universal optic fiber based connection? why not?

[randy hutajulu]

before everything.. i just wanna say that i'm not a pro tech guy. this post based on my own curiosity and my (not so much) knowledge about tech

 

i'm curious why people keeps doing research with USB etc. why people don't start making 1 single universal connection to make a world a better place.

 

years ago, the only thing i know about optic fiber is that it's made for audio needs, i used it for my home theater and car audio setup back in the day.

and now, we use it for internet connection and its WAY WAY WAY better than any copper connector that i've used before.

if i'm not mistaken, once it can be used for internet connection, it means that this type of connector can also be used for video, and audio codec, right? so we can also make a display connector from it, right?

 

so why we don't develop a new universal connection based on optic fiber?

 

please share with me if u have a time

thank u so much guys

 

regards

[Wombo]

I think the main issue with that is the cost of quality elements to transmit and receive an optical signal. Sure you can use some cheap led's and diodes for audio signals but when it comes high datarates it requires very finely tuned lasers. Also fibre optic cables are a lot more fragile than standard copper cables. They could use some of the polymer/plastic cables but those are well... shit.

 

It's easier and cheaper to send data over copper, especially when it comes to something like a connector that you plug you phone in with.

 

Not to mention the fact that you can't send power over fibre optics, only information.

[randy hutajulu]

I think the main issue with that is the cost of quality elements to transmit and receive an optical signal. Sure you can use some cheap led's and diodes for audio signals but when it comes high datarates it requires very finely tuned lasers. Also fibre optic cables are a lot more fragile than standard copper cables. They could use some of the polymer/plastic cables but those are well... shit.

 

It's easier and cheaper to send data over copper, especially when it comes to something like a connector that you plug you phone in with.

 

Not to mention the fact that you can't send power over fibre optics, only information.

 

yea.. i totally agree with u sir. it will not be cheap (for now) until it becomes common right? i'm just curious why people don't start doing research for this. 

 

i just imagine that our life will be a lot easier if we have a single capable universal connector. i'm using display port for my display connector, and trust me. display port isn't common in my country and it's so hard to get one after u lose it.

[APasz]

At short distances (under ~150m depends on many factors) Copper can do as well as Fiber. This due to a couple of bottlenecks that no has a work around for.

• For copper is mainly a matter of imperfections in the wire itself which degrades performance.
• For fiber its the fact that there isn't any electricity so light signals has to be translates into electrical current which then has to go over copper.

Its best to avoid translating if at all possible as that introduces lag but also errors which have to be checked then fix which as you might guess, eats up more time and whats the most important thing when it comes to computers? Time of course.

 

Now about a universal connector. At the end of the day it would be nice to have just one but that's simply never gonna happen because physics says so.

In theory everything but uncompressed video and speciality things could use something like USB but that takes time and it is slowly happening, its just that we're not there yet.

 

Uncompressed video is just so big and bulky and just generally so different from normal data that the firmware that controls these connections have to be fundamentally different otherwise the latency will be so bad that you can forget about 4K 60fps for at least 10 years.

 

TL:DR Physics.

[randy hutajulu]

At short distances (under ~150m depends on many factors) Copper can do as well as Fiber. This due to a couple of bottlenecks that no has a work around for.

• For copper is mainly a matter of imperfections in the wire itself which degrades performance.
• For fiber its the fact that there isn't any electricity so light signals has to be translates into electrical current which then has to go over copper.

Its best to avoid translating if at all possible as that introduces lag but also errors which have to be checked then fix which as you might guess, eats up more time and whats the most important thing when it comes to computers? Time of course.

 

Now about a universal connector. At the end of the day it would be nice to have just one but that's simply never gonna happen because physics says so.

In theory everything but uncompressed video and speciality things could use something like USB but that takes time and it is slowly happening, its just that we're not there yet.

 

Uncompressed video is just so big and bulky and just generally so different from normal data that the firmware that controls these connections have to be fundamentally different otherwise the latency will be so bad that you can forget about 4K 60fps for at least 10 years.

 

TL:DR Physics.

 

umm.. ya ya ya.. know i understand a bit. hahaha..

so optic is slower because it needs to be translated right?

but i'm curious, why optic fiber is a lot better for internet connection rather than copper? or it's just advertising things?

thank u so much sir

regards

[APasz]

For long distance (1km+) fiber is king because light travels a lot faster then electricity and that slight delay when translating becomes more and more of a non-issue the longer the cable but fiber does have a slight hiccup atm (has been solved in lab) which is a limit of I think 400km or 4000km before needing to be "refreshed", can't remember but that is some advanced stuff so I leave that at that.

 

For the time being fiber is slower than copper at short range communication (~150m-) because of the translation but the information itself is traveling faster over fiber.

Side note; I think it was the Uni of Cambridge (someone please correct me if wrong) were able to get something like a few TB/s over something like 50m of copper cable. [can't remember details, sorry]

[cragger89]

No thanks to this.

[Samfisher]

Fibre needs power.  Copper lines won't die when there's an outage.  Fibre is also extremely expensive still and for a country as large as Indonesia/Malaysia and the US, it is prohibitively expensive.  Only reason why so many nations in Asia are fully fibre-equipped is cos they are either tiny (Singapore, and also mega rich), or South Korea where a huge majority of their population live in monolithic mega cities of the future.

[randy hutajulu]

For long distance (1km+) fiber is king because light travels a lot faster then electricity and that slight delay when translating becomes more and more of a non-issue the longer the cable but fiber does have a slight hiccup atm (has been solved in lab) which is a limit of I think 400km or 4000km before needing to be "refreshed", can't remember but that is some advanced stuff so I leave that at that.

 

For the time being fiber is slower than copper at short range communication (~150m-) because of the translation but the information itself is traveling faster over fiber.

Side note; I think it was the Uni of Cambridge (someone please correct me if wrong) were able to get something like a few TB/s over something like 50m of copper cable. [can't remember details, sorry]

 

 

Fibre needs power.  Copper lines won't die when there's an outage.  Fibre is also extremely expensive still and for a country as large as Indonesia/Malaysia and the US, it is prohibitively expensive.  Only reason why so many nations in Asia are fully fibre-equipped is cos they are either tiny (Singapore, and also mega rich), or South Korea where a huge majority of their population live in monolithic mega cities of the future.

 

 

i'm curious, what about the thunderbolt bandwidht? is it faster than USB 3.1? i think it's also a good solution for universal connector since it also works as display port, right?

why they don't make it common?

 

thx and regards

[Yoinkerman]

They'll just get destroyed if deployed in office and home environments.

[APasz]

i'm curious, what about the thunderbolt bandwidht? is it faster than USB 3.1? i think it's also a good solution for universal connector since it also works as display port, right?

why they don't make it common?

 

thx and regards

The thing with thunderbolt is that it's extremely expensive.

I believe the latest TB is 40gbit/s wheres USB 3.1 is 10gbit/s but USB is much simpler, cheaper and doesn't need PCI-E lanes. TB is basically a pass-through for PCI-E devices which eats up very valuable lanes which is why it isn't as widespread as it could be and can't be a universal connector.

 

Many people have tried to make universal connectors in the past but they never worked for various reasons.

[randy hutajulu]

The thing with thunderbolt is that it's extremely expensive.

I believe the latest TB is 40gbit/s wheres USB 3.1 is 10gbit/s but USB is much simpler, cheaper and doesn't need PCI-E lanes. TB is basically a pass-through for PCI-E devices which eats up very valuable lanes which is why it isn't as widespread as it could be and can't be a universal connector.

Many people have tried to make universal connectors in the past but they never worked for various reasons.

Wuutt...??! 40 gbit/s??!! PCIe is around 32 right?

I think it's still possible if they want to do more research about TB and make it common so it will be cheaper.

Imagine 40 gbit/s is a standard transfer speed.. Imagine..

Imagine..

Hahahahaha...

[AshleyAshes]

Here's a very similar question: Why do you take a jet air liner to cross an ocean, but you use a slow stupid car to drive to the grocery store?

[BuckGup]

Here's a very similar question: Why do you take a jet air liner to cross an ocean, but you use a slow stupid car to drive to the grocery store?

It isn't economical or reasonable. You would literally take off then land instantly 

[AshleyAshes]

It isn't economical or reasonable. You would literally take off then land instantly 

 

Yes.  I was very, very seriously asking why I can't book it on down to the grocery store in a 747.

[APasz]

Wuutt...??! 40 gbit/s??!! PCIe is around 32 right?

I think it's still possible if they want to do more research about TB and make it common so it will be cheaper.

Imagine 40 gbit/s is a standard transfer speed.. Imagine..

Imagine..

Hahahahaha...

PCI-E speed is very dependent on the application. As you may or may not know, ThunderBolt is an Intel tech wheres the PCI-E interface is made by Intel, Dell, HP and IBM. The short of it is that TB has a lot less overhead where's PCI-e has quite a bit. (Also apple has quite a grip on Intel).

 

Transfer speed isn't the end all and be all. Take USB3 drives for example, even though its capable of 5Gbit or 625MBytes, you'll never get that speed because the flash chip just isn't fast enough.

The main reason for such high speeds with TB being required is because you are able to daisy chain TB devices.

[BuckGup]

Yes.  I was very, very seriously asking why I can't book it on down to the grocery store in a 747.

Lol get a Concord

[randy hutajulu]

PCI-E speed is very dependent on the application. As you may or may not know, ThunderBolt is an Intel tech wheres the PCI-E interface is made by Intel, Dell, HP and IBM. The short of it is that TB has a lot less overhead where's PCI-e has quite a bit. (Also apple has quite a grip on Intel).

 

Transfer speed isn't the end all and be all. Take USB3 drives for example, even though its capable of 5Gbit or 625MBytes, you'll never get that speed because the flash chip just isn't fast enough.

The main reason for such high speeds with TB being required is because you are able to daisy chain TB devices.

 

yea.. maybe this kind of technology will be a lot more useful for SSDs and displays. but i really hope that someday we will only need 1 type of connector jack so one cable can be used for everything u need. maybe for hard drive extension cable or display cable or charging something, or internet connection. that will be good. 

but still, the jack itself can be implemented on flashdrive. that will be awesome.

[APasz]

Maybe one day we will but as it stands right now there are just too many variances in cable and connector requirements that it's unlikely to happen anytime soon.

Wireless tech is probably gonna resolve these issues before the industry settles on a single connector anyway; Intel showed some cool wireless tech off a little while ago that looks quite promising.

 

If you have any more questions I would be glad to answer them to the best of my ability.

[Dabombinable]

Thinking about it, the standard would need:

• The ability to supply power-possibly 2 or more separate wires spiraled around the cable
• To be peer to peer like Firewire (yes you could use Firewire to network computers)
• Be fully backwards compatible with current standards (USB, Thunderbolt, Displayport etc)
• Have a reversible connector
• Have a durable connector
• To be worth the expense over all other connectors

 

 

Maybe one day we will but as it stands right now there are just too many variances in cable and connector requirements that it's unlikely to happen anytime soon.

Wireless tech is probably gonna resolve these issues before the industry settles on a single connector anyway; Intel showed some cool wireless tech off a little while ago that looks quite promising.

 

If you have any more questions I would be glad to answer them to the best of my ability.

The problem with going wireless is interference and latency. The technology has come a long way but its still not good enough for all applications, and it can't provide power efficiently.

[randy hutajulu]

Maybe one day we will but as it stands right now there are just too many variances in cable and connector requirements that it's unlikely to happen anytime soon.

Wireless tech is probably gonna resolve these issues before the industry settles on a single connector anyway; Intel showed some cool wireless tech off a little while ago that looks quite promising.

 

If you have any more questions I would be glad to answer them to the best of my ability.

 

ahaha,... thank u so much sir. since my knowledge about tech is so poor.. yeaa.. i dont have anything to ask anymore lol.

 

Thinking about it, the standard would need:

• The ability to supply power-possibly 2 or more separate wires spiraled around the cable
• To be peer to peer like Firewire (yes you could use Firewire to network computers)
• Be fully backwards compatible with current standards (USB, Thunderbolt, Displayport etc)
• Have a reversible connector
• Have a durable connector
• To be worth the expense over all other connectors

 

 

The problem with going wireless is interference and latency. The technology has come a long way but its still not good enough for all applications, and it can't provide power efficiently.

 

lets hope that one single universal connector will be arrived anytime soon sir. 

for the better world 

 

amen