Really? FAIL ARTICLE. The author is meant to use the work SWITCH instead of HUB.
HUBS CANNOT, by definition, manage layer-2 or layer-3 traffic. They are exclusively a layer-1 (physical) implement. Period. Otherwise it is not a hub.
For you're convenience ::
hxxp: www (dot) thegeekstuff (dot) com/2013/09/hubs-switches-routers/
"These types of network hubs are useful for high-traffic situations, such as a gamer's LAN party, where dozens of players may be connecting to the network"
I love this.
Due to the problems involved in hubs and the LACK of CSMA/CD NIC support as well as MAC2MAC L2 routing that a switch provides, this is why you use a switch, *instead of a hub. Too many collisions and dropped packets!
Apart from all the misinformation about Ethernet hubs (these did exists in the stone age of networks BTW), there's at least some truth in it since it did mention USB hubs and these are indeed hubs, not switches...
Rhetorical? But I'll bite. It's a simple way to get wireshark or another protocol analyzer onto a network port that doesn't otherwise support mirroring. Cheap way to bridge a 10base2/5 network to something more modern. Can limit the damage of a broadcast storm (why it's bad to plug a network cable between the ports of a cheap switch).
I can think of some cases where industrial control systems that might expect to be on shared media.
Other than that, the availability of cheap switches and the rise of gigabit+ networks have rendered them very obsolete, especially for home use.
I love all the Cisco "hubs" we use at work... 500 computers, 1 collision domain... booyah! Just be careful not to "stack" your hubs too high, otherwise they'll fall over, I recommend 2 stacks of hubs in some circumstances.
I read this article on the extremely remote chance that there was some functionality to network hubs - or even some very specific hub model - that I didn't know about which allowed them to work as network bridges somehow. I know... not realistic, but even stranger features have been built into specialized hardware before.
The article went far beyond the mere achievement of disappointment. Should I laugh? Should I cry? On the one hand, I feel so bad for Ryan because he just put himself out there, and not only is he now not ever going to be employable as a network engineer or admin, but I'm never going to read another one of his articles the same way. I will be deeply skeptical about all of them. So I mourn the depth, breadth and pervasiveness of factual mistakes that would cause any editor to cover the entire page in red paint. Forget ink; that would take too long.
But then there's this darkly humorous aspect to it. What if an iSheep reads this and then goes to Best Buy thinking that they've researched what kind of network equipment they need to buy? Imagine Paris Hilton or better yet Snooki trying to base a purchasing decision on the information contained within this article. It's practically a setup for them to be punked.
I can't wait to go to Best Buy and ask them for one of those newer USB hubs so that I can network my computers faster.