I don't think wireless is a better option. It is a nice option, but not a complete replacement. I can run Gig-E speeds over Cat5e in my house (2 RG6QS/2 Cat5e at each drop). You can't touch that speed with wireless. It is good when running video. There is no congestion or interference - you basically get sustained speeds close to the system spec. Wireless doesn't give you either.
I wired my existing home about 18 months ago. I had to cut some holes, etc. I've got pictures and need to post the how-to sometime. I used combination cable with all four wires in it - that made a big difference. If I were building a new home, I would definitely recommend wiring it up. It is a lot easier when the walls are open and the cost is pretty low. I got all the tools I needed, a rack and something like 10 drops for about $1000 and I have a lot of bulk cable still left. If you want a professional to do it, I imagine the cost would be about triple or more.
In terms of future-proofing, I suppose today I would get Cat6, but that isn't a huge deal. I can imagine uses for faster than Gig-E, but to make that consumer-grade would be a challenge. Compare and contrast with people who say 100% wireless is the way to go. My network probably has 8-10x the speed of 802.11n (if not more). It's rock solid and secure. I have wireless as well, it is a good complement, but my data-heavy devices are all wired. Remember also that AppleTV is 100-base-T, so it isn't pulling in data all that fast even when wired. That might give you an idea of what ten years from now might be like in the home.
Exactly. The only thing I would add is that CAT-6a or 7 can better handle HDMI over CAT cable, which I don't think most people would want/need, but is good for "future-proofing". For pulling in an existing house, 5e is fine, as once you're pulling cable in an existing house, you can always pull more cable when you need it. I use all 5e now for that reason.
Just like broadband internet access, right? Oops.
Please tell me what you would use fiber in a house for? Keep in mind that CAT-6 can send 1080p 3D HDMI 200 feet along with IR and RS-232C, AND that CAT-6a can handle 10GbE up to 100m, with CAT-6 handling 10GbE at shorter distances. The bottom line, however, is that manufacturers and service providers aren't going to utilize fiber in the house because of the limited market of people who have it. Most houses don't even have CAT-5 right now, so forget about fiber.
Yes, there actually is. Fiber is used when copper can't go the distance. Look at Verizon FIOS. It might go multiple miles before getting to your ONT. The last few hundred feet of copper has just as much or more bandwidth than the fiber does, because of the distance.
Fixed that for you as well. Distance is not the only factor to consider when choosing a transmission medium, as every A+ and Network+ "certified technician" knows. You cannot selectively ignore the other significant factor to prove your point. This makes the rest of your post more or less irrelevant since you think that transmission speeds only go up to the one gigabit range.
CAT-6a can handle 10GbE. However, current computer are utilizing about 30% of GbE as it is, and unless you are using a NAS with a decent RAID system, there is no compelling reason for a home user to have GbE, other than because the brand name switches are about the same price, and the really cheap (<$12) 100mbit switches have lots of gremlins.
Really? It'll never be useful in houses?
No. It's purely a tech toy. I suppose optical digital audio is fiber, but it's no better than coaxial digital, and neither go through walls.
Likewise. I hope we never get past the gigabit speed on a LAN, because BiggAW says it's impossible to go past that on copper! Oh noes!
huh?
The other underlying fact here that you're ignoring is that there is a limited amount of bandwidth for content to get into the house. Satellite and cable networks are choked as it is, and while they may increase their bit rates a bit in the coming years (let's hope so), we're talking from 12 to 19mbps for cable, or 8 to maybe 10mbps for satellite. Hardly overtaking a 100mbit connection. Even if there were high-resolution rentals online that you could get through FIOS, and FIOS was upgraded to full GPON, you're still looking at maybe 50-70mbps in a highly extreme case. Again, that would run just fine on 100mbit ethernet. Sure, you can move files around between computers, but that's not immediately time sensitive, and computers can only put out a few hundred mbps at best.
The content also won't balloon out of control because most of the users who are consuming it don't have CAT-5e in their walls, much less fiber or something. The result is that more and more of the technology is becoming more efficient in bandwidth consumption.
Conclusion: CAT-6a cable is MORE than enough well into the future. Make sure the cable is terminated at the proper CAT level, although I would say that there is no reason to have patch cables above 5e for the forseeable future.
