Re: PROBLEM: KB->KiB, MB -> MiB, ... (IEC 60027-2)

[Bodo Eggert <7eggert@gmx.de>]

Tony Foiani <tkil@scrye.com> wrote:
>>>>>> "David" == David Schwartz <davids@webmaster.com> writes:

> Just last night I formatted some new "500GB" drives, and they
> eventually came back with 465GB as the displayed capacity.  Wouldn't
> it make more sense to display that as "465GiB"?

[...]

> David> Adopting IEC 60027-2 just replaces a set of well-understood
> David> problems with all new problems.
> 
> Which are clearly solved in the standards document, and remove any
> ambiguity.  Is one extra character really that painful to you?

If it's done in order to make disk vendors look good in spite of
advertizing more than they deliver, yes.

1) This change isn't nescensary - any sane person will know that it's not a
   SI unit. You wouldn't talk about megabananas == 1000000 bananas and
   expect to be taken seriously.
2) No sane person would say kibibyte as required by the standard. You'd need
   a sppech defect in order to do this, and a mental defect in order to try.
   So why should anybody adhere to the rest of this bullshit?
-- 
"Whoever said the pen is mightier than the sword obviously never
encountered automatic weapons."
-Gen. Douglas MacArthur
Friß, Spammer: x39bp@lZonner.7eggert.dyndns.org .wq@ZHh.7eggert.dyndns.org