Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP Path: utzoo!mnetor!seismo!cmcl2!phri!roy From: roy@phri.UUCP (Roy Smith) Newsgroups: comp.std.internat,comp.sys.m68k,comp.arch Subject: Re: How do you say "byte" in French? Message-ID: <2525@phri.UUCP> Date: Sat, 6-Dec-86 15:15:58 EST Article-I.D.: phri.2525 Posted: Sat Dec 6 15:15:58 1986 Date-Received: Sun, 7-Dec-86 07:00:23 EST References: <125@ogesml0.UUCP> <2523@phri.UUCP> <348@uthub.toronto.edu> <1257@ncr-sd.UUCP> Reply-To: roy@phri.UUCP (Roy Smith) Followup-To: comp.std.internat Distribution: world Organization: Public Health Research Inst. (NY, NY) Lines: 67 Summary: Common usage != Correct usage Xref: mnetor comp.std.internat:27 comp.sys.m68k:68 comp.arch:102 [Note: followups redirected to comp.std.internat only] [I tried to send this earlier, but an overflowing /usr/tmp caused my file to get eaten -- this is from memory and not as good as the original.] This all started when I noticed that <> is the French translation for the English "byte", and pointed out that this is sure to cause confusion when you teach people that a byte does not have to be 8 bits. (This, by-the-way, was not intended as a slur against the French language, simply an observation; English has many, greater, stupidities.) Random people have objected to my contention that "byte != 8 bits". Several people have pointed that <> is a {better, different, alternative, what-have-you} word for <>. I like <> better for the generalized concept of "smallest natural grouping of bits on a particular machine". In article <1257@ncr-sd.UUCP> lodman@ncr-sd.UUCP (Michael Lodman) writes: > Although at one time [a byte is 8 bits] might have been a correct > statement, its my quess that a reference today to anything but an 8 bit > byte will cause blank stares and massive confusion. For all practical > purposes the definition of a byte is eight bits. If you speak Latin to most people in the world today, you will get blank stares and massive confusion. Does that mean Latin is not a real language? If I told my mother (an intelligent and educated women who doesn't happen to grok complex algebra) that "sqrt (-1) = exp (j*pi/2)" that would also cause blank stares and massive confusion. Does that mean it isn't a true statement? Try telling all those people who work with DEC-20's that a byte is 8 bits, and see how many blank stares you get then. Being common usage doesn't make something right. I commonly talk about making a Xerox copy, when in reality we only have Kodak and Cannon photocopy machines at work. When I refer to the RS-232 port on a Mac-plus, but I know full well it's not really RS-232 because (among other things) it has the wrong connector. That people are sloppy about the phrase "Xerox copy" doesn't cause much trouble (to me anyway; Xerox folks probably feel differently), but people being sloppy about what they mean by "RS-232" causes me more grief than you want to know about. It is important to make a distinction between common speech and speaking technicly. "Byte" is a technical term, and as such, it has a specific meaning. I'm not going to stick my neck out and say exactly what the definition is, but it sure doesn't include having to be 8 bits. If people continue to use technical terms for whatever they feel like meaning that particular day, pretty soon we'll have: If it signals with +/- 10 volts, it's RS-232. If it has 2 N connectors and a DB-15, it's Ethernet. If it's 1200 baud full-duplex, it's Bell-212A. If it's got "From:" and "To:" lines in the header, it's RFC-822. If sending it "ESC [ " makes it jump, it's X3.64. If it prints out a "% " and runs "ls -l", it's Unix. Unfortunately, there are all too many people in the world who would say that some or all of the above are true. Many of those people are in the business of building and selling computer systems. More the pity. -- Roy Smith, {allegra,cmcl2,philabs}!phri!roy System Administrator, Public Health Research Institute 455 First Avenue, New York, NY 10016 "you can't spell deoxyribonucleic without unix!"