× The internal search function is temporarily non-functional. The current search engine is no longer viable and we are researching alternatives.
As a stop gap measure, we are using Google's custom search engine service.
If you know of an easy to use, open source, search engine ... please contact support@midrange.com.


  1.  Home
  2. MIDRANGE-L
  3. October 2006

Re: Computerworld editorial: ASCII is better than EBCDIC

Did not read the article, but I think he is more PC minded than AS/400 (if
he has heard of the system).

By the way, ASCII and EBCDIC are subsets of UNICDE, AFAIK.

Regards,
Carel Teijgeler

*********** REPLY SEPARATOR  ***********

On 31-10-2006 at 13:57 Mike Cunningham wrote:


Did anyone else read Frank Hayes column in the Oct 23 issue of
Computerworld where hs states that ASCII is better than EBCDIC. When I
went thru school (I won't say when but it was after the birth of ASCII
in the '60s) we were taught that EBCDIC was better since it was 8-bit
and supported 256 characters and ASCII was 7 (at least at that time) and
only support 128 characters. Any idea why he would say ASCII was better?


p.s. I do agree that both should be retired and replaced by unicode

As an Amazon Associate we earn from qualifying purchases.

This thread ...
Follow-Ups:
Replies:
Follow On AppleNews
Return to Archive home page | Return to MIDRANGE.COM home page

This mailing list archive is Copyright 1997-2024 by midrange.com and David Gibbs as a compilation work. Use of the archive is restricted to research of a business or technical nature. Any other uses are prohibited. Full details are available on our policy page. If you have questions about this, please contact [javascript protected email address].

Operating expenses for this site are earned using the Amazon Associate program and Google Adsense.