![]() | This article is rated C-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||
|
![]() | The following references may be useful when improving this article in the future: |
Or we should just cover the iphone processors in the article. SMBMovieFan ( talk) 13:10, 12 October 2022 (UTC)
This article uses some sources that should be replaced, such as PDAdb, DeviceBeast, hack2learn and phonedb. Others seems (sometimes borderline) fine to me. PhotographyEdits ( talk) 15:32, 23 December 2022 (UTC)
@ Guy Harris @ CoolingGibbon I'm not sure if the title is correct. I agree they are not processors but SoCs, but is this the correct plural form? A single iPhone has a *system* on a *chip*, but have multiple iPhones systems on a chip, system on chips or systems on chips? The abbreviation has a clear plural form in my view: SoCs. PhotographyEdits ( talk) 12:00, 25 December 2022 (UTC)
Looking at the academic literature, "systems on chip" is indeed the correct way to pluralize this. I think a move to Early iPhone systems-on-chip (most papers put hyphens) would be best, and most accurate. I was wrong that "processors" was less precise; it's just incorrect terminology here. DFlhb ( talk) 19:49, 6 February 2023 (UTC)
The result of the move request was: Page moved. Sufficient consensus and rationale demonstrated for this move. ( closed by non-admin page mover) -- Dane talk 06:24, 18 February 2023 (UTC)
Early iPhone processors → Early iPhone systems-on-chip – Proposing a move to "systems-on-chip". It's the only accurate term, since these aren't "processors" (they're quite fundamentally different), and the incorrect title led to a nonsensical lead sentence. "System-on-chip" is a technical term, but it's now pretty widespread, so I don't think recognizability is an issue. I also think it's more encyclopedic to spell it out, rather than spelling it "Early iPhone SoCs" DFlhb ( talk) 19:53, 6 February 2023 (UTC)
![]() | This article is rated C-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||
|
![]() | The following references may be useful when improving this article in the future: |
Or we should just cover the iphone processors in the article. SMBMovieFan ( talk) 13:10, 12 October 2022 (UTC)
This article uses some sources that should be replaced, such as PDAdb, DeviceBeast, hack2learn and phonedb. Others seems (sometimes borderline) fine to me. PhotographyEdits ( talk) 15:32, 23 December 2022 (UTC)
@ Guy Harris @ CoolingGibbon I'm not sure if the title is correct. I agree they are not processors but SoCs, but is this the correct plural form? A single iPhone has a *system* on a *chip*, but have multiple iPhones systems on a chip, system on chips or systems on chips? The abbreviation has a clear plural form in my view: SoCs. PhotographyEdits ( talk) 12:00, 25 December 2022 (UTC)
Looking at the academic literature, "systems on chip" is indeed the correct way to pluralize this. I think a move to Early iPhone systems-on-chip (most papers put hyphens) would be best, and most accurate. I was wrong that "processors" was less precise; it's just incorrect terminology here. DFlhb ( talk) 19:49, 6 February 2023 (UTC)
The result of the move request was: Page moved. Sufficient consensus and rationale demonstrated for this move. ( closed by non-admin page mover) -- Dane talk 06:24, 18 February 2023 (UTC)
Early iPhone processors → Early iPhone systems-on-chip – Proposing a move to "systems-on-chip". It's the only accurate term, since these aren't "processors" (they're quite fundamentally different), and the incorrect title led to a nonsensical lead sentence. "System-on-chip" is a technical term, but it's now pretty widespread, so I don't think recognizability is an issue. I also think it's more encyclopedic to spell it out, rather than spelling it "Early iPhone SoCs" DFlhb ( talk) 19:53, 6 February 2023 (UTC)