Post

Whoever decided to use "bits per second" instead of "bytes per second" is my sworn enemy

62 reposts1K likes

We already had a perfectly good non-confusing name for bits per second and frankly having a Gigabaud internet connection sounds awesome. I know that baud is technically different in ways that don't really matter anymore. That pedantry should be directed at people stealing 24 MB per GB they sell you

In the ye olden days, the K, M, G meant binary powers, so a "kilobyte" was 1024 bytes. But with disk manufacturers turning it into meaning "1000" (K), or "1 million" (M) or "1 billion" (G), that's why people get confused about a "1TB" drive only showing less than that on their file system.

The reason is that serial lines (eg for comms) are literally "serial" in that they send bits, not bytes. For example, on old fashioned serial lines, there are checksum & start/stop bits that are not "data". So 10 bits were sent for each 8 bits of data. Better to complain about the "G" not the "b".

If you ever see something like "100 Mbps internet" and thought to yourself "100 megabytes per second" congratulations you have been hoodwinked It's actually 12.5 megabytes per second

Hear me out: if it’s soooo important that serial connections not be measured in bytes (and I’m not sure it is), at least bring back “baud”!

I was told once that 1 baud is one sine wave per second. Past 2400 it is too hard to squeeze more cycles onto a telephone wire so they started using amplitude to get more bits per baud.

Almost.. It's one "symbol"/sec. Early modems just used frequency A for 1 and B for 0. 1 symbol = 1 bit. There's a speed limit there (phone is about 4kHz bandwidth), so they defined four frequencies for a modem to hum, those could represent 00, 01, 10, 11 and send 2 bits at once. And so on...

One might ask, wait, isn't that confusing because both bits and bytes start with a b? Yes. YES IT IS. To distinguish, the world generally does MB/s to indicate MegaBytes per second, and Mbps to indicate MegaBits per second. Isn't that fun.

Don't forget the difference between MB (megabyte, 10^6 bytes) and MiB (mebibyte, 2^20 bytes), and to make it even more fucked up MB can actually refer to either one of those, and then you also have the bit/byte distinction...

If you think this is bad look into the difference between MegaBytes and MebiBytes. 1000 Kilobytes != 1024 Kilobytes And it compounds on each, kilo, mega, giga, tera, each is further off and further off.

Information symbols per second. *NOT* bits per second as some seem to think. A 56kbps modem runs at 8000 baud. 2400bps modems are 600 baud. It’s a measure of the encoding system.

A baud is, very technically, not the same as a bit per second. But long ago I decided to treat them that way in my head, at least until such time as I get a job as a modem engineer, at which point I will need to look up and thoroughly understand the definitions.

It’s from a bit of history when lines were unreliable and there was often an extra bit (or two!) sent along with each byte as error detection/correction. Data line up on pretty byte boundaries at layer 2, but not always at layer 1.

Unfortunately, because data are encoded for transmission - error control and framing are present and some media require stuffing - it isn’t a straightforward mapping from bits to bytes in communications systems. If bits/sec is constant, bytes/sec often does vary. That’s why bps is better for these.

Wait until you find out network interface statistics counters are in bytes (well, octets) and we convert it back to bits for graphing/reporting.

If I'm designing a network system (and I have, wired and wireless) I'm figuring out how to get one bit from point A to point B as fast as I reliably can. So bps makes sense for those of us designing it. It's the marketing folks who decide how to present it to Joe public.

It's simple. From the First Book of Telecommunications, first Chapter: 1: In the beginning was the baud, and the baud measured bps and the baud was bps. […] All signals were sent this way and otherwise no signal was sent. […] The data floweth through the cable; and the cable comprehendeth it not.

It’s more than that. Modems were originally serial devices, operating on bit inputs and outputs. Byte encoding of data was none of the modems business, so you could run BCD, ASCII, or EBCIDIC over the same modem in theory.

… and even when 8-bit bytes were transmitted, the addition of parity (error checking) caused 9-bits to be transmitted per byte. Thus, bytes/second would undercount the bit rate of the network.

Back in the day bytes were whatever size you wanted, sometimes six bits, sometimes nine. Then on an Rs232 serial line there were start bits and stop bits and parity to count too. I always divide/multiply by 10 for rough conversion