Talk:Edge computing

Wikified as part of the Wikification wikiproject! JubalHarshaw 19:16, 2 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Bug reported re: category section

I noticed a phantom category at the bottom that is redlined, but can't get rid of it. I reported it to Phabricator.Timtempleton (talk) 20:59, 2 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Fog vs. Edge

What's the difference between fog computing and edge computing? Please answer on the fog computing talk page. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 194.213.3.4 (talk) 11:45, 6 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Rewrite needed

I rewrote the introduction, but this whole article is too WP:TECHNICAL for non-expert readers. I'm not an expert enough to rewrite this on my own. I'm gonna need some help. -- Daviddwd (talk) 16:15, 24 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Advocates of Edge have several different and contradictory definitions. Much of the article was out of date and/or only relevant if you assume a particular definition. Often contradictory. This leaves a very short article so I will ask experts I know to improve it. — Dave Burstein Daveburstein (talk) 07:56, 19 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

It is not too technical: it is not technical enough! it is just a load of waffle with not the slightest hint of what real implementations might be like. The article should be written up to describe it as an ill-defined but widely used term. Some actual examples and a picture, such as this, would help. — RHaworth (talk · contribs) 11:13, 9 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

We also need to remember that [WP:NOTDIC|Wikipedia is not a dictionary]]. So, the article shouldn't be waffling about what Edge Computing means, but rather, choosing a definition and describing it. If there are multiple definitions, the disambig link should send the user to articles of other definitions. Minority definitions can probably be just ignored. Ashmoo (talk) 14:07, 5 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

There ought to be some mention of edge device privacy and security issues, as well as the issue of degradation of the edge device's (e.g. a smartphone's) response due to edge processing. Zvmphile (talk) 05:11, 20 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Examples and applications

I have moved the recent good-faith edit from RichardWeiss into the main text (hope that's OK as a compromise). A quick additional point though: we should be careful not to introduce an indiscriminate list of examples and applications, unless such applications have been covered in detail by non-promotional sources ("non-promotional" excludes many trade magazines and similar publications, that primarily serve to hype their industry and products). Wikipedia is an encyclopedia, not another platform for the latest industry news.GermanJoe (talk) 12:04, 10 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Note sure about reference 15

Or the link is broken, or this is a commercial link — Preceding unsigned comment added by 62.235.70.149 (talk) 20:34, 25 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Agreed. It was probably added in good faith, but is completely useless, so I have removed it. Thanks. Grayfell (talk) 21:18, 25 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Recent cite spam for doctoral thesis

This recent edit [1] does not improve article sourcing and only serves to add a citation to a doctoral thesis that has not been peer-reviewed, published in an acknowledged journal or widely cited in other literature (afaik). The reference didn't even bother to provide a specific page number in the 200+ pages thesis => This is a clear violation of WP:SELFCITE, I have reverted the edit accordingly. Unless the likely author can provide a good rationale for inclusion and uninvolved editors agree, such likely self-citing references should be avoided. GermanJoe (talk) 07:40, 9 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed merge of Edge device into Edge computing

Edge devices do edge computing, but there is so little in common with edge devices beyond this, that they don't really constitute a separate article. Ethanpet113 (talk) 23:20, 28 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose - Edge devices in networking get you onto to the network. Edge computing is a cloud computing optimization. Despite similar names, these are orthogonal technologies and there's no benefit in covering them in the same article. ~Kvng (talk) 13:47, 31 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Definitely oppose - Agree that there is no benefit in muddying either article by co-mingling distinctly different technologies (there really is no overlap in the topic other than they may represent different segments of an integrated solution)

Closing, given the uncontested objections. Klbrain (talk) 20:44, 2 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Commercial offerings in edge computing

I would think it is useful to list the slowly growing commercial offerings in the space of edge computing. My addition does not take a stance on any being better than another and encompasses all three leading cloud computing providers. This is useful material for someone looking to use edge computing, not just read research papers on it. Sonata19 (talk) 21:07, 24 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Sonata19, Wikipedia is not a directory or a catalog, we shouldn't be concerned with matching our readers with products they can use, especially not with primary source citations to the vendors themselves. MrOllie (talk) 21:24, 24 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

MrOllie Understood. Thank you for the instruction. Sonata19 (talk) 21:46, 24 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

section on neuromorphic computing.

There should be a section in this article dedicated to neuromorphic computing. given the significant applications of edge computing in that area (not relying on a cloud to process AI analytics but rather use a neuromorphic chip at the edge)

I agree with the rationale for creation of a new page on Edge AI. This is a topic of large and growing interest.

Sonata19 (talk) 15:47, 1 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

proposed article for creation: Edge AI

id like to request consensus for the creation of the article Edge AI.

I think this apllication of edge computing requires treatment in a separate article since some aspects of it are different from traditional edge computing.

thank you in advance for commenting.

Wiki Education assignment: Research Process and Methodology - SU22 - Sect 202 - Tue

This article was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment, between 4 July 2022 and 16 August 2022. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): Ninamn7 (article contribs).

— Assignment last updated by Ninamn7 (talk) 18:27, 28 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Wiki Education assignment: Research Process and Methodology - FA22 - Sect 200 - Thu

This article was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment, between 22 September 2022 and 8 December 2022. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): Omnicass (article contribs).

— Assignment last updated by Omnicass (talk) 22:38, 19 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

New introduction

My latest edit shortened the introduction. It should be more useful to people who want a quick summary. --Svennik (talk) 16:58, 16 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

You deleted a lot of sourced content and citations without much justification. MrOllie (talk) 17:17, 16 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

This time, I rephrased all the existing content in the introduction without removing it. Svennik (talk) 19:00, 16 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Agreed, rewrite needed. Intro is oddly clumsy and ambiguous.

I'm no expert on modern networking concepts, but do have professional career experience in client-server networking and database administration. IMPO, a better rewrite of this article is needed and desirable. I think that phrases such as "sources of data" and "a user... physically closer to a server" are ambiguous and confusing, and perhaps of questionable relevance. IMHO, application performance is much more impacted by user traffic load on a network at any given moment and on the Internet through which I/O travels than it is by how geographically "close" or "far" a client is from a data server or cluster. As always there are trade-offs to be considered in choosing alternatives to implement. KnowBuddy (talk) 23:22, 9 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

This might partly be because a user tried to combine an early spammy, jargon-filled opening sentence with an attempt at a more useful introductory paragraph. --Svennik (talk) 15:22, 11 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

You might have attempted a more useful introductory paragraph, but what you actually produced was less informative and even more confusing than what had been there previously. Language like 'roughly about' is unhelpful. We need to tell the reader what it actually is, not what it almost is. MrOllie (talk) 15:51, 11 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

It's hard to find non-spammy sources about this topic, but network latency is certainly something that exists. --Svennik (talk) 15:30, 11 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]