Comments on: 1 KB = 1024 Bytes? No, 1 KB = 1000 Bytes!

By: James Cape

James Cape — Wed, 01 Oct 2008 00:56:10 +0000

Why not display RAM in TiB/GiB/MiB/KiB, and disk space in TB/GB/MB/KB? So long as you’ve got the units…

By: initcrash

initcrash — Wed, 01 Oct 2008 00:44:59 +0000

i forgot my conclusion: yes k=1024 IS a bug and needs to be fixed.

By: initcrash

initcrash — Wed, 01 Oct 2008 00:36:35 +0000

Hi, i am a stundent of information technology (at university) and we had a somewhat lengthy discussion about this in class a while ago.
In IT the unit “bit” is actually not only for file sizes on disk but for quantities like “entropy” or “self-information”. In this context there is absolutly no dabate that 1k=1000. This means all scientists in the world use k=1000 exclusivly in all their pulbications etc. so it is definitly not a sure way to be inconsistent with _everything_.

I am a little suprised that nobody mentioned the absolute highlight of this nerverending idocracy: remember those little plasic things called “floppy disk” with an advertised capacity of 1.44MB ? how much bytes are on these?
a) 1.44 * 1000 * 1000 = 1440000
or
b) 1.44 * 1024 * 1024 = 1509949 ?
well…none of the above: 1.44 is actually the result of using k=1024 and M=1000 so the floppy has a capacity of 1.44 * 1000 * 1024 = 1474560 bytes…totaly logical isn’t it?

also great:
how long does it take to copy a 20MB file with a speed of 20MB/s?
one second? certainly not…tranfer rates _always_ use k=M=1000 file sizes moslty use k=M=1024…so i takes 1.04858 seconds…at least close…

By: Robert Ancell

Robert Ancell — Wed, 01 Oct 2008 00:34:13 +0000

+1 for using K=1000

- It doesn’t matter if memory is physically made in powers of 2. The sizes are always integer so pick any relavant integer display format
- Your 1GB memory stick never stores 1GB. Overhead due to formatting, perhaps the manufacturer decided to reserve some sections etc.
- If we change most users are not going to care about/notice the 2.4% (KB) or 4.8% (MB) difference
- The SI system is used much more widely than in the computer industry. Thus it is much more likely to be recognised correctly by Joe user.
- It doesn’t greatly matter what convention existing command-line tools use – these aren’t used by the majority of users.

My background: Used computers since young, electrical engineering degree, been working in the software industry since.

By: Larry Reaves

Larry Reaves — Wed, 01 Oct 2008 00:27:24 +0000

Not that it matters all that much with today’s hardware, but keep in mind that using a power of two reduces division to a bitshift, whereas dividing by a power of ten is a much more expensive operation.

By: Jakub Steiner

Jakub Steiner — Tue, 30 Sep 2008 23:46:43 +0000

Murray pretty much nailed my planned response. This is really the last thing that you should lose your head for these days, Christian

By: Michael "KiB vs. KB vs. m vs. ft" Howell

Michael "KiB vs. KB vs. m vs. ft" Howell — Tue, 30 Sep 2008 23:36:07 +0000

@Carl van Tonder: It’s always possible to convert between one measurement and another (1 inch = 2.54 centimeters).

By: menko

menko — Tue, 30 Sep 2008 23:30:31 +0000

Martin: +1

By: Michael "KiB vs. KB vs. m vs. ft" Howell

Michael "KiB vs. KB vs. m vs. ft" Howell — Tue, 30 Sep 2008 23:29:58 +0000

Just use KiB when it is KiB, KB when it is KB, etc. If it’s common to measure disks in KB, go ahead and display it in KB; label it that way. If it’s common to measure ram in KiB, go ahead and display it in KiB; label it that way. That way, someone not familiar with the convention differences will see on screen what their disk box and memory box says is in it. Someone familiar will see an accurate description of the sizes (it’s 100 KiB, okay; silly, but at least accurate).

Displaying KiB as KB is as inaccurate as displaying feet as meters.

By: Warbo

Warbo — Tue, 30 Sep 2008 22:47:27 +0000

My Debian-using girlfriend answered 1000 straight away, and was confused that there was the possibility that it could ever be anything else…