Talk:Category 1 cable

leval deval

The resource that this article cites actually calls it "Category 1". What's the source for the idea that "Category 1" is a misnomer? 97.77.44.146 (talk) 16:40, 17 August 2011 (UTC)

Both Bibliography-sources are published in... 2017? That can't be right... Evert (talk) 10:08, 25 April 2013 (UTC)

Refs and the article look like a bit of humbug to me. The ever present weakness of this publication. Older voice lines have different specs in each country. Twisted pair was standardized by Bell in the US from 1900 onwards. It was not called "Cat 1". Someone has created this article as a fake reference for some garbage article. Never believe everything you read. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 220.244.72.137 (talk) 06:54, 11 June 2013 (UTC)

Cat 1 was used data transmission at one time
The article, before I fixed it, stated that cat 1 is unsuitable for data use, but it was in fact once used for data transmission in the form of Apple LocalTalk networks (which used the AppleTalk protocal). The Farallon PhoneNET adapter was one popular way to setup such a network (in the late 80's and 90's). It used special adapters that plugged into the AppleTalk port of the Mac and there where two RJ-11 phone jacks that you plugged in standard cat 1 in a daisy chain setup. Because the AppleTalk networking protocol was very slow (only 230 kbit/s) it could be transmitted over cat 1 cable. I am not aware of any similar cat 1 networking solution on the IBM PC compatible side of the market. While someone could argue that such a slow network was "unsuitable", by even late 80's standards, the fact is such LocalTalk networks where indeed setup and used at one time so it would not have been a universal viewpoint. So it's only true that in modern context would it be considered completely unsuitable for data transmission (outside of retro computing applications on old Macs), thus I corrected the article to reflect this. --Notcharliechaplin (talk) 09:54, 7 December 2018 (UTC)