Linked by JoanneRodgers on Thu 15th May 2008 23:02 UTC
Features, Office In a June 2003 Wired Magazine interview, Martha Stewart said, "Bill Gates' house, for example, is totally out of date now. He built it right before wireless happened. The big tunnels for all his wires - he doesn't need any of that stuff anymore." The article wasn't about networking, or even technology, but I was struck by that statement because it was echoed by several people when I was explaining that I was running many thousands of feet of cable in OSNews' "house of the future." "Is all that cable really necessary now that there's wireless everything?" people said. As much as I respect Martha Stewart's business and design acumen, neither she, nor those people who talked to me, know what they're talking about. When it comes to networking, there's no substitute for a wire, when a wire's available. -- This is the latest entry in our 2008 Article Contest.
Permalink for comment 314500
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
RE: I'm missing something
by elektrik on Fri 16th May 2008 13:43 UTC in reply to "I'm missing something"
Member since:

Wire doesn't take the place of wireless, though - I'm sure as hell not stringing a cat5 cable across the floor in my living room to my couch or out onto my back porch. On the other hand, I'm not going to setup my file server with a wireless card and expect to stream music and video from it, either. Both mediums serve a purpose. The argument made is analogous to saying that the PSTN kicks ass on cellular - sure it does, in a number of cases, but I'm not going to throw my cell away and grab a slimline "Freedom Phone" and a 10k foot spool of cat3 to "prove" it.

I think the part you may be missing is the article's (rather long-winded way) of implying that wires have numerous advantages over wireless (speed, security, etc.)...

Reply Parent Score: 1