Re: Bits

[Luke A. K. <lu...@ma...>]

On Wed, 25 Sep 2002, Shprentz, Joel [C]  wrote:

> Will,
> 
> Your mention of a "Jimmy Wig" reminds me that although we converse in
> English, we may not share a common vocabulary.

As far as I can remember (which currently extends at least until
yesterday), it is similar to a clown wig.  My guess is that the "Jimmy"
reference is to Jimi Hendrix, because it was a bit of a psychodelic 'fro,
but I'm only guessing.

> Now I wonder whether a package is a bundle of binary digits or a bundle of
> small pieces.

My guess is that it is a bundle of small pieces; there's not point in
bundling individual bits in anything but a file at a time, and those are
usually called "files", not "bundles".  Thus, it would follow that a
bundle would be a bundle of related files.

Plus, we've pretty much abstracted the whole "digital bit" thing these
days.  I've never yet had to move actual little bits anywhere in my
five-odd years as a sysadmin, and I'd be surprised if a bundling
mechanism's main goal was to bundle individual bits....

Luke

-- 
Today at work an ethernet switch decided to take the 'N' out of NVRAM
                -- Richard Letts