cryptoanarchy.wiki

Arise, you have nothing to lose but your barbed wire fences!

1996-04-11 - Re: questions about bits and bytes

Header Data

From: “Perry E. Metzger” <perry@piermont.com>
To: Simon Spero <ses@tipper.oit.unc.edu>
Message Hash: f792ba1a151b5e94ae4c8f9ce76c955f108dacb3158d6d1103754774898d3c9b
Message ID: <199604111457.KAA20833@jekyll.piermont.com>
Reply To: <Pine.SOL.3.91.960410182824.5230D-100000@chivalry>
UTC Datetime: 1996-04-11 22:22:00 UTC
Raw Date: Fri, 12 Apr 1996 06:22:00 +0800

Raw message

From: "Perry E. Metzger" <perry@piermont.com>
Date: Fri, 12 Apr 1996 06:22:00 +0800
To: Simon Spero <ses@tipper.oit.unc.edu>
Subject: Re: questions about bits and bytes
In-Reply-To: <Pine.SOL.3.91.960410182824.5230D-100000@chivalry>
Message-ID: <199604111457.KAA20833@jekyll.piermont.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain



Simon Spero writes:
> No, bytes are no always 8 bits - some machines use(d) 9-bit bytes. That's 
> why we have the word octet.

Indeed, machines have come in all flavors of byte size.

Byte size on PDP-6 descended machines, including the PDP-10 and
DECSystem-20, was always variable -- byte pointers could extract any
length from one bit to 36 bits, and byte size was an attribute of
files under several operating systems that ran on that series. I
remember that many of the MIT crowd favored 9 bit Extended ASCII,
using the so called space-cadet keyboards that set the two high bits
when control and meta were hit, and with the area we think of as the
control characters being taken up by other symbols.

"Byte" only came to mean "Eight Bits" consistantly in the last decade
or less. "Octet" is the only really consistant term.

Perry

Thread