Talk:64-bit computing

message: I've notice the following two sentences stating somewhat conflicting information:
# In the introduction paragraph:  Hence, a processor with 64-bit memory addresses can directly access 264 bytes (=16 exabytes) of byte-addressable memory.
# In "Limits of processors": In principle, a 64-bit microprocessor can address 16 EiBs (16 × 10246 = 264 = 18,446,744,073,709,551,616 bytes, or about 18.4 exabytes) of memory.
Perhaps I am misunderstanding something here, but seems to me that 264 == 264, bytes are bytes, exabytes are exabytes. Same values, same units and thus the final result should have the same value if the units are same.
Either both are ~18.4 Exabytes (EB), or 16 Exbibytes (EiB), something else?
As the byte unit is the common ground for both Magnitude systems (1000 vs 1024), 264 == 18446744073709552000 == 16 * 10246 ≈ 18.4 × 10006 ≈ 18.4 × 1018, then the first sentence was probably meant to use exbibyte instead of exabyte. Mainly, 16 Exbibytes ≈ 18.4 Exabytes. However for consistency, the values should be changed and use the same term.
Comments? Joedf (talk) 16:13, 30 October 2019 (UTC)
replies: text: Not sure what WP:COMPUNITS dictates here. Guy Harris (talk) 16:57, 30 October 2019 (UTC)
thread_title:  Inconsistency with use of 'Exabyte / Exbibyte' term or its equivalency 

message: I see there was a minor discussion above about exabytes vs exbibytes, and I note this article is rife with IEC units which appears to go against the guidance at WP:COMPUNITS. I checked one of the sources (AMD64 Programmer's Manual Volume 2: System Programming) and on page 24 (page 88 of the PDF) in section 2.2.1 - Memory Addressing, there is this passage (highlighted portions added for clarity):
This source is, by no means, historical, and was revised as recently as March of this year. I haven't checked the other cited sources, but if our sources are using petabyte, exabyte, terabyte (and the associated PB, EB, TB) then our article should as well (notwithstanding the WP:COMPUNITS guidance from MoS which really ought to be enough on its own, but just saying, the sources are also not using IEC units). In so far as kilobyte (KB), megabyte (MB) and gigabyte (GB) vs. the IEC prefixed variants, consider JEDEC memory standards. If there is no reasonable objection to making the article consistent with the sources I'll make the switch so our article can conform with standard usage in technical documentation (see this Microsoft developer article on memory limits in the various versions of Windows and Windows Server for examples of GB and TB (vs GiB and TiB in our article)) and in the larger media. —Locke Cole • t • c 18:21, 14 April 2021 (UTC)
replies: text: Implemented the correction. —Locke Cole • t • c 16:56, 16 April 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  IEC units 

message: How large is a screen resolution: 8, 16, 32, 64 or ... bit? How do you define a 32 / 64 Office API (any API)? I can't find anything pertinent with Google, neither here in the Wikipedia; does someone know where to find pertinent information on bitness, and why Microsoft Office made such a mess with it's API? Or can someone add that info to the appropriate article(s)? Alien4 (talk) 16:38, 2 November 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  APIs