A conceptual question

[EugenyG]

When the byte was defined as a basic unit of information, it was decided to have 8-bit. Back at the time all software was 1-byte based, so it was referred to as 8-bit.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Since then we have moved to 16-bit, 32-bit, and now moving on to 64-bit with the introduction of Athlon 64's, Itaniums, and now the new Windows x64.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

However, all that happens is increasing the number of bytes per unit of information. 16-bit has 2 bytes, 32-bit has 4 bytes, and 64-bit has 8 bytes.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Question: Seeing as a "byte" is not the basic building block anymore (up to 8 are required nowadays), why not just get rid of the concept of "byte" (just keeping data at the bit level), or define byte to be the basic block for a system (thus a byte on a 32-bit system would have, well, 32-bit, etc.)

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Just because a byte was designed in order to be a complete, independent piece of data, but it isn't anymore, so it's whole purpose is rendered obsolete.

[Hannibal]

Question: Seeing as a "byte" is not the basic building block anymore (up to 8 are required nowadays), why not just get rid of the concept of "byte" (just keeping data at the bit level), or define byte to be the basic block for a system (thus a byte on a 32-bit system would have, well, 32-bit, etc.)

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Just because a byte was designed in order to be a complete, independent piece of data, but it isn't anymore, so it's whole purpose is rendered obsolete.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Compatibility? Thousands if not millions of programs, drivers and other hardware pieces which have not gone to 64-bit at all, and pieces of code rely on the byte being 8 bits. It's not worth the trouble to change that.