Taking Unicode out of the picture, the 'better than' proposition probably
has something to do with usage. IBM (and I think Bull used to) is the user
of EBCDIC - all others use ASCII. And even IBM doesn't use EBCDIC on pSeries
and xSeries - just i and z. So, while Betamax may be better than VHS...

On 10/31/06, Neil Palmer <neilpalmer400mr@xxxxxxxx> wrote:


You should write to him and/or the Computerworld editor and call him out
on this.  :-)

Neil Palmer, Cambridge, Ontario, Canada

(This account not monitored for personal mail,
remove the last two letters before @ for that)

----- Original Message ----
From: "vhamberg@xxxxxxxxxxx" <vhamberg@xxxxxxxxxxx>
To: Midrange Systems Technical Discussion <midrange-l@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
Sent: Tuesday, October 31, 2006 6:48:33 PM
Subject: Re: Computerworld editorial: ASCII is better than EBCDIC

Frank Hayes has, according to the article, "has covered IT for more than
20 years." It seems he has not been around long enough to make the statement
he does. And this very statement is patently ridiculous on the face of it::

ASCII. A big improvement over IBM’s proprietary EBCDIC character set in
the 1960s. But today we do business globally, and ASCII can’t even handle
euro or yen signs.

Original ASCII came from telexes, my cohort across the aisle says, and was
7-bit - plus various stop and parity stuff. EBCDIC is related to our
favorite Hollerith cards. Who knows the whys and wherefores behind the
design decisions. As to handling euro and yen, the writer seems not to know
that there are several ASCII code pages. As to superiority, which one has
more control codes? Of course, are they needed?

The statement seems more about acceptance than about true improvements. My
cohort also said that IBM made EBCDIC public long ago. And the 2 systems
were probably developed in parallel - different origins. This is just
another unfortunate silly example of something that people will accept
without examining it for credulity. And I am probably off the mark, but I
hope not so bad as that writer!!


-------------- Original message --------------
From: AGlauser@xxxxxxxxxxxx

> For those who are interested, I believe this is the article in question:
> d=269598

This is the Midrange Systems Technical Discussion (MIDRANGE-L) mailing
To post a message email: MIDRANGE-L@xxxxxxxxxxxx
To subscribe, unsubscribe, or change list options,
visit: http://lists.midrange.com/mailman/listinfo/midrange-l
or email: MIDRANGE-L-request@xxxxxxxxxxxx
Before posting, please take a moment to review the archives
at http://archive.midrange.com/midrange-l.

This thread ...

Return to Archive home page | Return to MIDRANGE.COM home page