Ubuntu Desktop Unit Consistency (LP: #369525)

[Christopher Chan]

Remco wrote:
> On Mon, Jun 1, 2009 at 3:12 AM, Christopher Chan
> <christopher.chan at bradbury.edu.hk> wrote:
>   
>> RAM comes in multiples of 1024. Network throughput is also in multiples
>> of 1024. Disk storage is expressed in multiples of 1024 under any
>> operating system. base-10 kilobytes/kilobits/whateverbytes/whateverbits
>> are only used by disk manufacturers (hence the 'discrepancy' between
>> that the label on the disk says and what the operating system says) and
>> misconceptions of certain network equipment manufacturers (eg:
>> 100megabit/1000megabit) being base-10.
>>     
>
> Bit rate is measured in base 10:
>
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bit_rate
>   
Okay, you are right there...bit rates and reported throughput in bytes 
are actually different so there is no misconception about network equipment.

1000mbits = 12.5 MB/s.

I, therefore, stand by my statement that software has always (or had as 
it now seems that new software is no longer following conventions of the 
past) been base2.

>   
>> Each block on disk remains 512 bits (half a proper kilobyte) and so
>> going for base-10 kilobytes requires translation while using proper
>> kilobytes requires no translation.
>>
>> base-10 kilobytes/megabytes/gigabytes have no place in software. They
>> belong solely on hard disk labels along with their footnote indicating
>> that they are the wrong kilobyte/megabyte/gigabyte definition.
>>     
>
> Base 10 is easier to calculate for humans. Try calculating the sum of
> 754 MiB and 1.42 GiB without using a calculator.
>   
I did not know that people care about doing that nowadays. You are bound 
to have left over space if you assume 1000 instead of 1024 anyway. So 
are you going to try to express amounts of RAM in base10 too? You are 
guaranteed to not have nice and easily identifiable base2 related 
numbers of 16,32,64,128,256,512,1024,2048,etc and additions of those. 
768MB of RAM anybody?

> If the conversion is done properly by Nautilus, it should be no
> problem. At the moment, Nautilus lies to us: it talks about MBs, while
> in fact they are those pesky MiBs.


Stop changing age old conventions.