what about 48 bits?

joel jaeggli joelja at bogus.com
Wed Apr 7 03:02:12 UTC 2010


On 4/6/2010 10:39 PM, Stephen Sprunk wrote:
> On 05 Apr 2010 12:43, Valdis.Kletnieks at vt.edu wrote:
>> On Mon, 05 Apr 2010 13:29:20 EDT, Jay Nakamura said:
>>
>>>>> I would have attributed the success of Ethernet to price!
>>>>>
>>>> You've got the causality wrong -- it wasn't cheap, way back when.
>>>>
>>> I remember back in '93~94ish (I think) you could get a off brand 10BT
>>> card for less than $100, as oppose to Token Ring which was $300~400.
>>> I can't remember anything else that was cheaper back then.  If you go
>>> back before that, I don't know.
>>>
>> Steve is talking mid-80s pricing, not mid-90s.  By '93 or so, the fact
>> that Ethernet was becoming ubiquitous had already forced the price down.
>>
>
> Ah, but what _caused_ Ethernet to become ubiquitous, given the price was
> initially comparable?

Early standardization.

> The only explanation I can think of is the raft
> of cheap NE2000 knock-offs that hit the market in the late 1980s, which
> gave Ethernet a major price advantage over Token Ring (the chips for
> which all vendors _had_ to buy from IBM at ridiculous cost).

Metcalf didn't make computers, whereas IBM and Datapoint did, protecting 
their captive markets cost both of them quite dearly.




More information about the NANOG mailing list