Re: octet vs. byte

From: 187 (bigal187_at_invalid.rx.eastcoasttfc.com)
Date: 09/24/04 

Date: Fri, 24 Sep 2004 08:54:54 -0700

Moe Trin wrote:
> In article <87ekktjkmd.fld@barrow.com>, Floyd L. Davidson wrote:
>> Did nibbles ever refer to anything other than half of an 8 bit
>> byte?
>
> I don't believe so. As ESR says in his Jargon file, it's a play on
> the word 'byte', as is the 'crumb' (half of a nibble). I've used the
> term 'nibble' in conversation with peers when discussing some piece
> of software, but in reports/papers/etc. or when talking to
> non-technical or non-peers, I've always used the more precise N bits
> (where N is for me invariably 4). I did work on a POS that used a 12
> bit byte back in the 1970s, but I don't recall seeing references to
> fractional parts of a byte in that horror (other than bits).
>
> Old guy,

Well said. There are many other reasons to keep to one size of byte, suc
has 8. Imagine wanting to compare memory but having to figure out the
Byte scale first. There should be a clear definition of Byte (which give
KByte (Byte * 2^10), MByte (Byte * 2^20), ...). Imagine wanting to
compare the memory in two different computers today, one went by the
practically-standard 8 bit Byte, and another went by 12bits. you would
be comparing apples and oranges, and the only way to compare would be to
break it down to bytes and convert one to the other. Why should we have
to do this? Why can't Byte just have one meaning? Like mile or meter. I
saw someoen compare it to have Dollars in US and Canada, and Aus, but
they are not al called dollar, but correctly called "US Dollar",
"Canadian Dollara", "Australian Dollar". "Byte" is used just as that
reguardless of how big (# of bits) it is, and I really feel this should
be standardized, and that is a nend some veery smart people have been
working to.

Actually didn't ISO once say something about the Byte?