Talk:AppleTalk

message: The official name is denoted as "AppleTalk", not "Appletalk". After posting my intentions to the Village Pump, I flipped the content between AppleTalk and Appletalk articles to reflect the correct name. RedWolf 21:32, Dec 27, 2003 (UTC)
from the village pump
According to Apple documentation, the official correct name for the protocol is "AppleTalk", not "Appletalk". Yet, it's the "Appletalk" page that has the text and the "AppleTalk" page that is the redirect. Anyone going to have a problem with me flipping this inaccuracy? RedWolf 05:44, Dec 27, 2003 (UTC)
: Sounds like an eminently sensible change to me...
: James F. 07:15, 27 Dec 2003 (UTC)
replies: text:  Go for it. Dpbsmith 15:01, 27 Dec 2003 (UTC)
thread_title:  Article title 

message: FYI, I updated the article to uniformly use "Apple Filing Protocol" throughout. I made this change because the current version of the AppleTalk documentation calls it this. (Older AppleTalk documentation does indeed call it "AppleTalk Filing Protocol".)-- tooki 03:56, 25 Nov 2004 (UTC)
thread_title:  AFP: "AppleTalk Filing Protocol"  or "Apple Filing Protocol"? 

message: I've noticed an item in two articles that contradict each other: AppleTalk says ("PhoneNet was considerably less expensive to install and maintain, and it is perhaps surprising that Apple did not move to this solution as well.") vs LocalTalk ("eventually Apple itself abandoned LocalTalk wiring and marketed PhoneNet as LocalTalk"). Can someone confirm if Apple ever offered a PhoneNet solution? --Steven Fisher 14:20, 17 May 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Disputed: Apple PhoneNet 

message: Hi-
Should idempotent be a link to Idempotence (computer science) or to Idempotence?  I assume it's good to avoid redirects (if we want to link to the Idempotence article), and I'm not sure if the computer science definition would be more apropos.
Stilroc 07:18, 26 September 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  What should [[idempotent]] link to? 

message: "AARP resolves AppleTalk addresses to physical layer, usually MAC, addresses. It is functionally equivalent to ARP."
This is clearly an error, as the physical layer has nothing to do with addressing.  The text, and the link, should reference the Data Link layer.  Second?  --Talinus 19:13, 11 July 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Agree. /Blaxthos 20:08, 4 August 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Wrong layer 

message: Is this an encyclopedic article or a fan posting?  ;-)  Seriously, it may be the easiest, but certainly such judgement should be kept off of wiki articles.  The whole section needs to be copyedited for style/tone/diction and sentence structure.  Tag applied; I'll try to take a stab at it over the next weekend.  /Blaxthos 20:07, 4 August 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Tone 

message: According to the article, in ADSP, "a connection attempt could be rejected", unlike in TCP.  However, in Winsock, the WSAAccept function allows server applications to accept or reject connection attempts based on the address of the client.  Does this mechanism not work with TCP too, by sending TCP resets or ICMP errors?  The documentation does mention that defending against SYN attacks requires sending the SYN+ACK to the client before calling the server's callback that would decide whether to accept the connection; but AFAIK such defense is not required by TCP itself.  213.216.199.52 05:04, 10 August 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Rejecting a connection 

message: It should be noted somewhere that the Apple II line also supported AppleTalk. As an add-on card for the //E and IIRC built in to some //C's and the GS. I also remember reading that implementing AppleTalk on the Apple II line involved some careful assembly programing as the 1 Mhz 65C02 could just handle the protocols speed.
Dryeo (talk) 06:05, 26 May 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  AppleTalk and the Apple II 

message: Adenosine triphosphate → ATP (Discuss). --Una Smith (talk) 21:00, 9 December 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Notice of requested move

message: Under "Addressing", the article says:
"This can be mitigated somewhat by insistence on using CNAME records indicating service rather than actual machine names to refer to the service..."
I understand this is an example, but it's not entirely accurate — CNAMEs aren't required to have a different name for the same server and, in this case, an A record would probably be better since it's not really an equivalent name for the same server/service. — 72.87.188.198 (talk) 22:57, 9 February 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  CNAMEs 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified  on AppleTalk. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20120422020240/http://www.techfest.com:80/networking/lan/token.htm to http://www.techfest.com/networking/lan/token.htm
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at ).
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 14:57, 16 October 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on AppleTalk. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20061016132614/http://www.opendoor.com/nethistory/MacWorld2004/index.html to http://www.opendoor.com/nethistory/MacWorld2004/index.html
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 02:59, 8 July 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: This article confuses, probably because Apple did, the LocalTalk hardware and the AppleTalk software protocols. Initially there was only AppleTalk on the built-in hardware, so one name was enough. When they later started using Ethernet and Tokenring, they needed new names, so the previous hardware was renamed LocalTalk.  It is not completely obvious how to fix this, but I think if the article early mentions the name change, and then consistently uses the later names, it should work. Gah4 (talk) 19:24, 17 July 2021 (UTC)
replies: text: I tried to add a bit of clarity, but this article (and the LocalTalk article to match) probably needs a massive rewrite to detangle the mess. — tooki (talk) 13:23, 12 September 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  LocalTalk