This is the
talk page for discussing improvements to the
Computer bus template. |
|
This template does not require a rating on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||
|
RS-232 isn't a "bus." Nor is Serial ATA, nor PCI-Express, anything else that involves point-to-point links between exactly two devices.
I suggest the term "interconnect standard" instead, or something simliar. Jeh ( talk) 22:39, 27 July 2009 (UTC)
There is no reason in normal English nor in WP:STYLE to hyphenate the two words of this or any similar title. Jeh ( talk) 22:39, 27 July 2009 (UTC)
Why are 16550 UART, and UART in general, listed as buses? Aren't they covered by RS-232 or MIDI or other buses that the 16550, or UARTs in general, support? Guy Harris ( talk) 05:06, 30 September 2009 (UTC)
Unfortunately I have no idea exactly how fast it is so don't want to put it in here and ruin something... 76.117.247.55 ( talk) 19:30, 18 July 2010 (UTC)
Does InfiniBand really belong in "Computer bus standards (desktop)"? Is there any desktop or even deskside system that uses InfiniBand as an internal bus? It's not a bus topology (although, strictly speaking, neither is PCIe, as I recall) and I generally see it referred to as an alternative to networks like Fibre Channel or Ethernet, not buses like PCIe, QPI, or HyperTransport. If it belongs in this template, I think it would be more appropriate under storage buses instead of desktop buses. (This same issue is true on List_of_device_bit_rates.) Thoughts? Vykk ( talk) 15:13, 1 December 2010 (UTC)
Direct memory access (DMA) is not a bus as such, so I suggest it is removed from this template. Sigmundg ( talk) 13:54, 5 June 2011 (UTC)
It looks like User:Nasa-verve changed the group name from Desktop to "Standards"? Perhaps it was in response to the discussion about Infiniband, but there was no edit summary. Not sure this makes sense, since many other groups also describe standards too, just for more specific kinds of buses. I would suggest maybe "General pupose" might be a better name for them, or "Desktop and data center" (although some laptops have Hypertransport or QPI, etc). Any thoughts?
Also the links in the title are dubious. Interconnection example talks about telephone companies! Nothing at all to do with computer buses. Since some are de facto standards I will add that link and delete the misleading one. Also Multidrop bus is a specific vending machine technology, which sounds to me like it should be in the embedded category. W Nowicki ( talk) 19:20, 8 June 2011 (UTC)
What makes MIDI a computer bus? It's a communications protocol that can be carried over buses such as RS232 or USB, but it's no more a bus than is Ethernet. Besides, it's not even a computing technology: it's a musical instrument technology that was adapted for use in computers. Dementia13 ( talk) 15:00, 27 August 2012 (UTC)
Hello. There are many serial interfaces in existence: RS-485, RS-422, USB, SPI, Ethernet, Fibre Channel, and many others. Some of them are covered by the “RS” umbrella mentioned in the title and called “serial” by their respective standards or by common convention, some are not (Ethernet, Fibre Channel), but the term “serial” pertains to every single interface which employs the serial transmission principle—to all of them regardless of any informal conventions. This is exactly why I see no reason for writing “RS-232 (serial port)” instead of the proper “RS-232”—it is not the one and only serial ports, all other EIA/TIA standards of the “RS” umbrella and lots of ITU-T ones like V.35 are serial ports too at the very least. By the way, my home servers IBM eServer xSeries 345 have RS-485 serial ports along with RS-232 ones, so RS-232 is not the sole serial port standard found on computers.
As a generalization from here, we really should write names as they are in article titles: RS-232, RS-485, etc., without adding anything extra. I see contraction as the only possible form of alternation, e.g. abbreviation of “Universal Serial Bus” to “USB.” Remember: these are technical articles, hence we must keep it all technically correct and strict; if it is called “RS-232”, the we must not call it anything else like “COM1” or “serial port”—that is both impudent and disgraceful to the mathematically strict art of technology. I will go for it after a while and rename all items to their proper technical names (as per corresponding standards and specifications, mostly.)
213.131.238.28 ( talk) 10:15, 5 September 2012 (UTC)
Fibre Channel doesn't belong to this template: it is not a bus, but a network. Removed.
213.131.238.28 ( talk) 10:18, 5 September 2012 (UTC)
Would these fit here?
The Category:Computer buses lists quite a few that aren't on this template... What decides what busses make the list on the template? -- jwilkinson ( talk) 05:14, 29 March 2013 (UTC)
AC '97 and Intel HD Audio are not only software specs. They are specifications that define the electrical connection between the chipset for a software audio solution (or audio acceleration engine for a hardware accelerated sound card) and even define the pinouts for compliant codecs. AC'97 defines a point-to-point link called the AC-Link between the chipset or audio acceleration engine and the AC'97 codec, and Intel HD Audio specification defines a bus named the High Definition Audio Link that links together one HD Audio controller and one or more HD Audio codecs. Jesse Viviano ( talk) 14:40, 17 June 2014 (UTC)
Currently, the title of this template (on the bar) is:
I feel this is pretty confusing and archaic. So I proposed this new title. I believe it also may make sense to leave off the text in parenthesis, so please let me know your thoughts on that as well. Please provide feedback. If no one objects, I'll make the change over the weekend (3 days):
Nasa-verve ( talk) 20:10, 30 July 2014 (UTC)
@ Dsimic: @ Nasa-verve: @ Sbmeirow: It's been almost a year. Can we settle on a title that either doesn't mention buses, or explicitly includes p-t-p connections? Jeh ( talk) 05:52, 26 November 2016 (UTC)
USB mass storage class is not a bus, it is a USB device class. It uses the USB bus.
iSCSI is not a bus. It is a spec for sending SCSI commands and receiving the responses over IP.
If we're going to include iSCSI then we would also have to include TCP. Which would be absurd. Jeh ( talk) 08:55, 18 August 2014 (UTC)
Profibus and Multibus are not a peripheral buses. they are a communication protocol, and use the EIA-485/RS-485 as physical bus. Same goes for Cameralink. Suggest to remove these from the Peripheral list. Lionblue ( talk) 14:59, 25 February 2017 (UTC)
This is the
talk page for discussing improvements to the
Computer bus template. |
|
This template does not require a rating on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||
|
RS-232 isn't a "bus." Nor is Serial ATA, nor PCI-Express, anything else that involves point-to-point links between exactly two devices.
I suggest the term "interconnect standard" instead, or something simliar. Jeh ( talk) 22:39, 27 July 2009 (UTC)
There is no reason in normal English nor in WP:STYLE to hyphenate the two words of this or any similar title. Jeh ( talk) 22:39, 27 July 2009 (UTC)
Why are 16550 UART, and UART in general, listed as buses? Aren't they covered by RS-232 or MIDI or other buses that the 16550, or UARTs in general, support? Guy Harris ( talk) 05:06, 30 September 2009 (UTC)
Unfortunately I have no idea exactly how fast it is so don't want to put it in here and ruin something... 76.117.247.55 ( talk) 19:30, 18 July 2010 (UTC)
Does InfiniBand really belong in "Computer bus standards (desktop)"? Is there any desktop or even deskside system that uses InfiniBand as an internal bus? It's not a bus topology (although, strictly speaking, neither is PCIe, as I recall) and I generally see it referred to as an alternative to networks like Fibre Channel or Ethernet, not buses like PCIe, QPI, or HyperTransport. If it belongs in this template, I think it would be more appropriate under storage buses instead of desktop buses. (This same issue is true on List_of_device_bit_rates.) Thoughts? Vykk ( talk) 15:13, 1 December 2010 (UTC)
Direct memory access (DMA) is not a bus as such, so I suggest it is removed from this template. Sigmundg ( talk) 13:54, 5 June 2011 (UTC)
It looks like User:Nasa-verve changed the group name from Desktop to "Standards"? Perhaps it was in response to the discussion about Infiniband, but there was no edit summary. Not sure this makes sense, since many other groups also describe standards too, just for more specific kinds of buses. I would suggest maybe "General pupose" might be a better name for them, or "Desktop and data center" (although some laptops have Hypertransport or QPI, etc). Any thoughts?
Also the links in the title are dubious. Interconnection example talks about telephone companies! Nothing at all to do with computer buses. Since some are de facto standards I will add that link and delete the misleading one. Also Multidrop bus is a specific vending machine technology, which sounds to me like it should be in the embedded category. W Nowicki ( talk) 19:20, 8 June 2011 (UTC)
What makes MIDI a computer bus? It's a communications protocol that can be carried over buses such as RS232 or USB, but it's no more a bus than is Ethernet. Besides, it's not even a computing technology: it's a musical instrument technology that was adapted for use in computers. Dementia13 ( talk) 15:00, 27 August 2012 (UTC)
Hello. There are many serial interfaces in existence: RS-485, RS-422, USB, SPI, Ethernet, Fibre Channel, and many others. Some of them are covered by the “RS” umbrella mentioned in the title and called “serial” by their respective standards or by common convention, some are not (Ethernet, Fibre Channel), but the term “serial” pertains to every single interface which employs the serial transmission principle—to all of them regardless of any informal conventions. This is exactly why I see no reason for writing “RS-232 (serial port)” instead of the proper “RS-232”—it is not the one and only serial ports, all other EIA/TIA standards of the “RS” umbrella and lots of ITU-T ones like V.35 are serial ports too at the very least. By the way, my home servers IBM eServer xSeries 345 have RS-485 serial ports along with RS-232 ones, so RS-232 is not the sole serial port standard found on computers.
As a generalization from here, we really should write names as they are in article titles: RS-232, RS-485, etc., without adding anything extra. I see contraction as the only possible form of alternation, e.g. abbreviation of “Universal Serial Bus” to “USB.” Remember: these are technical articles, hence we must keep it all technically correct and strict; if it is called “RS-232”, the we must not call it anything else like “COM1” or “serial port”—that is both impudent and disgraceful to the mathematically strict art of technology. I will go for it after a while and rename all items to their proper technical names (as per corresponding standards and specifications, mostly.)
213.131.238.28 ( talk) 10:15, 5 September 2012 (UTC)
Fibre Channel doesn't belong to this template: it is not a bus, but a network. Removed.
213.131.238.28 ( talk) 10:18, 5 September 2012 (UTC)
Would these fit here?
The Category:Computer buses lists quite a few that aren't on this template... What decides what busses make the list on the template? -- jwilkinson ( talk) 05:14, 29 March 2013 (UTC)
AC '97 and Intel HD Audio are not only software specs. They are specifications that define the electrical connection between the chipset for a software audio solution (or audio acceleration engine for a hardware accelerated sound card) and even define the pinouts for compliant codecs. AC'97 defines a point-to-point link called the AC-Link between the chipset or audio acceleration engine and the AC'97 codec, and Intel HD Audio specification defines a bus named the High Definition Audio Link that links together one HD Audio controller and one or more HD Audio codecs. Jesse Viviano ( talk) 14:40, 17 June 2014 (UTC)
Currently, the title of this template (on the bar) is:
I feel this is pretty confusing and archaic. So I proposed this new title. I believe it also may make sense to leave off the text in parenthesis, so please let me know your thoughts on that as well. Please provide feedback. If no one objects, I'll make the change over the weekend (3 days):
Nasa-verve ( talk) 20:10, 30 July 2014 (UTC)
@ Dsimic: @ Nasa-verve: @ Sbmeirow: It's been almost a year. Can we settle on a title that either doesn't mention buses, or explicitly includes p-t-p connections? Jeh ( talk) 05:52, 26 November 2016 (UTC)
USB mass storage class is not a bus, it is a USB device class. It uses the USB bus.
iSCSI is not a bus. It is a spec for sending SCSI commands and receiving the responses over IP.
If we're going to include iSCSI then we would also have to include TCP. Which would be absurd. Jeh ( talk) 08:55, 18 August 2014 (UTC)
Profibus and Multibus are not a peripheral buses. they are a communication protocol, and use the EIA-485/RS-485 as physical bus. Same goes for Cameralink. Suggest to remove these from the Peripheral list. Lionblue ( talk) 14:59, 25 February 2017 (UTC)