Pat and all,

Yes a good explanation. However, I still do not understand why the computer
industry dumbed down metric to ifp to its audience in metric countries and
still continues to do it. Why didn't it market the so-called 3.5" inch disks
in metric countries with its real size of 90 mm?
Why 17" etc. screens in countries like The Netherlands, France and Germany?
If that industry is not anti-metric, then why do that?

The American car industry never did to its public in the metric world what
the computer industrie did and still does: dumbing down metric to ifp to a
metric-using audience. Instruments and instruction were metric for its
metric customers.

Han

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Pat Naughtin" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "U.S. Metric Association" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Sunday, 2003-10-05 13:58
Subject: [USMA:27104] Re: Computer Screens


Dear John, Han, and All,

Front end down-dumbing

There are a number of areas where an entire industry is metric and � just
before release to the public � there is a dumbing down by the
marketing/media department for the public.

I will call this 'Front end down-dumbing'.

Let me give you some examples.

The world motor industry
In the 1970s the whole world motor vehicle industry changed to metric
measures. They did this to achieve massive savings by adopting the 'world
car concept' where component parts could be sourced from the best priced
parts anywhere in the world. Since the mid 1970s all � I'll repeat that ALL
� cars in the world have been made using only metric measures. There are
about 10 000 parts in a car and each of these needs on average 10
measurements � making 100 000 measurements in all. In the USA the car is
then fitted with its down-dumbing equipment, a speedometer labelled 'mph',
and odometer labelled 'ml', and a tyre labelled 14. These three labels are
generally sufficient for the new car owner to believe that they are driving
an 'English' designed, and 'English' built, and that all is right in this
'English' world. Note that this is three labels (not measurements) out of
100 000 or 99.997 %. Apparently 0,003 % is enough to convince the public of
the 'truth'.

NASA
As I understand it, but please correct me where I'm wrong, NASA has two
classes of programs: the heritage programs designed in metric (by Von Braun
et al) and then converted and specified in feet and inches for the US
engineers to build them, and the more modern programs designed in metric,
specified in metric and built in metric. Once a program is under way the
data is then given to the down-dumbing department (probably called something
like NASA Public Relations) where all the data is converted to 'English'
values for press releases, 'English' values for web-sites, 'English' values
for political speeches and to generally give the allusion that NASA is
completely 'English'.

Computer industry
The research done on my computer to design the chips was done using
nanometres, the silicon masks were then designed using micrometres, the
component parts were then designed and built in millimetres with a precision
to the nearest tenth of a millimetre. Then this data was given to the
down-dumbing department (in the USA) who then dumbed it down to 'English'. I
believe that every part of every component in my computer was designed and
built using metric units; it wasn't until the marketing/public relations
people became involved that the down-dumbing took place.

In these three examples, it's interesting to note that the down-dumbing only
occurs at the interface between the company and the public. The companies
involved would not consider going back to old measures at all � ever � the
costs would be far too great. But they will tolerate the down-dumbing
process. Maybe management of these enterprises does not believe that running
whole down-dumbing departments is costing them anything.

Cheers,

Pat Naughtin LCAMS
Geelong, Australia
-- 

on 5/10/03 12:36 PM, John S. Ward at [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:

> Scanner and printer resolutions are similar.  Even in France, "600 DPI" is
> translated "600 PPP" for "points par pouce."  No attempt to quote
resolutions
> in metric units.  I consider this to be a simple artifact that computers
were
> developed mostly in the U.S. rather than a global conspiracy.
>
> I think screens should be measured in cm, and resolution in /mm.  The only
way
> this is likely to happen any time soon is if the EU adopts legislation
> requiring metric labeling for computer hardware.
>
> John
>
> On Friday 03 October 2003 11:10, Han Maenen wrote:
>> From the coming of the first home computer, the computer industry
marketed
>> the screens (and much more) in inch sizes in Western Europe and fooled
the
>> computer users into adopting it. This nonsense is still going on.
>> I think that the computer industry tried to start up the world wide
>> adoption of ifp and the demise of the metric system with this campaign.
>> Otherwise this industry would only have used inch sizes for consumers in
>> inch countries.
>>
>> Han
>>   ----- Original Message -----
>>   From: john mercer
>>   To: U.S. Metric Association
>>   Sent: Friday, 2003-10-03 7:13
>>   Subject: [USMA:27093] Computer Screens
>>
>>
>>   Hello in metric countrys how are computer screens measured?  When we
>> speak of a 17 inch screen I have converted it to metric and it works out
to
>> 43.18 cm.  If we used metric would 43 cm be clos enough? Thanks.
>


Reply via email to