Talk:Internet of things

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
  (Redirected from Talk:Internet of Things)
Jump to: navigation, search

leading text needs rewriting[edit]

I would suggest to scratch

   Bruce Sterling (are personal references necessary?)
   Josef Preishuber-Pflügl (are personal references necessary?)
   Pachube (already referred to under applications)

from the "see also" section. --— Preceding unsigned comment added by IoTCruiser (talkcontribs) 3 mei 2011 10:33‎ (UTC)

Applications Section[edit]

The majority of this section's content here seems to be just links to commercial applications, which resembles advertising. A simplistic comparison would be to list Ford, Toyota, Mercedes etc... on the Cars page. Granted, the Internet of Things concept is much newer, but does anybody object to removing the content that is linked to commercial applications? The wouldn't apply to the UBC paragraph. — Preceding unsigned comment added by GeminiDrive (talkcontribs) 5 jun 2013 02:17‎ (UTC)

leading text needs rewriting[edit]

It's gibberish. Perhaps the Internet of Things itself is gibberish. I wish one could tell from reading the lead of this article. — Preceding unsigned comment added by (talkcontribs) 7 nov 2014 18:03‎ (UTC)

Spelling should be lower case[edit]

Hi, internet of things is not a proper noun and should, therefore, be lower-cased. --EnOreg (talk) 15:26, 10 May 2016 (UTC)

After a week with no objections I fixed it. EnOreg (talk) 07:23, 17 May 2016 (UTC)
The next step will be to move the article to the correct spelling. To this end, I've nominated the current redirect at internet of things for deletion. --EnOreg (talk) 11:49, 31 May 2016 (UTC)
Move completed. --EnOreg (talk) 12:28, 31 May 2016 (UTC)
Internet is a proper noun however, so it's normal when included in a larger noun to keep that part upper case. Done. I think it does need looking at per WP:COMMONNAME what the title is, checking against MOS as it is most commonly stylised in uppercase, which we need to at least say as such in the lede. (not yet done). Widefox; talk 10:25, 23 October 2016 (UTC)
User:MrOllie can you part revert [1] as at least "Internet" needs to be capital. I've only just fixed that, but your undo reverts without giving a reason (reason was for IP editor). User:Dawkeye please use this talk section as we're flipping between upper and lowercase, so would be worth reaching consensus here (see above). Widefox; talk 11:12, 24 October 2016 (UTC)
From the Merriam-Webster dictionary: "Note: In U.S. publications, the capitalized form Internet continues to be more common than internet, although the lowercase form is rapidly gaining more widespread use. In British publications, internet is now the more common form." [2]
WP:CAPITALIZATION says to follow normal spelling rules, not community preferences. Therefore, things is clearly lower case. --EnOreg (talk) 11:31, 8 September 2017 (UTC)

Military History[edit]

The whole military history is missing, is this an oversight or is only the commercial and academic aspect of interest? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Karl smith (talkcontribs) 21:00, 23 July 2016 (UTC) Moved from top of page 220 of Borg 13:19, 12 October 2016 (UTC)


To whom this may concern,

I have been tasked to make an edit on the Internet of Things wiki page for the Georgia Tech Research Institute's Center for the Development and Application of Internet of Things Technology (CDAIT). I have put the edit “in a pulsating world” and attached the documents to cite the phrase. However, each time that I have made the edit it have been removed. Why is this? (I only ask to have a detailed explanation to present to my project director) and also may I have permission to edit on the Internet of Things page without being removed? I look forward to hearing from you. Thanks— Preceding unsigned comment added by Future hindrix (talkcontribs)

While that's an interesting turn of phrase, it doesn't seem to convey any information to the reader. Why exactly should it be included? - MrOllie (talk) 16:39, 8 August 2016 (UTC)
Agree MrOllie, it sounds like a marketing 'buzzword'. Ras.gif 220 of Borg 13:26, 12 October 2016 (UTC)

Lede image[edit]

File:Internet of Things.jpg

Is the File:Internet of Things.jpg cartoon a useful lede image for this article? It seems a little jumbled and cryptic to me. I think a picture of a connected object (like File:Nest_Learning_Thermostat_(cropped).JPG) gets the "it's a thing, but connected to the internet" message across more clearly. --McGeddon (talk) 10:59, 26 September 2016 (UTC)

The thermostat is to me just one thing. The cartoon expresses better the many, many things that are connected. Just my 2-cents. --Ajv39 (talk) 11:13, 26 September 2016 (UTC)
Perhaps a montage of photos, then? At thumbnail size, most of the illustrated objects are unclear (and even full-size I have no idea what the flowers, the red "4", the arm-muscle or the figure squatting and saying "II" are about). --McGeddon (talk) 14:58, 26 March 2017 (UTC)
I think that the cartoon is very illustrative. But such a montage would be better. North8000 (talk) 12:10, 27 March 2017 (UTC)

'Wi-Fi' kettle[edit]

Well he finally did get a cuppa, after ELEVEN hours setting-up his (smart?) kettle.

Bonnie Malkin (12 October 2016) "English man spends 11 hours trying to make cup of tea with Wi-Fi kettle", Retrieved 12 October 2016.

I have already add this info for reference to the Kettle talkpage.220 of Borg 13:10, 12 October 2016 (UTC)

Nothing on Stuxnet and how IoT is related to SCADA?[edit]

I feel some security talk is needed on this page?

[1] [2]

I would suggest there needs to be quite a bit more talk on the topic of IoT security. A grand total of 1 sentence talking about how the first DDoS attack from a IoT botnet was several times larger than any other DDoS previously recorded? Stuxnet is also a good topic and an example of the reverse (targeting IoT-type devices, rather than IoT-type devices targeting the Internet). (talk) 22:59, 4 December 2016 (UTC)

Maybe this page and patent may help clarify how SCADA and IOT kinda fused: - and yea that's me (the goofy dude with the cig) Link to patent - The date of priority is aug 1995; I was working on that back in June of 1994. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Wamnet (talkcontribs) 20:20, 12 March 2017 (UTC)

  1. ^
  2. ^

Term coining[edit]

Is there any evidence for the 1985 Lewis coining? The reference doesn't exist, and most sources seem to agree on Ashton Grusl2017 (talk) 12:12, 19 March 2017 (UTC)

So remove then? Grusl2017 (talk) 14:14, 21 March 2017 (UTC)

I scrubbed through both Google Scholar and Google proper for every related search term that I could think of, and I cannot find any evidence for this claim. There are plenty of blogs that present it as fact, but all of them link to the source used in this article. My vote is for removal. Edit -- Found a couple of decent sources that refer to Ashton as the coiner. Ashton claims to have coined it during a presentation at Proctor and Gamble in 1999, but he also mentioned it in a Forbes interview in 2002. [1] [2] [3] SnowdogU77 (talk) 21:26, 27 March 2017 (UTC)

  1. ^ Ashton, Kevin. "That "Internet of Things" Thing". RFID Journal. Retrieved 27 March 2017. 
  2. ^ Schoenberger, Chana. "The Internet of Things". Forbes. Retrieved 27 March 2017. 
  3. ^ Maney, Kevin. "Kevin Ashton, Father of the Internet of Things & Network Trailblazer". The Network. Retrieved 27 March 2017. 

Some proposed changes[edit]

Enterox IoT framework formerly known as Eraspaas provides capabilities such as protocol translation for example devices that communicate over MQTT protocol can connect with Enterprise System that communicate over web based protocols such as REST or SOAP; even legacy industrial automation devices that communicate over Modbus protocol can connect with new cloud based enterprise systems such as Microsoft Dynamics CRM or Enterox Enterprise Suite, that provide web based API. This technology is extremely useful for Enterprise Integration scenarios that involve integration with IoT devices - sensors, actuators and physical machines.[1][2]

References (talk) 05:28, 15 June 2017 (UTC)

Why should Wikipedia mention Enterox? Blue Rasberry (talk) 13:47, 15 June 2017 (UTC)
Enterox IoT framework (formerly known as the Eraspaas framework) has a much longer history of research and development in Internet of Things than some of the companies mentioned in the framework section. It will be unfair to allow mention of other companies while not mentioning Enterox or Eraspaas. For the article to be unbiased, I have made the necessary edits to remove mention of other companies if the change is reverted then the proposed change about Enterox IoT framework and the unique approach in which it connects IoT devices with enterprise system by allowing data structure mapping and protocol translation should also be mentioned. (talk) 17:28, 15 June 2017 (UTC) You just removed the other companies from that section. I think that was an improvement, and now as you say, no companies are there. That part seems resolved. Anything more? Blue Rasberry (talk) 13:54, 16 June 2017 (UTC)