From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1750786AbXATWyM (ORCPT ); Sat, 20 Jan 2007 17:54:12 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1750790AbXATWyL (ORCPT ); Sat, 20 Jan 2007 17:54:11 -0500 Received: from mail1.webmaster.com ([216.152.64.169]:3215 "EHLO mail1.webmaster.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1750786AbXATWyK (ORCPT ); Sat, 20 Jan 2007 17:54:10 -0500 From: "David Schwartz" To: Subject: RE: PROBLEM: KB->KiB, MB -> MiB, ... (IEC 60027-2) Date: Sat, 20 Jan 2007 14:54:10 -0800 Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="Windows-1252" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 (Normal) X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.6604 (9.0.2911.0) In-Reply-To: X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.3028 Importance: Normal X-Authenticated-Sender: joelkatz@webmaster.com X-Spam-Processed: mail1.webmaster.com, Sat, 20 Jan 2007 15:56:36 -0800 (not processed: message from trusted or authenticated source) X-MDRemoteIP: 206.171.168.138 X-Return-Path: davids@webmaster.com X-MDaemon-Deliver-To: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Reply-To: davids@webmaster.com X-MDAV-Processed: mail1.webmaster.com, Sat, 20 Jan 2007 15:56:37 -0800 Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org > Nice observation, however, it still leaves quite an amount of internal > inconsistencies in the kernel output. I agree with the majority view that using the term 'MB' or 'GB' to mean a million or a billion bytes is inaccurate. The way RAM and flash are measured is correct. The way disk manufacturers advertise disk capacity is simply *wrong*. There is no word for a million bytes. There is no word for a billion bytes. > One way of getting rid of those inconsistencies would be to follow IEC > 60027-2 for those cases where SI is inappropriate. Talk about a cure worse than the disease! So you're saying that 256MB flash cards could be advertised as having 268.4MB? A 512MB RAM stick is mislabelled and could correctly say 536.8MB? That's just plain craziness. Adopting IEC 60027-2 just replaces a set of well-understood problems with all new problems. DS