Computing: CompSci Template‑class Mid‑importance | |||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Does anyone think netbook deserves to be in this template?-- Kozuch ( talk) 19:01, 5 June 2008 (UTC)
There has been a discussion at Talk:List of computer size categories about whether servers and workstations are desktops. I think that this template should be updated to reflect the result of the discussion. Rilak ( talk) 07:20, 11 July 2008 (UTC)
I was looking at this list and noticed that embedded system seems a little bit out of place. The article on embedded systems says that they can vary in size from a microcontroller to complex controll systems with multiple modules, peripherals, etc. So it's location in a size hierarchy seems quite ambiguous. I added microcontroller to the template (it pretty clearly fits in at the small end), was wondering whether there is merit to keeping embedded system here, or whether it is better to dispense with it. Zodon ( talk) 06:39, 21 July 2008 (UTC)
How meaningful is it to try to categorize types of computers by physical size? "Servers" have no typical physical form-factor - they could potentially be 1U rackmount boxes, or full 42U racks. Why are desktops and workstations "microcomputers", but laptops and tablets aren't? Should cart computers be in the same category as pocket computers? And microcontrollers aren't really "computers" in this context. Letdorf ( talk) 00:10, 27 October 2008 (UTC).
The Micro row contains "Personal (Workstation, Desktop, Home, Gaming, SFF (Nettop))". The Mobile row doesn't say have any link to Personal computer. Yet, laptops are personal computers. Our current presentation misleadingly suggests they aren't. -- Chealer ( talk) 14:51, 24 May 2012 (UTC)
As noted in the Talk:Smartbook page the term is deprecated even by it's creator, Qualcomm. Should it be removed? Grantbow ( talk) 23:30, 26 March 2013 (UTC)
I think the use of many arm processors and the creation of simple appliances with lower prices put Chromebooks in a new subclass of Subnotebooks. Should it be added? Grantbow ( talk) 23:30, 26 March 2013 (UTC)
It seems to me that many of the words in the in the table are prefixes, for example, "Super" actually meaning "Supercomputer". In my opinion as one of the uninitiated, this does not seem immediately apparent. It may be helpful to indicate this in some way, by adding hyphens to the end of some of the row headings (eg Micro-) or simply typing out the full word/title of the link, even though the table is inherently about computers, for simplicity. This is really just a personal opinion than anything else; I haven't checked any official documentation to see if this is appropriate suggestion to make for such a table. Techhead7890 ( talk) 07:21, 9 December 2013 (UTC)
I think it does not hurt the Wikipedia to maintain this navbar. But I think it should be cleaned of ANY marketing™ terms and especially brands. E.g. Chromebook is some brand, not a size. Less concise are terms like Palm-size PC, Pocket PC or Pocket computer or Palmtop PC or Ultra-mobile PC, which, AFAIS, do not represent different sizes, but are all products of different marketing departments. Feature phone is another typical a marketing term...
Ultrabook could be, by Intel. Where is the difference to a Netbook or a Smartbook. Subnotebook seems to be the most encyclopedic article, and the picture File:MacBookEeePCNintendoDS.JPG at least tries to bring some clarity.
Even the term Personal computer (PC) is, AFAIK, based on IBM marketing, see IBM PC compatible.
I would bother to delete them articles, but in case the people who wrote those article would like people writing other article to link to them, well, some clean-up would be nice.
Remember, clarity™ is something, marketing departments want to insinuate, but definitely not something they want to really provide. User:ScotXW t@lk 17:18, 20 June 2014 (UTC)
Minicomputer is massively obsolete as a term though. Sagittarian Milky Way ( talk) 21:47, 16 August 2015 (UTC)
Computing: CompSci Template‑class Mid‑importance | |||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Does anyone think netbook deserves to be in this template?-- Kozuch ( talk) 19:01, 5 June 2008 (UTC)
There has been a discussion at Talk:List of computer size categories about whether servers and workstations are desktops. I think that this template should be updated to reflect the result of the discussion. Rilak ( talk) 07:20, 11 July 2008 (UTC)
I was looking at this list and noticed that embedded system seems a little bit out of place. The article on embedded systems says that they can vary in size from a microcontroller to complex controll systems with multiple modules, peripherals, etc. So it's location in a size hierarchy seems quite ambiguous. I added microcontroller to the template (it pretty clearly fits in at the small end), was wondering whether there is merit to keeping embedded system here, or whether it is better to dispense with it. Zodon ( talk) 06:39, 21 July 2008 (UTC)
How meaningful is it to try to categorize types of computers by physical size? "Servers" have no typical physical form-factor - they could potentially be 1U rackmount boxes, or full 42U racks. Why are desktops and workstations "microcomputers", but laptops and tablets aren't? Should cart computers be in the same category as pocket computers? And microcontrollers aren't really "computers" in this context. Letdorf ( talk) 00:10, 27 October 2008 (UTC).
The Micro row contains "Personal (Workstation, Desktop, Home, Gaming, SFF (Nettop))". The Mobile row doesn't say have any link to Personal computer. Yet, laptops are personal computers. Our current presentation misleadingly suggests they aren't. -- Chealer ( talk) 14:51, 24 May 2012 (UTC)
As noted in the Talk:Smartbook page the term is deprecated even by it's creator, Qualcomm. Should it be removed? Grantbow ( talk) 23:30, 26 March 2013 (UTC)
I think the use of many arm processors and the creation of simple appliances with lower prices put Chromebooks in a new subclass of Subnotebooks. Should it be added? Grantbow ( talk) 23:30, 26 March 2013 (UTC)
It seems to me that many of the words in the in the table are prefixes, for example, "Super" actually meaning "Supercomputer". In my opinion as one of the uninitiated, this does not seem immediately apparent. It may be helpful to indicate this in some way, by adding hyphens to the end of some of the row headings (eg Micro-) or simply typing out the full word/title of the link, even though the table is inherently about computers, for simplicity. This is really just a personal opinion than anything else; I haven't checked any official documentation to see if this is appropriate suggestion to make for such a table. Techhead7890 ( talk) 07:21, 9 December 2013 (UTC)
I think it does not hurt the Wikipedia to maintain this navbar. But I think it should be cleaned of ANY marketing™ terms and especially brands. E.g. Chromebook is some brand, not a size. Less concise are terms like Palm-size PC, Pocket PC or Pocket computer or Palmtop PC or Ultra-mobile PC, which, AFAIS, do not represent different sizes, but are all products of different marketing departments. Feature phone is another typical a marketing term...
Ultrabook could be, by Intel. Where is the difference to a Netbook or a Smartbook. Subnotebook seems to be the most encyclopedic article, and the picture File:MacBookEeePCNintendoDS.JPG at least tries to bring some clarity.
Even the term Personal computer (PC) is, AFAIK, based on IBM marketing, see IBM PC compatible.
I would bother to delete them articles, but in case the people who wrote those article would like people writing other article to link to them, well, some clean-up would be nice.
Remember, clarity™ is something, marketing departments want to insinuate, but definitely not something they want to really provide. User:ScotXW t@lk 17:18, 20 June 2014 (UTC)
Minicomputer is massively obsolete as a term though. Sagittarian Milky Way ( talk) 21:47, 16 August 2015 (UTC)