Talk:D-subminiature

Dash or no dash?
The article is inconsistent with regard to dashes in the name of these connectors, i.e. DB-25 or DB25? Caviare (talk) 01:03, 19 September 2018 (UTC)


 * I agree. All the designations could be standardised to have the dash/hyphen. There is already a disambiguation page for DE9 and DE-9 redirects correctly to the D-Sub page.  This could probably be done with a page wide find and replace. Idyllic press (talk) 07:36, 29 July 2023 (UTC)

Digital archaeology, or anti-deletionism
These two links, found via the DE-9 connector article history, list devices that used to be equipped with female and male DE-9 connectors, respectively:


 * https://web.archive.org/web/20101219073208/http://pinouts.ru/connector/9_pin_D-SUB_female_connector.shtml
 * https://web.archive.org/web/20101219071551/http://pinouts.ru/connector/9_pin_D-SUB_male_connector.shtml

I am not sure how they might be put back into maybe this article, but here they are. —ReadOnlyAccount (talk) 16:57, 28 April 2024 (UTC)

DF-104
The positioning of the DF-104 entry in the table at the top of the article page seems to suggest this connector had the same shell size as the non-standard 19-pin connector, which it does not. Its shell is a lot larger.

The "DF-104" name suggests its shell was called an "F shell", which is not in source. Neither is the DF-104 name itself. Sources do describe this thing as a "104-Pin D-Sub" or "104-Pin D-type" connector and reference a military specification MIL-DTL-24308. That spec calls the shell a "Shell size 6". Another source mentions a "size 22". Even if some sources, not the mil-spec, but some sources call this connector a "D-Sub" one, it is questionable whether this large connector with a D-type shell ought to properly be considered a D-subminiature connector and included in the table. The military specification's earliest revision's date of publication appears to be 2 Nov 1999, which was after the first iMac came to market, which heralded the slow demise of D-subminiature connectors. Certainly this 104-pin connector was not part of the original crop of D-sub connectors and is more of a late related development for a niche market and special applications. One might ask whether its inclusion here, which stems from these edits is at all warranted, or if it belongs in the table as opposed to elsewhere in the article. One of those edits describes the connector as HD104, which is also not in source. I have found one source that advertises this thing as a "DB104HD" connector, but then says: "Technically, the correct term for a DB104HD connector is DF-104, but that term is not commonly used." Besides the usual "DB instead of D plus some other letter" gripe, it is not clear at all according to whom this connector might technically or officially be called DF-104, and in any case, the lack of common use speaks for itself.

I would have added #EDEDED to the 104-pin connector's entry in the table, except the table's layout is already messed up enough by the dubious tag, and I'm not sure its entry will survive public scrutiny anyway. —ReadOnlyAccount (talk) 18:18, 28 April 2024 (UTC)