1 |
Dnia 2014-03-30, o godz. 16:43:20 |
2 |
Patrick Lauer <patrick@g.o> napisał(a): |
3 |
|
4 |
> On Sunday 30 March 2014 10:33:42 Michał Górny wrote: |
5 |
> > Dnia 2014-03-27, o godz. 09:40:47 |
6 |
> > |
7 |
> > "Anthony G. Basile" <blueness@g.o> napisał(a): |
8 |
> > > The council will be meeing on April 8, 2014 at 1900 UTC. Please bring |
9 |
> > > forward any agenda items you would like discussed. |
10 |
> > |
11 |
> > Before we get into another revert war from patrick, I'd like to raise |
12 |
> > the following item: |
13 |
> > |
14 |
> > - use of ISO/IEC binary prefixes vs ambiguous 'mega' prefixes |
15 |
> > |
16 |
> > Quick explanation: |
17 |
> > |
18 |
> > ISO/IEC prefixes [1,2]: KiB (kibibyte), MiB (mebi-), GiB (gibi-) |
19 |
> > -- unambiguously 2^10, 2^20, 2^30 |
20 |
> > |
21 |
> > 'old' prefixes: kB (kilobyte), MB (mega-), GB (giga-) |
22 |
> > -- can mean 10^3 or 2^10 etc. depending on author's intention |
23 |
> > -- SI people tend to use 10^N for consistency with other units |
24 |
> > |
25 |
> |
26 |
> base-10 bytes make no sense. |
27 |
|
28 |
Sorry to disappoint you but most people in the world use base 10 |
29 |
as their natural system. Not that they've chosen to, it's just what you |
30 |
get teached in schools, and then what you meet in shops, government |
31 |
agencies, random companies and -- guess what -- even most of those |
32 |
computer programs output in base 10 unconditionally. |
33 |
|
34 |
Why would base-1024 prefixes make any sense when the numbers are |
35 |
base 10? |
36 |
|
37 |
Sorry to say that, but when I see 10-digit number, I'd rather shift |
38 |
the decimal comma and use base-10 gigabytes. Dividing by power of 1024 |
39 |
don't come easy in base 10, and most of the people don't waste time |
40 |
using a calculator just to use some fancy base-1024 unit that makes |
41 |
some sense in internal computer design issues. Though 1024 there is |
42 |
pretty arbitrary and makes real sense only in some contexts. |
43 |
|
44 |
-- |
45 |
Best regards, |
46 |
Michał Górny |