Re: Changing KB, MB, and GB to KiB, MiB, and GiB in Configure.hel p.

[Nicholas Knight <nknight@pocketinet.com>]

On Thursday 20 December 2001 10:36 am, Dana Lacoste wrote:
> > I believe that the main purpose of documentation, help etc is
> > to get the
> > information across in a way that is most easily understood, ie that
> > minimises the number of support questions.. ..and everyone
> > surely knows
> > what GB, MB and KB stand for. So let's leave it at that.
> > Where's the "i"
> > in "megabyte" ? Or is 1MiB 1000000 bytes, rather than 1048576?
>
> 1 MB isn't 1048576.
>
> it's 1000000
>
> mega isn't 2^10, it's 10^6
>
> so where are YOU coming from?
>
> (no, i'm not arguin, i don't particularly care.  but i'm
> pointing out that some people have completely firmly set
> definitions and some other people also have firm definitions
> and neither will agree the other's right.  MiB is the international
> standard for a 2^10 B(yte) specification.  so if you mean
> 2^10 bytes, you mean MiB, not MB, even if you don't like it :)

This "international" standard seems to have excluded a few countries. 
It wasn't until it was SET that I even heard of its existance. (And 
then only through SLASHDOT!)

Everyone I know has been using KB/MB/GB for 1024 forever. The *only* 
exception is networking, and the occasional FLASH/ROM size. The latter 
isn't very common discussion, and among those that it is, they'd know 
what the other was talking about. For the former, I can distinguish 
easily depending on who it is.

Someone without a lot of experience: I have a 1MB connection. (this 
user has a 1 Megabit connection)

Someone with experience: I have a 1mb/Mb connection. (This person has a 
1 megabit connection has used a "standard" abbreviation.)

Know how these standards came about?
Actual use. Not a bunch of "engineers" in a room arguing over how best 
to cause absurd changes in kernel help files.