Ron Bouwhuis wrote:

>--- John Richard Smith
><[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
><snip a little off the top> 
>  
>
>>I once took the problem up with two harddrive
>>manufacturers, as to why 
>>you get
>>two different sizes for the same drive , depending
>>upon which machine 
>>you put it in,
>>and indeed why the manufacturers size measurements
>>always are greater 
>>than that
>>which your system says there is.
>>
>>The answer appears to be that indeed there are more
>>than one way of 
>>calculating
>>sizes. Apparently , there is no industry wide
>>standard, it all depends 
>>upon the formular
>>used to calculate  it. Now this explanation may be
>>false , but I have 
>>noticed different
>>machines do calculate the size of a known  hard
>>drive slightly 
>>differently, which tends to
>>suggest that this may be true. At any rate , in the
>>absense of a better 
>>explanation
>>I have come to accept it.
>>
>>John
>>
>>    
>>
>John, 
>
>Check out
>http://physics.nist.gov/cuu/Units/binary.html - which
>IMHO describes a madness that I hope will never reach
>the real world (I mean, really, can you imagine
>actually saying "mebibyte" or "gibibyte"???). 
>However, it does explain one major area of confusion
>(and opportunity for deceipt) - namely that for a
>drive labelled, say as 20GB, what exactly does the "G"
>mean?  In the old (real) world of IT, "G" means 2 **
>30.  However, to a manufacturer following SI units,
>"G" means 10 ** 9, which is a lot smaller!
>
>Ron.
>
>__________________________________________________
>Do You Yahoo!?
>HotJobs - Search Thousands of New Jobs
>http://www.hotjobs.com
>
>  
>
>
>  
>
Oh dear me, what a nightmare.
No wonder, it's a mess,
just a sample of this carnage:-

Once upon a time, computer professionals noticed that 2^10 was very 
nearly equal to 1000 and started using the SI prefix "kilo" to mean 
1024. That worked well enough for a decade or two because everybody who 
talked kilobytes knew that the term implied 1024 bytes. But, almost 
overnight a much more numerous "everybody" bought computers, and the 
trade computer professionals needed to talk to physicists and engineers 
and even to ordinary people, most of whom know that a kilometer is 1000 
meters and a kilogram is 1000 grams.

Then data storage for gigabytes, and even terabytes, became practical, 
and the storage devices were not constructed on binary trees, which 
meant that, for many practical purposes, binary arithmetic was less 
convenient than decimal arithmetic. The result is that today "everybody" 
does not "know" what a megabyte is. When discussing computer memory, 
most manufacturers use megabyte to mean 2^20  = 1 048 576 bytes, but the 
manufacturers of computer storage devices usually use the term to mean 
1 000 000 bytes. Some designers of local area networks have used megabit 
per second to mean 1 048 576 bit/s, but all telecommunications engineers 
use it to mean 10^6 bit/s. And if two definitions of the megabyte are 
not enough, a third megabyte of 1 024 000 bytes is the megabyte used to 
format the familiar 90 mm (3 1/2 inch), "1.44 MB" diskette. The 
confusion is real, as is the potential for incompatibility in standards 
and in implemented systems.



And that is just a sample.

So really the whole computer industry needs better standardization, but 
there is noone around
with the authority to set standards maybe ?

John

-- 
John Richard Smith
[EMAIL PROTECTED] 




Want to buy your Pack or Services from MandrakeSoft? 
Go to http://www.mandrakestore.com

Reply via email to