizmos for this application.

WiFi is quite quick.
I can saturate my 18M DSL connection with ease using WiFi.

I can saturate my wifi with a single file transfer.

So?
That's not what the OP is likely to do.
And if that causes you a problem then run some better software which
prioritises the AV stuff so it works.


now how do I do that on a shared wifi ethernet?

On 05/01/2012 19:31, Man at B&Q wrote:
On Jan 5, 1:29 pm, The Natural
wrote:
Man at B&Q wrote:
On Jan 5, 12:46 pm, Timothy wrote:
Paul D Smith wrote:
If you need a really long cable, you might consider WiFi instead.
Something like a DLink DAP 1160 will convert "wired" to "wireless" and I
happily stream HD iPlayer over exactly that from my Dlink WiFi router/ADSL
modem which is some inconvenient distance form the TV.
Does the lower speed of WiFi compared with ethernet become relevant
when dealing with TV (video) data?

Not really. The Ethernet in a smart TV is mostly for streaming content
from the web which, for most people, will be limited by their
broadband connection.

well yes and no.

Like I said not really.

Wifi is not full duplex for a start, and if other people are using it it
can become a limiting factor.
As can the DSL connection if while you are watching that HD video, your
email client wakes up and starts downloading a huge email attachment..

The question was about the WiFi link. Why do you think I said that
most peoples broadband will be the limit?

No idea.

If I am streaming a movie from my media server to a couple of TVs, I
can't see what it has to do with my broadband.



--
Cheers,

John.

/================================================== ===============\
| Internode Ltd - http://www.internode.co.uk |
|-----------------------------------------------------------------|
| John Rumm - john(at)internode(dot)co(dot)uk |
\================================================= ================/

"The Natural Philosopher" wrote in message
...
dennis@home wrote:


"The Natural Philosopher" wrote in message
...
dennis@home wrote:


"John Rumm" wrote in message
o.uk...
On 05/01/2012 12:46, Timothy Murphy wrote:
Paul D Smith wrote:

If you need a really long cable, you might consider WiFi instead.
Something like a DLink DAP 1160 will convert "wired" to "wireless"
and I
happily stream HD iPlayer over exactly that from my Dlink WiFi
router/ADSL
modem which is some inconvenient distance form the TV.

Does the lower speed of WiFi compared with ethernet become relevant
when dealing with TV (video) data?

Potentially yes... but it does depend on what you are using the
ethernet connection for.

If all you want is access to Youtube via the internet, then it makes
little difference, since whatever wifi speed you get will still be
well in excess of most broadband connections.

If however you have a DLNA media server stuffed full of HD movies etc,
and you want to stream them to the TV, you may find the wifi ruyns out
of puff. Hence the popularity of "Homeplug AV" data over mains gizmos
for this application.

WiFi is quite quick.
I can saturate my 18M DSL connection with ease using WiFi.

I can saturate my wifi with a single file transfer.

So?
That's not what the OP is likely to do.
And if that causes you a problem then run some better software which
prioritises the AV stuff so it works.


now how do I do that on a shared wifi ethernet?

802.11n supports QOS but even you could put in two access points and split
the use.

Zapp Brannigan wrote:

I have an application (Smart TV) which calls for a "Ethernet Cable
(Screened)".

Are they all screened as a quick look on Amazon doesn't make any
differentiation.

Try an ordinary cable, it'll likely work fine.

I'm using an ordinarly ethernet cable to attach my Samsung Smart TV (D5520)
to a PC, and it seems to work perfectly.


--
Timothy Murphy
e-mail: gayleard /at/ eircom.net
tel: +353-86-2336090, +353-1-2842366
s-mail: School of Mathematics, Trinity College Dublin

On 07/01/2012 13:19, Timothy Murphy wrote:
I'm using an ordinarly ethernet cable to attach my Samsung Smart TV (D5520)
to a PC, and it seems to work perfectly.

And I'm using one for my Sony.

Quite a long one as it happens - the direct path might only be 20ft, but
it goes via the loft.