Talk:Cable spaghetti

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

I've always had this problem with cables. I never knew what to call it, but now that I see it does indeed have a name, it's so obvious to call it "spaghetti" that I can't believe I didn't even think of it when I was always never knowing what to call it. Sigh. --69.234.194.203 23:09, 2 Apr 2005 (UTC)

"...and separately powered items do double damage..." haha love that. -spotco

[edit] The contradiction thingo

Says mboverload on my talk page:

Could you please explain on Talk:Cable spaghetti? Thanks. I'm not challenging you or anything, I guess I'm just not seeing it =D Thx--mboverload@ 09:22, 29 July 2006 (UTC)

Oh well, better point it out then:

page says: "Cable spaghetti can be reduced or even eliminated with a properly designed and used cable management system. However, due to the nature of the work being a time consuming trial-and-error process, few users bother or attempt it."

Then, lower down, says: "Cable management systems are extremely popular and widely used for things such as data centers, which have a massive number of computers in a small space. Cable management is included in many racks and things such as raised floors or overhead cable conduits mean more options in the placing and interconnection of cables."

Not sure which is right, but i'm no cable spaghetti expert, so I wouldn't know where to find a source (opens up google :D ) MichaelBillington 09:28, 29 July 2006 (UTC)

Ahhh, I see your point, keen eye. I'll think about it, thanks for pointing that out. If any editor wants to try their hand go ahead. --mboverload@ 09:37, 29 July 2006 (UTC)

My general impression is that network cabinets and other "proffesional" systems tend to be done in a way that keeps cable spaghetti down but end users setting up equipment rarely bother. Plugwash 23:44, 21 February 2007 (UTC)