Minchino Posted March 26, 2010 Share Posted March 26, 2010 Not something that will largely affect me. Frankly I dont care. With harddrives in the TB range and probably larger coming in the next few years, should we really complain over a few bytes (giga, kilo, mega, whatever)? It certainly causes a problem when trying to perform any calculations, especially when you get into the TiB/TB range, the difference is 99,511,627,776 bytes! Disappointingly even Google gets this one wrong: http://www.google.co.uk/#q=MB+in+kB Link to comment https://www.neowin.net/forum/topic/886582-another-controversial-change-for-ubuntu-1004-file-size-policy/page/3/#findComment-592397148 Share on other sites More sharing options...
GreenMartian Posted March 26, 2010 Share Posted March 26, 2010 I doubt if most users will either know or care about this. I'm sure if you've dealt with people with no computer background (which btw, is what I'd define to be "most users"), you'll know that we are kinda tired being asked the question "Why is my 1TB hard disk only showing 931 jiggabyte? Should I ask for a refund?". Why change something after so many years? People need to learn computers work on the base2 structure and not base10. And all you fighting here need to learn philosophy, and realise that this debate won't achieve anything of use :p Link to comment https://www.neowin.net/forum/topic/886582-another-controversial-change-for-ubuntu-1004-file-size-policy/page/3/#findComment-592397160 Share on other sites More sharing options...
Digitalx Posted March 26, 2010 Share Posted March 26, 2010 Never used 'KiB' ever and never will don't recognise it because a KB is 1024 bytes etc. Base 10 units are an approximation and not a formal unit in themselves - it's purpose is for apples advertising of how many songs, video and picture your ipod can hold. Occasionally sure it can also be used for people guessing sums in their head but that's it. Link to comment https://www.neowin.net/forum/topic/886582-another-controversial-change-for-ubuntu-1004-file-size-policy/page/3/#findComment-592397218 Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kirkburn Posted March 26, 2010 Share Posted March 26, 2010 Never used 'KiB' ever and never will don't recognise it because a KB is 1024 bytes etc. Base 10 units are an approximation and not a formal unit in themselves - it's purpose is for apples advertising of how many songs, video and picture your ipod can hold. Occasionally sure it can also be used for people guessing sums in their head but that's it. Huh? That made little to no sense. You don't recognise KiB, therefore it's wrong? Base 10 units are an approximation? It's used for sums in your head? The computer world has misused the 1,000 units system for a while - but just because they've done it for some time, doesn't mean it's right. Kilo means 1000, not 1024. This is why "KiB" was created, meaning 1,024 bytes, so that it could have proper terminology without misusing the metric system. (It has bugger all to do with Apple's advertising. WTF?) Ideally, all systems should sort out their units, and display them correctly. That way users wouldn't get confused and it doesn't necessarily prevent either one being used. Yes, some re-education might be required ... but it's not like people base their life around whether 1 kilobyte is 1024 or 1000 bytes. Read me: https://wiki.ubuntu.com/UnitsPolicy Link to comment https://www.neowin.net/forum/topic/886582-another-controversial-change-for-ubuntu-1004-file-size-policy/page/3/#findComment-592397352 Share on other sites More sharing options...
Digitalx Posted March 26, 2010 Share Posted March 26, 2010 Huh? That made little to no sense. You don't recognise KiB, therefore it's wrong? Base 10 units are an approximation? It's used for sums in your head? The computer world has misused the 1,000 units system for a while - but just because they've done it for some time, doesn't mean it's right. Kilo means 1000, not 1024. This is why "KiB" was created, meaning 1,024 bytes, so that it could have proper terminology without misusing the metric system. (It has bugger all to do with Apple's advertising. WTF?) Kilo means a thousand, yes. byte is generally considered 8bits so 2?/2*2*2 = 8 = 1B and 2?⁰ = 1,024 = 1KB. So as it's denoted kilo as the unit prefix 1|xxx with x=byte/bits I never said it was wrong I just don't recognise or use it because the fact is it's an unnecessary term devised for god knows why for something which is as simple as remembering ones tens hundreds thousands in money. the only differentiation imo necessary is Byte and bit which is simple lower case b = bits B = bytes which is generally accepted. Link to comment https://www.neowin.net/forum/topic/886582-another-controversial-change-for-ubuntu-1004-file-size-policy/page/3/#findComment-592397416 Share on other sites More sharing options...
Growled Member Posted March 26, 2010 Member Share Posted March 26, 2010 I'm thinking we need to move Shuttleworth back into the front office so he'll stop changing things. :D Link to comment https://www.neowin.net/forum/topic/886582-another-controversial-change-for-ubuntu-1004-file-size-policy/page/3/#findComment-592397694 Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kirkburn Posted March 26, 2010 Share Posted March 26, 2010 Kilo means a thousand, yes. byte is generally considered 8bits so 2³/2*2*2 = 8 = 1B and 2¹⁰ = 1,024 = 1KB. So as it's denoted kilo as the unit prefix 1|xxx with x=byte/bits I never said it was wrong I just don't recognise or use it because the fact is it's an unnecessary term devised for god knows why for something which is as simple as remembering ones tens hundreds thousands in money. the only differentiation imo necessary is Byte and bit which is simple lower case b = bits B = bytes which is generally accepted. Regardless of how many bits are in a byte ... 1000 bytes is still 1000 bytes, and thus 8000 bits. Kilo = one thousand. How is 2^10 related to the word "kilo"? Basically, I still fail to see your point. Kilometer = 1000 metres. Kilogram = 1000 grams. These are absolute standards. Computing is the only one that gets it wrong. I've no idea why you think it's a "unnecessary term". What exactly is unnecessary? The issue currently is kilo being used for two different things. This change is about fixing that. Link to comment https://www.neowin.net/forum/topic/886582-another-controversial-change-for-ubuntu-1004-file-size-policy/page/3/#findComment-592397836 Share on other sites More sharing options...
Digitalx Posted March 26, 2010 Share Posted March 26, 2010 Regardless of how many bits are in a byte ... 1000 bytes is still 1000 bytes, and 8000 bits. Kilo = one thousand. Basically, I still fail to see your point. Kilometer = 1000 metres. Kilogram = 1000 grams. These are absolute standards. Computing is the only one that gets it wrong. I've no idea why you think it's a "unnecessary term". What exactly is unnecessary? The issue currently is kilo being used for two different things. This change is about fixing that. Ok i'll make it even more simpler. We all know decimal system and stuff. 1.00 is one dollar because it's in first ones after decimal point. 10.00 is tens because now the 1 is in the tens after the decimal. 100.00 now the 1 is in the hundreds and so on. 103.00 This is One hundred and three as there's 1 hundred and 3 ones in front of the decimal, ok. Now as you move up in units of base units of 10 you can attach SI prefix's kilo mega giga etc metric units are base 10 so it's common usage with them which is what causes this problem but the point is kilo is 1000 yes as I said a KB is 1024 Bytes [024] which is the Byte section in the name so Kilo-Thousand [indicating thousandth digits] + Byte [2¹⁰] = 1024Bytes = 1KB Link to comment https://www.neowin.net/forum/topic/886582-another-controversial-change-for-ubuntu-1004-file-size-policy/page/3/#findComment-592397952 Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kirkburn Posted March 26, 2010 Share Posted March 26, 2010 Now as you move up in units of base units of 10 you can attach SI prefix's kilo mega giga etc metric units are base 10 so it's common usage with them which is what causes this problem but the point is kilo is 1000 yes as I said a KB is 1024 Bytes [024] which is the Byte section in the name so Kilo-Thousand [indicating thousandth digits] + Byte [2¹⁰] = 1024Bytes = 1KB The point is that a kilobyte is bad terminology for 1024. You can't use it as the basis for your reasoning. A kilo means one thousand; a thousand bytes is 1000 bytes, not 1024. You're seriously twisting maths to make your thinking work. If I read you correctly, let's say we have base 3 system using foobars. 3^7 is 2187 foobars. That's the closest we get to 1000 in that system using simple power jumps. So I'm going to define 2187 as a kilofoobar. It doesn't make sense. Base 2 is just lucky that 1024 lands so close to 1000. 2^20 is 1,048,675 (1 MiB). This is 1024x1024 ... it's still not relating to 1000. The problem just gets worse as you get bigger. 1,073,741,824 (1 GiB) is plainly not a billion of anything. Basically, a kilobyte should be one thousand bytes. We have a the terminology available to deal with the computing world: a kibibyte. It's not hard to use that instead if needed. +M2Ys4U 1 Share Link to comment https://www.neowin.net/forum/topic/886582-another-controversial-change-for-ubuntu-1004-file-size-policy/page/3/#findComment-592398164 Share on other sites More sharing options...
Southern Patriot Posted March 26, 2010 Share Posted March 26, 2010 This, like many other issues, will never be resolved to the satisfaction of everyone. Those who oppose the use of "kilo", "mega", etc. to mean anything other than various multiples of 10 will always bitch about it. Those who have used computers for decades before this change will always bitch about it being changed. Kind of like how I personally think the French are annoying to the rest of the world by insisting on calling a byte an "octet", so they have their own abbreviations - Ko, Mo, Go, etc. Link to comment https://www.neowin.net/forum/topic/886582-another-controversial-change-for-ubuntu-1004-file-size-policy/page/3/#findComment-592398628 Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kirkburn Posted March 26, 2010 Share Posted March 26, 2010 This, like many other issues, will never be resolved to the satisfaction of everyone. Those who oppose the use of "kilo", "mega", etc. to mean anything other than various multiples of 10 will always bitch about it. Those who have used computers for decades before this change will always bitch about it being changed. Kind of like how I personally think the French are annoying to the rest of the world by insisting on calling a byte an "octet", so they have their own abbreviations - Ko, Mo, Go, etc. That can more reasonably be put down to translation differences - it's not changing the definition or anything. It's something used in English anyway: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Octet_%28computing%29 Of course it can be resolved, it's just the computing guys will ultimately "lose". :) Link to comment https://www.neowin.net/forum/topic/886582-another-controversial-change-for-ubuntu-1004-file-size-policy/page/3/#findComment-592398798 Share on other sites More sharing options...
Syanide Posted March 26, 2010 Share Posted March 26, 2010 They've reverted the change as of today, because some apps still read it the old way, and it creates confusion. The change will land in 10.10. From omgubuntu.co.uk. Link to comment https://www.neowin.net/forum/topic/886582-another-controversial-change-for-ubuntu-1004-file-size-policy/page/3/#findComment-592398890 Share on other sites More sharing options...
Southern Patriot Posted March 26, 2010 Share Posted March 26, 2010 Of course it can be resolved, it's just the computing guys will ultimately "lose". :) That's why I said it will never be resolved to the satisfaction of everyone. Sort of like the demotion of Pluto. There will always be those who continue to call it a planet because that is what they grew up calling it. Link to comment https://www.neowin.net/forum/topic/886582-another-controversial-change-for-ubuntu-1004-file-size-policy/page/3/#findComment-592399344 Share on other sites More sharing options...
ThePitt Posted March 26, 2010 Share Posted March 26, 2010 I remember a long time ago, when microsoft try to do this and the whole world was against them... And to be honest I dont know. Its like the imperial vs metrial problem/issue. Link to comment https://www.neowin.net/forum/topic/886582-another-controversial-change-for-ubuntu-1004-file-size-policy/page/3/#findComment-592399346 Share on other sites More sharing options...
kaffra Posted March 26, 2010 Share Posted March 26, 2010 Not something that will largely affect me. Frankly I dont care. With harddrives in the TB range and probably larger coming in the next few years, should we really complain over a few bytes (giga, kilo, mega, whatever)? in a way yes, you wont see much space difference form your old 20GB drive, but in the 1TB drives you are 'losing' around 70GB. As bigger drives come to the market a lot of people are going to wonder what happened to their hundreds of gigs. Link to comment https://www.neowin.net/forum/topic/886582-another-controversial-change-for-ubuntu-1004-file-size-policy/page/3/#findComment-592399620 Share on other sites More sharing options...
McoreD Posted March 26, 2010 Share Posted March 26, 2010 Good to see them finally do this, the kernel and most userland tools have been using the proper suffixes for ages. It also brings it in line with HD makers (who have always done it properly), and helps the end user (having conflicting numbers = bad) Exactly. Let mega mean million. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mega- Confirmed in 1960, it comes from the Greek μέγα. If you want 1048576 then DON'T call it mega but call it something else = Mebi as IEC suggested. End of confusion and discussion. Kirkburn and brentaal 2 Share Link to comment https://www.neowin.net/forum/topic/886582-another-controversial-change-for-ubuntu-1004-file-size-policy/page/3/#findComment-592399636 Share on other sites More sharing options...
The_Decryptor Veteran Posted March 28, 2010 Veteran Share Posted March 28, 2010 (edited) Seeing some of the comments on Slashdot reminded me, that not every computing related subject uses the whole "kilo = 1,024" idea. Networking for example uses the standard meanings, 1KBps means 1,000 bytes per second, not 1,024 bytes per second. Isn't that kinda strange, that a network running at 1GBps, can't download "1GB" of data in a second? Edit: And yet another one I forgot, speed. A 2Ghz CPU doesn't run at 2,147,483,648 Hertz. Link to comment https://www.neowin.net/forum/topic/886582-another-controversial-change-for-ubuntu-1004-file-size-policy/page/3/#findComment-592403870 Share on other sites More sharing options...
Growled Member Posted March 28, 2010 Member Share Posted March 28, 2010 Isn't that kinda strange, that a network running at 1GBps, can't download "1GB" of data in a second? Yes, I've always found that odd. I guess now with 10.10 we can. Link to comment https://www.neowin.net/forum/topic/886582-another-controversial-change-for-ubuntu-1004-file-size-policy/page/3/#findComment-592404236 Share on other sites More sharing options...
libertas83 Posted March 28, 2010 Share Posted March 28, 2010 Seeing some of the comments on Slashdot reminded me, that not every computing related subject uses the whole "kilo = 1,024" idea. Networking for example uses the standard meanings, 1KBps means 1,000 bytes per second, not 1,024 bytes per second. Isn't that kinda strange, that a network running at 1GBps, can't download "1GB" of data in a second? Edit: And yet another one I forgot, speed. A 2Ghz CPU doesn't run at 2,147,483,648 Hertz. Your capitalization changes the meaning. Network speeds use 1Gbps which means 1 Giga-bits per seconds. The bit is the lowest unit so 1,000 bits is 1,000 bits. A byte is 8 bits and from then is calculated in Base-2 math. So if you want to convert 1Gbps to 1GBps, you dvide it by 8. I have never seen this as a major problem for average joes. They simply do not care most of the time. Link to comment https://www.neowin.net/forum/topic/886582-another-controversial-change-for-ubuntu-1004-file-size-policy/page/3/#findComment-592404974 Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kirkburn Posted March 28, 2010 Share Posted March 28, 2010 Your capitalization changes the meaning. Network speeds use 1Gbps which means 1 Giga-bits per seconds. The bit is the lowest unit so 1,000 bits is 1,000 bits. A byte is 8 bits and from then is calculated in Base-2 math. So if you want to convert 1Gbps to 1GBps, you dvide it by 8. I have never seen this as a major problem for average joes. They simply do not care most of the time. Uh, that's got pretty much nothing to do with what he was saying :) Link to comment https://www.neowin.net/forum/topic/886582-another-controversial-change-for-ubuntu-1004-file-size-policy/page/3/#findComment-592405376 Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts