| 1 |
Lets just stick with the JEDEC standard's way of doing things that came from IBM. |
| 2 |
|
| 3 |
On Mar 30, 2014, at 7:43 PM, Rich Freeman <rich0@g.o> wrote: |
| 4 |
|
| 5 |
> On Sun, Mar 30, 2014 at 7:05 PM, Joshua Kinard <kumba@g.o> wrote: |
| 6 |
>> Personally, I say make the metric version the default (new prefixes), and |
| 7 |
>> leave the choice available to switch to the SI (old prefix) form with a |
| 8 |
>> simple variable switch in a config file some where. |
| 9 |
> |
| 10 |
> The metric system IS the SI system. The new prefixes are not yet SI |
| 11 |
> standards, but they are ISO standards. However, the new prefixes |
| 12 |
> pertain to the old way of doing things. |
| 13 |
> |
| 14 |
> That is... |
| 15 |
> |
| 16 |
> System 1 (generally used by programmers in the 60s-90s, but less |
| 17 |
> universally as time moved on, not compatible with SI): |
| 18 |
> 1 kB = 1024 bytes, report everything in kB |
| 19 |
> |
| 20 |
> System 2 (aligned with SI and the metric system - used sporadically |
| 21 |
> until heavily adopted by storage manufacturers for marketing reasons) |
| 22 |
> 1 kB = 1000 bytes, report everything in kB |
| 23 |
> |
| 24 |
> System 3 (the new ISO standard, compatible with SI but adds to it) |
| 25 |
> 1kB = 1000 bytes |
| 26 |
> 1 KiB = 1024 bytes |
| 27 |
> report things in whatever units you feel like |
| 28 |
> |
| 29 |
> The main advantage of the ISO standard isn't the use of either base 2 |
| 30 |
> or base 10, but the fact that you can actually distinguish what base |
| 31 |
> is in use. |
| 32 |
> |
| 33 |
> Either system 2/3 could be described as metric in nature - the only |
| 34 |
> one which isn't is System 1. |
| 35 |
> |
| 36 |
> Rich |
| 37 |
> |
Archives