In the table of bit groupings, it would seem that a term defined by the International Electrotechnical Commission would be official.

octet - 8 bits.

 

Whilst accurate, how wide spread is the use of the term octet as opposed to bytes? (Which is how 8-bits is referred to in the text).

IIRC, octet is more commonly used in French speaking countries.

Dave

 

In the table of bit groupings, it would seem that a term defined by the International Electrotechnical Commission would be official.

octet - 8 bits.

You mean it's not! Sacre Bleu!

 

It will probably stay byte for some time - I will continue to enjoy Mr. Schumann's Octet, however. The term, octet, may be evocative, but utterly lacks geekiness.

Move to ignore the change.

 

Technically, using 'byte' to mean strictly a group of 8 bits is wrong. Remember the 7-bit byte negotiated by some telephone line modems?

In my opinion, such standards should be observed more carefully. There is enough confusion arising from not using kibibytes to mean \(2^{10}\) bytes for example. It's a shame that computer science still does not comply with the long-established scientific rules and common practice.

And then we wonder why 'engineering' isn't an accepted qualifier for 'software'...

 

Technically, using 'byte' to mean strictly a group of 8 bits is wrong. Remember the 7-bit byte negotiated by some telephone line modems?

In my opinion, such standards should be observed more carefully. There is enough confusion arising from not using kibibytes to mean \(2^{10}\) bytes for example. It's a shame that computer science still does not comply with the long-established scientific rules and common practice.

And then we wonder why 'engineering' isn't an accepted qualifier for 'software'...

Actually in the venerable PDP-6, a byte could be any size from 1 to 36 bits. There were hardware instructions that would pack and unpack them as well. Standards -shmandards

 

Does anyone have access to the IEC standards for bit-grouping terminology?

Dave

 

Most text books state that 1 byte = 8 bits.
1 bit = 0 or 1
1 nybble = 4 bits
1 byte = 8 bits
1 kilobyte = 1024 bytes
etc. etc.

As metric is common outside of the US and the imperial system is common inside, a byte will always mean an 8-bit byte here. Unless you're using proprietary hardware with an uncommon bit/byte ratio, the defacto will always be 8 bits = 1 byte. Most people don't know what an octothorpe is, why would they know what an octet is when the industries and commercials ingrain 1 byte = 8 bits. And without trying to be insulting, trying to sling around the word octet for a "cool factor" will probably result in looks of "what an idiot".

Speaking of commercials and coolness... some people hate hearing finger nails on a chalk board... I hate hearing the commercials for mobile phones with text messaging where the whole family says "IDK, I'm talking to my BFF Satan. OMGWTFBBQPORKCHOPSANDWICHES!" It makes me want to buy a musket so I can clean it then load it with black powder and a bullet and then shoot the television.

 

1 kilobyte = 1024 bytes

To obtain the proverbial can-of-worms and open it with two hands, but 1024 bytes is now referred to as a kilibyte (2^10) in the binary prefix notation. A kilobyte is is exactly 1000 (10^3) bytes under the SI prefix notation. However many still confuse the two terms - myself included, and some refuse to conform to the terminology creating confusion. Ever wondered why your 400GB external HD losses 28GBs on connection...

Dave

 

it sure wud be a pain however to get accustomed to these terminologies.
as for me i always get a good picture of things when figures are projected in bytes.

 

Well bytes are still bytes, i.e. 8-bits. The terminology change is in the prefix, reference: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Template:Quantities_of_bytes

The SI notation is the one that most people are familiar with, however the base-2 notation of the binary-prefixes are the more accurate ones for digital computing systems. My example of the external HDs showing less than advertised is a classic example of where the confusion of this terminology creeps in.

Dave

 

A good part of the confusion with the decimal/binary prefixes comes from their similarity - there are too many homonyms - killibyte and kilobyte as an example. Rather than make such a standard from on high, it might be more acceptable (and less confusing) to elicit input to see if less confusing terms may be come up with.

Considering that we're 48,576 bytes short when we say megabyte, it's not a bad idea. Then again, anyone using base 2 numbers knows the prefixes are not accurate. It's not quite at the level of the kilometers/miles mixup that lost a Mars probe.

No sense in gritching about the old Imperial units - the standard of a 1/4 - 20 screw socket in every camera for a tripod mount insures that inches will be with us forever!

 

A good part of the confusion with the decimal/binary prefixes comes from their similarity - there are too many homonyms - killibite and kilobite as an example.

Absolutely, the abreviated acronyms are not much better kilibyte = KiB and kilobyte = KB.

The other problem is that it is easy to say 1KiB = 1024 bytes \(\approx\) 1KB = 1000 bytes. Now this is not too bad on the KiB/KB scale when we get in the gigibyte and gigabyte scale, several gigs can go missing quite easily.

Rather than make such a standard from on high, it might be more acceptable (and less confusing) to elicit input to see if less confusing terms may be come up with.

I'd agree, but its now become standard notation.

No sense in gritching about the old Imperial units - the standard of a 1/4 - 20 screw socket in every camera for a tripod mount insures that inches will be with us forever!

The aviation industry will ensure imperial will be with us for a long time yet - it is far too risky to move away from an established system in such a standardised and critical industry.

Dave