| 1 |
On Monday, March 31, 2014 01:56:57 PM Ian Stakenvicius wrote: |
| 2 |
> On 31/03/14 01:27 PM, Rich Freeman wrote: |
| 3 |
> > On Mon, Mar 31, 2014 at 11:44 AM, Michał Górny <mgorny@g.o> |
| 4 |
> > |
| 5 |
> > wrote: |
| 6 |
> >> Dnia 2014-03-31, o godz. 06:56:19 Joshua Kinard |
| 7 |
> >> |
| 8 |
> >> <kumba@g.o> napisał(a): |
| 9 |
> >>> In some respect, if all one cares about is free space on a disk |
| 10 |
> >>> drive or how fast they can stream a movie, then the KiB/MiB |
| 11 |
> >>> thing works. But if you play with bits and bytes from |
| 12 |
> >>> time-to-time (and worry about byte alignment) or sometimes |
| 13 |
> >>> fiddle w/ partition tables in a hex editor...you're going to |
| 14 |
> >>> think in terms of powers of two. |
| 15 |
> > |
| 16 |
> > KiB/MiB ARE powers of two. It is KB/MB which are powers of ten |
| 17 |
> > (depending on who you talk to). |
| 18 |
> > |
| 19 |
> > Drive sizes tend to be reported in MB/GB, and memory tends to be |
| 20 |
> > reported in MiB, GiB (though they may or may not use those |
| 21 |
> > abbreviations when doing so). |
| 22 |
> |
| 23 |
> This is very much old "standard" vs new standard in terms of naming. |
| 24 |
> For those of us that have been around long enough, Mega/Kilo/etc have |
| 25 |
> always meant 1024 when addressing computational storage, as per for |
| 26 |
> instance ANSI/IEEE Std 1084-1986. However, as people know this did |
| 27 |
> become (or has always been) used ambiguously and so these terms were |
| 28 |
> apparently deprecated in favour of MiB, KiB etc by the IEC starting at |
| 29 |
> around 1996 and with formal adoption 1999 with IEC 60027-2 Amendment 2 |
| 30 |
> (and expanded adoption in ISO/IEC IEC 80000-13:2008) |
| 31 |
> |
| 32 |
> [*] source: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Binary_prefix |
| 33 |
> |
| 34 |
> +1 for usage of {K,M,G,T,...}iB as per standard. |
| 35 |
|
| 36 |
|
| 37 |
+1, the IEC is the way everyone is going, for reference |
| 38 |
|
| 39 |
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Timeline_of_binary_prefixes |
Archives