Re: CPU specific/optimized Debian builds ?

["John H. Robinson, IV" <jhriv@ucsd.edu>]

here we go, wandering off topic again . . .

On Thu, May 23, 2002 at 01:04:02PM -0500, Steve Langasek wrote:
> 
> That the people who put labels on hard drives are incapable of binary
> math,

i believe this is false (i have no proof though, and i suspect neither
do you).  however, 172GB sounds bigger than 160GiB. this is why such a
drive would cost, say, 399$ instead of 400$.

160GiB vs 172GB is a marketting thing, not a capacity thing.

> That anyone believes this new set of prefixes will /reduce/ confusion
> when RAM, file sizes, transfer speeds, and bandwidth rates (all of
> which have a greater direct impact on the average computer user than
> the total number of bytes available for use on a 160GB hard drive) is
> positively laughable.

of course, RAM, file sizes, transfer speeds, and bandwidth rates all
have exactly _nothing_ to do with proper unit prefixes.

-john


-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-request@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org