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.
Thread beginning with comment 550818
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
Comment by Ravyne
by Ravyne on Wed 30th Jan 2013 02:53 UTC
Ravyne
Member since:
2006-01-08

I agree it would be nice to move to 'proper' gigibytes (that is to say, 1024^3 x 8 bits), especially as that's the natural base unit for flash memory. SSD vendors have been good (rightly so) about advertising total chip space less space reserved for redundancy.

I agree also that for things like tablets, phones, music players, etc. they should have to disclose the amount of usable space (say, space left with all default software and content, and space left with all optional stuff removed) on the packaging in some plainly-visible, back-of-the-box type location.

But it goes to far to try to account for the space consumed by various software distributions, file formats, etc.

Reply Score: 2

RE: Comment by Ravyne
by ssokolow on Wed 30th Jan 2013 03:23 in reply to "Comment by Ravyne"
ssokolow Member since:
2010-01-21

I agree it would be nice to move to 'proper' gigibytes (that is to say, 1024^3 x 8 bits), especially as that's the natural base unit for flash memory. SSD vendors have been good (rightly so) about advertising total chip space less space reserved for redundancy.


It was decided that having "kilo/giga/terabyte" and "kB/GB/TB" referring to powers of 1024 was at odds with the rest of the SI unit system.

Hence why what we both agree to be 'proper' gigabytes are now called "gibibytes" (giga binary bytes) and use the abbreviation "GiB".

When I first discovered that, I didn't like it but, after thinking about it for a while, I decided it makes more sense this way. (The whole point of SI prefixes like giga- is that they're consistent)

Also, while I doubt you'd want to, it means you can confuse or amuse your friends by speaking of kibigrams and kibimeters if you want. (The only use I can think of for those units would probably be for stating representational limitations of variables in game engines and other computer-based physical simulations in a concise, intuitive fashion)

Edited 2013-01-30 03:24 UTC

Reply Parent Score: 4