Talk:Serial ATA

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
WikiProject Computing / Hardware (Rated C-class, High-importance)
WikiProject icon This article is within the scope of WikiProject Computing, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of computers, computing, and information technology on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.
C-Class article C  This article has been rated as C-Class on the project's quality scale.
 High  This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.
Taskforce icon
This article is supported by Computer hardware task force (marked as High-importance).
 

Template[edit]

The infobox being renders the "speed" field as "Capacity" for some reason, so it displays as: "Capacity 1.5, 3.0, 6.0 Gbit/s". This is obviously completely wrong. "Gbit/s" is not a unit of capacity. I have no idea how Wikipedia's bizarre, unusable template system works, so the best I can do is leave a note here.

It took me about 5 minutes of searching about to find and edit Template: Infobox Computer Hardware Bus to fix this bug. Not sure if I broke something elsewhere but it is now correct here. Tom94022 (talk) 03:52, 5 November 2013 (UTC)
Great job! Hopefully there will be no associated regressions. -- Dsimic (talk) 04:05, 5 November 2013 (UTC)

Created date in template[edit]

Hi, I have a few SATA devices that date from ~mid 2002, mainly a few NF2 and Intel E7502-based boards, which feature an additional Silicon Image Sil3112 controller (one of the earliest consumer controllers). For example: Gigabyte GA-8INXP. How is it then that the article says it was conceived in 2003? I'd appreciate any hints.

Cheers, Oerg866, 84.118.222.10 (talk) 14:44, 14 May 2014 (UTC)

First: Good observation.
The 2003 date (called "Created" in the template output, even though the parameter is called "invent-date") is the date on the standard for the first version. It is not uncommon in this business for early examples of new technologies to be produced, and maybe even appear on the market, in the year before the year in which the standard is finalized, accepted, and published, particularly if the latter happens early in the calendar year. This happened repeatedly with the various generations of Parallel ATA, and remember the long period when we had 802.11n products that were really "Draft-n" because the standard had not yet been accepted?
Probably "Created" is not the best legend for that datum in the template... or maybe the template needs some additional dates, like "First products" and "Standard published". Then the latter could be "2003" and the others... whatever we can find references for. Even if products had not come out before 2003, clearly SATA was invented (or created) some time before the standard was accepted and published. I think what this really needs is a fix to the template to support additional dates. I've suggested this at the talk page for the template; you are welcome to comment there, of course.
In the meantime we would need a reliable source before an earlier date can be given as the "Created" date. Magazine articles maybe? Jeh (talk) 16:36, 14 May 2014 (UTC)

Data SPEED Transmission nomenclature confused with SIZE value[edit]

This is a common mistake + something even as a scientist I had to get gradually get my head around.You have stated the type of measurement correctly but assumed their values are interchangeable despite the subtly in their difference you have stated correctly indicating a measurement that is on a completely different scale;

eg Quote;

"SATA revision 1.0 (1.5 Gbit/s, 150 MB/s)"

'Gbit' is usually abbreviated as 'MB' already is to 'Gb'

The capitalization of the letter 'B' + its totally different/NON DIRECTLY replaceable measurement referencing( the order of magnitude references however are interchangeable) is what causes problem for the human mind hard wired to assume (a quicker but less accurate method of thinking) think later. As you state lower case 'b' stands for 'bit' + the conventional nomenclature for data TRANSMISSION SPEED (for whatever reason I know not perhaps because data transmission is always on a much smaller scale than the other variable concerned(Data SIZE/CAPACITY) while uppercase 'B' stands for Byte the convention for Data SIZE(as just indicated) - which in 'computer code' binary there are 8 bits in 1 byte (comparable to 'Why are there 12 eggs in a dozen?') thus the correct conversion to the 'MB' value is to divide through the Gbit (1000000000 (10 to the power 9/ 1000 million) bits value by 8 - thus the actual M(=million)B/s value you've stated incorrectly for the first 3 revisions are 187.5 MB/s(1500/8) 375MB/s(3000/8) 750MB/s (6000/8) (in brackets taking the ratio taking into account that G(iga) is 1000 (1k) times ('overall')(orders of magnitude) bigger than M(ega)

Sata is a standard of data speed thus the conventional unit is used in the titles of its major revisions - DESPITE the widespread confusion/assumption it causes(eg as used with Internet connection speed where I have seen similar confusion eg working out your connection or wi-fi standard (b,g etc) speed ). That we generally use data size to conceptualize data degree by drive etc sizes where it's all important/the be all + end all, imo.

Al 92.23.112.162 (talk) 01:33, 23 January 2015 (UTC)

Hello! In a few words, values in Gbit/s are raw transfer speeds, while values in MB/s are usable transfer speeds that account for encoding overheads. That's already clearly explained in respective sections; here's an excerpt from the Serial ATA § SATA revision 1.0 (1.5 Gbit/s, 150 MB/s) section:
First-generation SATA interfaces, now known as SATA 1.5 Gbit/s, communicate at a rate of 1.5 Gbit/s, and do not support Native Command Queuing (NCQ). Taking 8b/10b encoding overhead into account, they have an actual uncoded transfer rate of 1.2 Gbit/s (150 MB/s).
In other words, it isn't a plain Gbit/s-to-MB/s conversion. — Dsimic (talk | contribs) 04:29, 23 January 2015 (UTC)
I would add that the notion that data transmission speeds are always quoted in multiples of bits per second (as opposed to bytes per second) is demonstrably false. Just in the area of storage interfaces, the "ATA 133" disk moves data at 133 megabytes (MB) per second, and Ultra320 SCSI is (was?) 320 MB/s. In other interfaces, conventional PCI is quoted at 33 MB/s. ... just for example. Jeh (talk) 11:18, 23 January 2015 (UTC)
Exactly – it's simply much more usable when specified in bytes per second. — Dsimic (talk | contribs) 11:26, 23 January 2015 (UTC)

Please begin the reference to SATA by expanding the entire acronym.[edit]

In the article, SATA is referred to as "Serial ATA." The first reference to the acronym should indicate its entire content: "Serial Advanced Technology Attachment (SATA, or Serial ATA)." While it may be widely understood within IT circles what "SATA" is, those who are not information technology savvy and are attempting to gain knowledge of the device type must go to other sources to find the complete meaning.

Indicating the content of the entire acronym at its first reference allows that to be satisfied within this one document.

Smakky (talk) 11:25, 18 April 2015 (UTC)

"Serial ATA" is never officially called anything but "Serial ATA" or "SATA".
"ATA" (PATA) was short for "AT Attachment" but the "AT" part had never been spelled out either, probably for trademark reasons. --Zac67 (talk) 17:05, 18 April 2015 (UTC)