so for them, they have naturally gravitated to:
1= bitcoins
0.001 = millibits = bits
0.000001 = microbits = micros
0.00000001 = satoshis.
im assuming this will just stick since it seems so intuitive and easy for the people who havent thought about it much.
Anyone else run across different term usage IRL? I believe someone suggested that gambling sites went with powers-of-satoshis (kSat, MSat, etc.) which seems cumbersome in speech. Any other local/group trends?
Colloquially, everyone in my circle used "u-bits" for uBTC, which has evolved over the last year to normally just "bits". Not much need for a name for mBTC, though we had been calling them Bitfins, finneys, and generally just Finns.
Thus my preference.
1.00 BTC = 1 Bitcoin. The full thing. Emphasis that it can be broken down, into...
0 . 000 001 BTC = 1 uBTC = 1 bit. Bitcoins are made of bits. It's a Bit-coin. Bits go to two decimal places, comfortably, and probably will not need to exceed this for a good many years:
0 . 000 000 01 BTC = 1 "Satoshi" = 0.01 bit.
At my company, we keep track of client funds with a "crossed B" for Bitcoin, and use BTC or the proposed ISO code XBT when necessary. For bits, we use a crossed lower-case b, and for clarity will use either uBTC, uXBT when necessary. (Necessary is when there is no glyph support for a B or a b superimposed with a dash, as some systems don't like this.)
We deal mostly in holdings that exceed a full B by a good deal, but interest and other things regularly need to be accounted for. We're anal so we keep 24 places of precision regardless, and thusly you'll see in our books "927 . 721 932 991 283 372 120 uBTC" but with our "bit" sign.