[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: Using standardized SI prefixes

Le vendredi 15 juin 2007 à 17:36 -0400, Ivan Jager a écrit :
> Yes. Any time the unit is bytes. There is even a standard for it.

I must have missed that one. Could you point us to this standard?

> How about when you buy 80 GB of RAM, and your software says you have
> 88 GB?

How about buying 80 GiB of RAM and having software say you have 80 GiB?

> How about when you buy an 80 GB disk, and you know it's 80 * 10^9 bytes,
> but your software says /home only has 79 GB and you know it means
> 79 * 10^9 bytes? Should we also add filesystem overhead to all file sizes 
> just to avoid confusing newbies?

Filesystem overhead is not an inaccuracy. It is expected that you can
only create a 79 GiB filesystem on a 80 GiB disk. It is not expected
that a 80 GB disk is 88 GB.

> It only solves half the problem. GB is still ambiguous even if GiB isn't.

It is only ambiguous for approximative people. Furthermore, if the use
of GiB starts spreading, there will be no regression in the fact that GB
is ambiguous. However in the long term that ambiguity will disappear.

: :' :      We are debian.org. Lower your prices, surrender your code.
`. `'       We will add your hardware and software distinctiveness to
  `-        our own. Resistance is futile.

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: Ceci est une partie de message =?ISO-8859-1?Q?num=E9riquement?= =?ISO-8859-1?Q?_sign=E9e?=

Reply to: