|
|
Networking 2 macs w/FW: what's the range
|
|
|
|
Mac Enthusiast
Join Date: May 2000
Location: San Jose, CA, USA
Status:
Offline
|
|
I want to connect 2 computers to be able to play video from the other macs HD, but they are a room apart (25ft). Any ideas.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Senior User
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: San Francisco Bay Area
Status:
Offline
|
|
Booting the source computer up in FW target mode with a long cable between makes the most sense. Is the video in a file, or do you want to stream it?
|
To choose doubt as a philosophy of life is akin to choosing immobility as a means of transportation.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Mac Enthusiast
Join Date: May 2000
Location: San Jose, CA, USA
Status:
Offline
|
|
Originally posted by xtal:
Booting the source computer up in FW target mode with a long cable between makes the most sense. Is the video in a file, or do you want to stream it?
I want to play eyeTV programs on a computer that's in a different room. I would prefer not to go target since that leaves one computer inactive.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Mac Elite
Join Date: Oct 2001
Location: Internet
Status:
Offline
|
|
Originally posted by craigthomas:
I want to play eyeTV programs on a computer that's in a different room. I would prefer not to go target since that leaves one computer inactive.
why not use ethernet?
|
20+ year MacNN forum member. MacBook Air 11" 1.6Ghz 4GB 128GB Backlit Keyboard, 4S, iPad Mini
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Mac Enthusiast
Join Date: May 2000
Location: San Jose, CA, USA
Status:
Offline
|
|
Originally posted by hadocon:
why not use ethernet?
Well, I could but I figured that it may not play well over ethernet. Do you really think that 100bt is fast enough to play video? 802.11b is way too slow.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Senior User
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: Portland, OR
Status:
Offline
|
|
Originally posted by craigthomas:
Well, I could but I figured that it may not play well over ethernet. Do you really think that 100bt is fast enough to play video? 802.11b is way too slow.
Are both computers recent enough to have gigabit ethernet? If you use cat-6 cable I would think that would work... I constantly (several times a day) stream divx encoded video (200mb for 30 minutes of video) over 100mb and it works just fine.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Mac Enthusiast
Join Date: May 2000
Location: San Jose, CA, USA
Status:
Offline
|
|
Originally posted by geekwagon:
Are both computers recent enough to have gigabit ethernet? If you use cat-6 cable I would think that would work... I constantly (several times a day) stream divx encoded video (200mb for 30 minutes of video) over 100mb and it works just fine.
No, both retired work computers that are reduced to home/family systems and are pre-gigabit (Ti500 and G4-466).
Oh well, I may have go with s-video and rcas under the house to my directly to my home entertainment center. http://www.smarthome.com has some great stuff for setting up muliple room entertainment.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Mac Elite
Join Date: Oct 2001
Location: Internet
Status:
Offline
|
|
Originally posted by craigthomas:
Well, I could but I figured that it may not play well over ethernet. Do you really think that 100bt is fast enough to play video? 802.11b is way too slow.
If you have 100BT you will be fine. I regularly stream DV from another computer in my house without a hitch.
|
20+ year MacNN forum member. MacBook Air 11" 1.6Ghz 4GB 128GB Backlit Keyboard, 4S, iPad Mini
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Professional Poster
Join Date: Jun 2000
Status:
Offline
|
|
Originally posted by hadocon:
If you have 100BT you will be fine. I regularly stream DV from another computer in my house without a hitch.
I agree. On the technical side, DV requires 3.9 MB/s (I hope I remember correctly), and 100base-T ethernet provides a maximum theoretical speed of 12.5 MB/s.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Mac Enthusiast
Join Date: May 2000
Location: San Jose, CA, USA
Status:
Offline
|
|
Thanks, 10baseT sounds like the cheapest way to go. While I'm under the dreaded house I'll probably send S-video and RCA wire as well. Not looking forward to the dusty crawling job though.
FYI: I tried a wireless 2.4GHz PC to TV product (PC a term they use for "personal computer" and is Mac friendly - it acually uses no sw). Unfortunatly it didn't send clean video and audio. Would've been cool though.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Professional Poster
Join Date: Jun 2000
Status:
Offline
|
|
Originally posted by craigthomas:
Thanks, 10baseT sounds like the cheapest way to go. While I'm under the dreaded house I'll probably send S-video and RCA wire as well. Not looking forward to the dusty crawling job though.
FYI: I tried a wireless 2.4GHz PC to TV product (PC a term they use for "personal computer" and is Mac friendly - it acually uses no sw). Unfortunatly it didn't send clean video and audio. Would've been cool though.
I'd recommend going with 100 base-T ethernet instead. All the cable nowdays is CAT5e which is 100 base-T, and I'd recommend a 100 base-T hub/router/switch or whatever you're getting. Although if you are going to run 100 Mbit cable, replacing the hub/router/switch in the future would be a lot easier than running new cable.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Mac Enthusiast
Join Date: May 2000
Location: San Jose, CA, USA
Status:
Offline
|
|
I decided that I'm going to run 2 lines of CAT5. I found some in wall faceplates and plugs that convert CAT5 to S-video to give me the option to run video straight to my big screen TV from my Mac in the other room or stream to my PowerBook then to the TV. I have a bunch of CAT5 labeled cable. Not sure if it is CAT5e. Is there a difference?
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Professional Poster
Join Date: Jun 2000
Status:
Offline
|
|
Originally posted by craigthomas:
I have a bunch of CAT5 labeled cable. Not sure if it is CAT5e. Is there a difference?
CAT5e is a better cable than CAT5. Here's a better explanation.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Forum Regular
Join Date: Sep 2000
Status:
Offline
|
|
Firewire speed drop VERY fast if the cable is longer than 15 feet. Sometimes this is a real problem for video editors. I know that to solve this issue there are companies that sell a little box with 2 female firewire connectors. The box essentially acts a power boost to help keep the signal going. I personally don't 100% trust this solution. Plus it would be very expensive. I agree with what people are saying here...try cat5.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Forum Rules
|
|
|
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts
|
HTML code is Off
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|