Talk:Kibibit

Computing Low‑importance

	This redirect is within the scope of WikiProject Computing, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of computers, computing, and information technology on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.ComputingWikipedia:WikiProject ComputingTemplate:WikiProject ComputingComputing articles
Low	This redirect has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Discussion about centralization took place at Talk:Binary prefix.

Shouldn't it say that 1 kibibit is 128 octets, and not necessarily 128 bytes? 8 bits is not universally defined as 1 byte, whereas the reader can determine for themselves if 1 octet = 1 byte in their world. Perhaps even make a note of this specificity and link it to an article on octet/bits/bytes?

No, our anonymous contributor is mistaken. It behooves us to avoid archaeism. It has been at least a decade since "byte" meant a variable number of bits, as outlined in articles kibibyte, byte and octet. Jim.henderson 13:43, 13 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Is this really used? I mean, when talking about storage, the base unit is kibiBYTE and when talking about transmissions its kilo bits. Where is the term "Kibibit" used? 84.58.138.254 01:41, 5 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Nope. It's not used, kilobyte and kibibyte are used for data capacity, and kilobit are used for data transmission. It's been a long time since kilobits (or megabits) were used for data capacity, and kibibit never was.76.112.254.142 (talk) 13:22, 15 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Evidence from Google Scholar suggests that Kibit/s is used. Dondervogel 2 (talk) 22:44, 16 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]