Michael L Torrie wrote: > On Mon, 2006-11-06 at 14:44 -0700, Shane Hathaway wrote: >> Shane Hathaway wrote: >>> Given those rules, n bits can express integers from 0 to (2^n - 1). n >>> is 2^64, so 16 exbibits can express integers from 0 to (2^(2^64) - 1). >> BTW, if you meant to ask about 16 exbibytes, you can represent up to > > Am I the only one who thinks that mebibytes and kibibytes and exbibytes > are silly and still uses good old SI prefixes using 1024 as the factor? > I probably am, but I just refuse to us MiBs or GiBs.
I don't say them out loud because they do sound silly, but I try to use them in writing. Also, when I buy a 250 GB hard drive, I expect it to provide about 250 x 1000^3 bytes of space, not 250 x 1024^3 bytes. The drive manufacturers back me up on this one. We'll see if the flash memory manufacturers catch on. They could: 1) Continue to use GB 2) Switch to GiB 3) Use GB but adjust the numbers upward: 16 GiB becomes 17.1 GB The first option is forgivable, since 1 GB is a low approximation of 1 GiB. The second option is geeky and unappealing. The third option is a way to draw attention, and it ought to appeal to marketers once they figure it out. Shane /* PLUG: http://plug.org, #utah on irc.freenode.net Unsubscribe: http://plug.org/mailman/options/plug Don't fear the penguin. */
