Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP Path: utzoo!mnetor!uunet!steinmetz!davidsen From: davidsen@steinmetz.steinmetz.UUCP (William E. Davidsen Jr) Newsgroups: comp.unix.wizards,comp.arch Subject: Re: *Why* do modern machines mostly have 8-bit bytes? Message-ID: <6802@steinmetz.steinmetz.UUCP> Date: Fri, 24-Jul-87 11:01:51 EDT Article-I.D.: steinmet.6802 Posted: Fri Jul 24 11:01:51 1987 Date-Received: Sat, 25-Jul-87 14:15:37 EDT References: <142700010@tiger.UUCP> <2792@phri.UUCP> <8315@utzoo.UUCP> <2807@phri.UUCP> <6724@think.UUCP> <624@ima.ISC.COM> Reply-To: davidsen@kbsvax.steinmetz.UUCP (William E. Davidsen Jr) Organization: General Electric CRD, Schenectady, NY Lines: 13 Xref: mnetor comp.unix.wizards:3411 comp.arch:1682 In article <624@ima.ISC.COM> johnl@ima.UUCP (John R. Levine) writes: |It seems to me that all of the eight-bit byte machines we have are following |the lead of the IBM 360. In 1964, before the 360 came out, the most common |word size for binary machines was 36 bits and bytes, if the hardware supported |them at all were 6 bits. Various six-bit codes were adequate for the upper |case alphabet, digits, and a smattering of punctuation. | The GE line (now Honeywell) of 36 bit machines had hardware 9 bit bytes as well. Very nice for graphics characters, etc. -- bill davidsen (wedu@ge-crd.arpa) {chinet | philabs | sesimo}!steinmetz!crdos1!davidsen "Stupidity, like virtue, is its own reward" -me