Agreed that mm for screen size would be better. I wish they would go to
metric. Seeing screens and metric sizes next to each other in stores would
be a great learning tool.
I saw a screen size in Costco of 40" and thought it was a nice round
number for the meter. cm is too cumbersome whereas mm avoid conversion and
adds only one digit whereas cm requires a decimal point for refinement.
Stan Doore
----- Original Message -----
From: "Bill Potts" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "U.S. Metric Association" <[email protected]>
Sent: Monday, April 14, 2008 4:29 PM
Subject: [USMA:40775] Re: BMI, Metric at Costco
Where screen size is specified in metric (i.e., in most of the world),
it's
always in centimeters.
If asked, I give the size of my Dell HDTV as 107 cm.
Notwithstanding what Pat Naughtin says about standardizing on millimeters
(something I heartily endorse for situations where people must actually
design stuff or measure and work with materials), I think specifying
screen
diagonals in meters is somewhat ponderous and that specifying them in
millimeters feeds the objections of those who believe that the use of SI
units imposes an unnecessary degree of precision. They're wrong, as we
know,
but we still have to contend with that.
Bill
________________________________
Bill Potts
Roseville, CA
http://metric1.org [SI Navigator]
-----Original Message-----
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf
Of STANLEY DOORE
Sent: Monday, April 14, 2008 02:18
To: U.S. Metric Association
Subject: [USMA:40774] Re: BMI, Metric at Costco
Another good way to promote metric is to specify new TV screens in
metric.
For example, a 40-inch TV screen equals one metre. Isn't this stealth
metric?
Stan Doore
----- Original Message -----
From: "Ziser, Jesse" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "U.S. Metric Association" <[email protected]>
Sent: Sunday, April 13, 2008 3:41 PM
Subject: [USMA:40772] Re: BMI, Metric at Costco
--- Jim Elwell <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
The question is whether companies with employees and leadership not
particularly
friendly toward metric will change without putting up a fight. That's
the area where I think leadership at the government level could smooth
things over.
We generally agree, but the nature of the government "leadership" has a
big effect: if it is
mandates, there will be a lot of resistance. However, as I've said many
times in the past on
this forum, if the US Federal Government is the single largest purchaser
of goods and services
in the country, and if it simply said "we buy metric," it would have a
huge positive effect on
metrication, without passing laws on private institutions.
I wasn't advocating legally forcing anyone to use metric (though that's
an
interesting subject for
debate). I was suggesting that a presidential administration should use
its voice to tell people
that metric is coming and they better be prepared for it. The presidency
could be used as the
proverbial "bully pulpit" to help persuade people that these changes are
here to stay, and not
something that will go away eventually. That was what I meant by
"leadership".
Needless to say, I strongly agree that the US government should buy
metric. As to legislatively
forcing people to use metric, I don't think I have an opinion right now
whether that would have a
more positive or negative effect.
__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around
http://mail.yahoo.com
