Folks, Twinax might not be dead. This is NOT the only article...
On 11/2/21 1:54 PM, Louis Ohland wrote:
Folks, Twinax might not be dead. This is NOT the only article...
It depends how you look at it.
"Twinax" as a proper name for something IBM used in the past is long dead.
"twinax" as a technology of twin-axial connection in an outer shield is
quite alive. It keeps re-appearing every few years as a higher quality
way to get signals from one location to another.
Another common approach is to use a pair of coax cables with different signals in each coax. DS-3s were famous for this in the '90s.
On 11/2/21 1:54 PM, Louis Ohland wrote:
Folks, Twinax might not be dead. This is NOT the only article...It depends how you look at it.
"Twinax" as a proper name for something IBM used in the past is long dead.
"twinax" as a technology of twin-axial connection in an outer shield is
quite alive. It keeps re-appearing every few years as a higher quality
way to get signals from one location to another.
Another common approach is to use a pair of coax cables with different signals in each coax. DS-3s were famous for this in the '90s.
--
Grant. . . .
unix || die
Folks, Twinax might not be dead. This is NOT the only article...It depends how you look at it.
"Twinax" as a proper name for something IBM used in the past is long dead.
"twinax" as a technology of twin-axial connection in an outer shield is quite alive. It keeps re-appearing every few years as a higher quality
way to get signals from one location to another.
Another common approach is to use a pair of coax cables with different signals in each coax. DS-3s were famous for this in the '90s.
Sysop: | Keyop |
---|---|
Location: | Huddersfield, West Yorkshire, UK |
Users: | 296 |
Nodes: | 16 (2 / 14) |
Uptime: | 13:46:22 |
Calls: | 6,645 |
Files: | 12,190 |
Messages: | 5,326,920 |