bit-widths, was Re: HP Laserjet ..again....

[Tom Jennings]

On Wed, 2004-09-22 at 13:04, Michael Sokolov wrote:

> > I always thought that the technical definition of a "byte" is "8-bits".
> 
> That's the current definition among beige-box kids, I thought the original
> definition was the smallest *addressable* unit of memory, wasn't it?
> That's the reason why RFCs use the term "octet" for 8 bits, not "byte".

We had to oppress the non-8-bit-byte zealots for a simply reason -- you
can't make nybbles out of odd bytes!