If you are running only one computer and a USB printer then I would
agree. But if you are running a couple of wired (ethernet) machines
along with several network printers along with some wireless computers
off of a base station that is connected to the LAN then the separate
switch approach makes more sense because you have a lot more ports to
plug things into. If you shop around the prices of switches (Asante)
are quite inexpensive.
Jerry
On Nov 16, 2004, at 11:37 AM, Lee Larson wrote:
> On Nov 15, 2004, at 10:39 PM, Jerry Yeager suggested:
>
>> I might suggest that your friend do the following:
>> Instead of getting a four port router, get a one port router and then
>> a gizmo called called a multi-port switch. It will be hooked up like
>> this:
>>
>> internet <<++>> (cable/dsl) modem <==> router <==> switch <----
>> computer one
>>
>> <---- computer two
>>
>> <---- printer one
>>
>> <---- printer two
>>
>> <---- other stuff if you want it.
>>
>> <---- more other stuff
>>
>> (a four port router that you see being listed is really a one port
>> router with a four port switch connected to it, all in one box).
>
> Jerry,
>
> It seems to me that for the vast majority of people this just makes it
> more complicated and expensive without gaining much. Most cable/DSL
> routers I've seen recently have four-port 10/100 switches built in.
> Printing, surfing, e-mail and normal file sharing gain nothing from
> going gigabit locally. You always poke a gigabit switch into one port
> of the router, in the unlikely event that you feel the need for more
> speed later on, to, say, move video between machines.
>
> L^2
>
>
-----------------------------------
Someday, I will come up with a clever signature line. I am not sure if
I will use it or not, but I will come up with one.
| The next meeting of the Louisville Computer Society will
| be November 23. The LCS Web page is <http://www.kymac.org>.
| List posting address: <mailto:macgroup at erdos.math.louisville.edu>
| List Web page: <http://erdos.math.louisville.edu/macgroup>
