Talk:Category 1 cable

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Computing, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of computers, computing, and information technology on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.ComputingWikipedia:WikiProject ComputingTemplate:WikiProject ComputingComputing articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
	This article is supported by Networking task force (assessed as Low-importance).

Telecommunications Mid‑importance

	Telecommunication portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Telecommunications, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Telecommunications on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.TelecommunicationsWikipedia:WikiProject TelecommunicationsTemplate:WikiProject TelecommunicationsTelecommunications articles
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

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)[reply]

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

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)[reply]

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)[reply]

I once tested quite a few twisted pair telephone cables of various vintages with a cable certifier and not a single one ever tested less than Cat 3, even telephone cables dating back to the early 1980s, if not the late 1970s. I then used those cables for Cisco IP phones running at 10baseT (with POE no less) and never had a single problem with doing that.

This includes some cables made by Superior Essex that were actually labeled as "Cat 1" on the jacket. Not sure what that was all about, but the cables tested as meeting Cat 3 (and were the ONLY cables I'd ever seen actually labeled as "Cat 1").

Conclusion: If actually tested, a so-called "Category 1" cable will almost always meet Cat 3 specs. 73.86.120.87 (talk) 03:43, 23 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]