Ask HN: Why haven't we miniaturized the Ethernet RJ45?

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=41849210

by linuxlizard • 2 years ago

10 12 2 years ago

news.ycombinator.com

Why is the Ethernet jack still a huge monstrosity? I see these small boards appearing and the ridiculous sized Ethernet jack looms over the PCB.

https://www.cnx-software.com/2024/10/14/wiznet-w55rp20-evb-pico-board-features-w55rp20-sip-with-w5500-ethernet-controller-and-rp2040-mcu/

We have gone from giant USB-A to the slim USB-C and converters are available. We have mini Display Port and converters are available. Why has no one tried to miniaturize RJ45?

i0nutzb• 2 years ago

Probably because you have to be able to crimp that connector as simple as possible, without too much tooling OR training needed.

You literally can train anyone, as non-tech as possible, to crimp 8 wires with a $5 tool in 5-10 minutes.

linuxlizard3• 2 years ago

Crimping our own cables is more common in data center or IT. Normal people wouldn't cut their own cables. I've given up cutting my own cables for home use (fixing busted heads) because it's easier to just grab a new cable.

pavel_lishin• 2 years ago

The last time I crimped one was three years ago when we moved into this house - I wanted a particularly long run of cable, and it was difficult to buy Just One.

The last time before that was when I was working as an IT tech in high school 20 years ago.

But yeah - I'm not even sure if "normal" people know you can make your own cables.

deafpolygon• 2 years ago

If it ain't broke.

USB and DP is driven by the demand for slimmer devices, and we don't need RJ45 on these devices... we use Wi-Fi.

linuxlizard3• 2 years ago

That makes sense. Phones would drive smaller USB and laptops likely drove smaller DisplayPort.

JohnFen• 2 years ago

My speculation: there's no real market need. Devices that don't have enough space for the RJ45 are probably using WiFi anyway and have no burning need for a physical ethernet connection.

Since making the connectors smaller also makes them less robust, why take on that tradeoff in the absence of a clear benefit?

I understand that R-Pis and the like appear to be an exception, but they don't represent the amount of marketshare required to spur the sort of industry movement needed to develop Yet Another Standard.

linuxlizard3• 2 years ago

That does make sense. Ethernet is easily replace by WiFi. There's no easy replacement for USB (can't charge a phone over Bluetooth (yet)).

stephenr• 2 years ago

Inductive charging is the replacement for usb charging.

I literally don't remember the last time I charged my iPhone by plugging it in - there are even inductive power banks available now.

runjake• 2 years ago

There are various alternatives (I.e. ND9, M12, etc), but they never really gained any traction in the mass market, where it matters.

I work on this stuff all day, every day and I can't tell you why we're still using RJ-45.

I could see FttD (Fiber to the Desktop) happen, but it will swap out these problems with new problems.

tacostakohashi• 2 years ago

Maybe because it's really convenient being able to continue using the billions of cables and other devices in existence?

Also RJ45 is in fact already a minaturized/standardized alternative to various proprietary/national phone connectors that preceded it, and the basic idea was to be able to repurpose existing phone twisted pair installations for ethernet. Also, it can be made pretty small if actually needed, see the Xircom RealPort adapters from back in the day.

As far as big / bulky / annoying connectors, go, RJ45 is very low down my list.

usbsea• 2 years ago

USB C adaptors. It is why we will end up with only USB C and nothing else eventually. No HDMI. No bespoke power cable. Anything that can't cut it gets adapted!

nothercastle• 2 years ago

There is a miniature version I think it’s called quadrax. Just too expensive but consumer applications

Ask HN: Why haven't we miniaturized the Ethernet RJ45?

Related Stories