Linked by Thom Holwerda on Wed 30th Jan 2013 00:38 UTC
Hardware, Embedded Systems Marco Arment: "Everyone should play by the same rules. A proposal: storage capacities referenced or implied in the names or advertisements for personal computers, tablets, and smartphones should not exceed the amount of space available for end-user installation of third-party applications and data, after enough software has been installed to enable all commonly advertised functionality. With today's OSes, iPads could advertise capacities no larger than 12, 28, 60, and 124 GB and the Surface Pros could be named 23 and 83 GB." Wholly agreed. When I buy a box of 100 staples, I expect it to contain ~100 staples - not 50 because the other 50 are holding the box together.
Permalink for comment 551041
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
RE: xiB vs. xB
by Alfman on Thu 31st Jan 2013 15:14 UTC in reply to "xiB vs. xB"
Alfman
Member since:
2011-01-28

astroraptor,

"You know, I always thought it was funny that hard drives were listed as physical bytes vs. logical bytes. Maybe I'm old fashioned but I prefer xB over xiB, the latter of which I find a little silly."

I think I see what people are getting stuck over. Is it that you don't want to see consumer products switching to xiB units? I can understand your reluctance, however it's slightly unfounded because most electronics are already being sold with the correct SI units, so consumers would not have to undergo a "switch" at all.

IE, when you buy a "1TB harddisk", it's *already* correct with respect to SI unit scaling and so it doesn't need to convert to 0.91TiB or anything "silly" like that.

The only place a consumer conversion to xiB units would be appropriate IMHO would be RAM capacities since these are the only components which are genuinely manufactured with capacities in powers of 2 and thus xiB units are an exact representation.

Edited 2013-01-31 15:24 UTC

Reply Parent Score: 3