| Author |
Message |
Guest
|
 Posted:
Wed Dec 07, 2005 5:35 pm Post subject:
Re: why do computer scientists say 1KB=1024 bytes?!! |
|
|
In article <1133933152.959247.51680@f14g2000cwb.googlegroups.com>,
"slebetman@yahoo.com" <slebetman@gmail.com> wrote:
| Quote: | onehappymadman@yahoo.com wrote:
Gregory L. Hansen wrote:
In article <1133922573.855472.297320@o13g2000cwo.googlegroups.com>,
onehappymadman@yahoo.com> wrote:
What's so special about 2^10 that computer scientists say it's 1k? The
SI system says 1k is 1000. 2^10 is not 1000, it is 1024.
Why not just say 1 KB = 2^9.965784285 bytes (= 1000)? If you're going
to nerd out, then nerd out completely, I say.
1024 is close enough to 1000 for jargon. The meaning is determined from
the context. If you want to sling around a more exact jargon, then use
kibibyte, mebibyte, and gibibyte.
Sure... try saying "the store is 3 kibimeters east of here". Or buying
a 5 kibi-watt generator. How many cents per kibiwatt-hour is it in
your neck of the woods? :)
Well.. the linux kernel have been re-commented and re-documented using
kibi and Mibi. So there are people using it practically. And the
company I work for is also slowly adopting ki, Mi and Gi since we are
in telecommunications and want to avoid coufusion. In telecoms and
networking, 10 mega bits per second really does mean 10 million state
changes per second, not (approx) 10.485 million. This is mainly because
telecoms have never really cared about the binary number system. We're
all about signal-to-noise ratios.
And don't even get me started on kb (kilobytes) vs kb (kilobits)!
You'll want to correct that, kb is always kilobits. kB is kilobytes.
Though, sometimes people do forget to press the shift key when they
mean bytes.
|
This convention [upper/lower case] is going to cause problems.
People are very sloppy w.r.t. spelling and are not getting
taught the importance of capitalization.
/BAH
|
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
Guest
|
| Posted:
Wed Dec 07, 2005 5:35 pm Post subject:
Re: why do computer scientists say 1KB=1024 bytes?!! |
|
|
In article <1133944327.883571.223730@z14g2000cwz.googlegroups.com>,
"zzbunker@netscape.net" <zzbunker@netscape.net> wrote:
| Quote: |
onehappymadman@yahoo.com wrote:
What's so special about 2^10 that computer scientists say it's 1k? The
SI system says 1k is 1000. 2^10 is not 1000, it is 1024.
Why not just say 1 KB = 2^9.965784285 bytes (= 1000)? If you're going
to nerd out, then nerd out completely, I say.
They say that because a byte is eight bits.
|
This is a recent definition of a byte.
| Quote: | It's doesn't really matter what SI, or Physics,
IEEE and ASCIII retards have to say about the issue.
|
You are an idiot.
/BAH |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Guest
|
| Posted:
Wed Dec 07, 2005 5:35 pm Post subject:
Re: why do computer scientists say 1KB=1024 bytes?!! |
|
|
In article <1133957672.066443.219040@g47g2000cwa.googlegroups.com>,
"slebetman@yahoo.com" <slebetman@gmail.com> wrote:
| Quote: | Pooh Bear wrote:
Deefoo wrote:
onehappymadman@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:1133922573.855472.297320@o13g2000cwo.googlegroups.com...
What's so special about 2^10 that computer scientists say it's 1k? The
SI system says 1k is 1000. 2^10 is not 1000, it is 1024.
Why not just say 1 KB = 2^9.965784285 bytes (= 1000)? If you're going
to nerd out, then nerd out completely, I say.
I've always been told that kilobytes is with a "K", a "k" meaning simply
1000 as in SI. This was before megabytes became common, though.
k = 1000
K = degrees Kelvin ( absolute temperature)
K = 1024
k = 1000
is a convention proposed by Tenenbaum. Never caught on though.
Computer science have given us another exception:
b = bits
B = bytes
Then again, on some very old systems, a byte is not necessarily 8 bits
(though modern systems always assumes this).
|
This assumption is a design flaw. The architecture I worked with
allowed the programmer to define the size of the byte.
| Quote: | .. That's why a lot of older
documentation talked about 'octets'.
|
We never did. I don't recall ever typing that word.
| Quote: |
Despite criticisms, kiB, MiB, GiB are catching on. I've started seeing
them in tender documents and specifications.
|
And what does a spell checker do with them?
/BAH
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Guest
|
| Posted:
Wed Dec 07, 2005 5:35 pm Post subject:
Re: why do computer scientists say 1KB=1024 bytes?!! |
|
|
In article <3vo3leF16euhaU1@individual.net>,
"markp" <map.nospam@f2s.com> wrote:
| Quote: |
onehappymadman@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:1133922573.855472.297320@o13g2000cwo.googlegroups.com...
What's so special about 2^10 that computer scientists say it's 1k? The
SI system says 1k is 1000. 2^10 is not 1000, it is 1024.
Why not just say 1 KB = 2^9.965784285 bytes (= 1000)? If you're going
to nerd out, then nerd out completely, I say.
Actually, the SI scaler is a lower case 'k'. The computerised scaler is an
upper case 'K'. So the question should be why use the SI unit for
temperature as a multiplication scaler? :-)
|
Sigh! We didn't. Once upon a time, there was no lower case.
There are good reasons that SIXBIT is useful. This is one
of them...mess prevention.
/BAH |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Mark Fergerson
Guest
|
| Posted:
Wed Dec 07, 2005 5:35 pm Post subject:
Re: why do computer scientists say 1KB=1024 bytes?!! |
|
|
jmfbahciv@aol.com wrote:
| Quote: |
In article <1133957672.066443.219040@g47g2000cwa.googlegroups.com>,
"slebetman@yahoo.com" <slebetman@gmail.com> wrote:
Pooh Bear wrote:
Deefoo wrote:
onehappymadman@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:1133922573.855472.297320@o13g2000cwo.googlegroups.com...
What's so special about 2^10 that computer scientists say it's 1k? The
SI system says 1k is 1000. 2^10 is not 1000, it is 1024.
Why not just say 1 KB = 2^9.965784285 bytes (= 1000)? If you're going
to nerd out, then nerd out completely, I say.
I've always been told that kilobytes is with a "K", a "k" meaning simply
1000 as in SI. This was before megabytes became common, though.
k = 1000
K = degrees Kelvin ( absolute temperature)
K = 1024
k = 1000
is a convention proposed by Tenenbaum. Never caught on though.
Computer science have given us another exception:
b = bits
B = bytes
Then again, on some very old systems, a byte is not necessarily 8 bits
(though modern systems always assumes this).
This assumption is a design flaw. The architecture I worked with
allowed the programmer to define the size of the byte.
.. That's why a lot of older
documentation talked about 'octets'.
We never did. I don't recall ever typing that word.
|
Remember "nybbles"?
| Quote: | Despite criticisms, kiB, MiB, GiB are catching on. I've started seeing
them in tender documents and specifications.
And what does a spell checker do with them?
|
IME spellcheckers learn faster than most humans.
Mark L. Fergerson |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Shmuel (Seymour J.) Metz
Guest
|
| Posted:
Wed Dec 07, 2005 5:35 pm Post subject:
Re: why do computer scientists say 1KB=1024 bytes?!! |
|
|
In <1133922573.855472.297320@o13g2000cwo.googlegroups.com>, on
12/06/2005
at 06:29 PM, onehappymadman@yahoo.com said:
| Quote: | Subject: why do computer scientists say 1KB=1024 bytes?!!
|
They don't; they say that 1,024 is close enough to 1K that it is
sometimes convenient to ignore the difference. The ignorant attempt to
copy the usage without understanding it. There's a similar problem
with people who attempt to imitate slang without understanding it,
e.g., losing the inflection in "I could care less?"
| Quote: | What's so special about 2^10 that computer scientists say it's 1k?
|
They don't. However, many things that they deal with are in powers of
2, and 1,024 is a convenient power of two that is reasonably close to
1K.
The people misusing "K" don't know from SI. That's why we get
monstrosities like drive manufacturers referring to 1,024,000 bytes as
1 MB.
In <1133931290.510746.187120@o13g2000cwo.googlegroups.com>, on
12/06/2005
at 08:54 PM, onehappymadman@yahoo.com said:
| Quote: | Sure... try saying "the store is 3 kibimeters east of here". Or
buying a 5 kibi-watt generator.
|
Do you normally measure distances in multiples of 1,204. If not, it's
a poor analogy.
| Quote: | And don't even get me started on kb (kilobytes) vs kb (kilobits)!
My laptop has a USB 1.1 (not 2.0) port, and I'm trying to calculate
how fast I can transfer data. I google it, and discover it can
handle 12 mbps!
|
It's a serial link; bits per second is the appropriate measure of
speed. Also, I've always seen an upper case B when someone gives the
speed in octets/second.
| Quote: | On the other hand, buy some rechargeable NiMH AA batteries, and the
package says, "2500 mAh"!
|
Madison Avenue at its best :-(
--
Shmuel (Seymour J.) Metz, SysProg and JOAT <http://patriot.net/~shmuel>
Unsolicited bulk E-mail subject to legal action. I reserve the
right to publicly post or ridicule any abusive E-mail. Reply to
domain Patriot dot net user shmuel+news to contact me. Do not
reply to spamtrap@library.lspace.org |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Fred Bloggs
Guest
|
| Posted:
Wed Dec 07, 2005 5:35 pm Post subject:
Re: why do computer scientists say 1KB=1024 bytes?!! |
|
|
onehappymadman@yahoo.com wrote:
| Quote: | What's so special about 2^10 that computer scientists say it's 1k? The
SI system says 1k is 1000. 2^10 is not 1000, it is 1024.
Why not just say 1 KB = 2^9.965784285 bytes (= 1000)? If you're going
to nerd out, then nerd out completely, I say.
|
Keep your F___ING ***TROLL*** pseudointellectual garbage off SED- damned
good-for-nothing puke mental midget. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
GregS
Guest
|
| Posted:
Wed Dec 07, 2005 5:35 pm Post subject:
Re: why do computer scientists say 1KB=1024 bytes?!! |
|
|
In article <GqClf.429$6N2.87@fed1read06>, Mark Fergerson <nunya@biz.ness> wrote:
| Quote: | jmfbahciv@aol.com wrote:
In article <1133957672.066443.219040@g47g2000cwa.googlegroups.com>,
"slebetman@yahoo.com" <slebetman@gmail.com> wrote:
Pooh Bear wrote:
Deefoo wrote:
onehappymadman@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:1133922573.855472.297320@o13g2000cwo.googlegroups.com...
What's so special about 2^10 that computer scientists say it's 1k? The
SI system says 1k is 1000. 2^10 is not 1000, it is 1024.
Why not just say 1 KB = 2^9.965784285 bytes (= 1000)? If you're going
to nerd out, then nerd out completely, I say.
I've always been told that kilobytes is with a "K", a "k" meaning simply
1000 as in SI. This was before megabytes became common, though.
k = 1000
K = degrees Kelvin ( absolute temperature)
K = 1024
k = 1000
is a convention proposed by Tenenbaum. Never caught on though.
Computer science have given us another exception:
b = bits
B = bytes
Then again, on some very old systems, a byte is not necessarily 8 bits
(though modern systems always assumes this).
This assumption is a design flaw. The architecture I worked with
allowed the programmer to define the size of the byte.
.. That's why a lot of older
documentation talked about 'octets'.
We never did. I don't recall ever typing that word.
Remember "nybbles"?
|
I remember the term. I think byte is simply a subdivision of a word,
which can be any size.
greg
| Quote: | Despite criticisms, kiB, MiB, GiB are catching on. I've started seeing
them in tender documents and specifications.
And what does a spell checker do with them?
IME spellcheckers learn faster than most humans.
Mark L. Fergerson
|
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
markp
Guest
|
| Posted:
Wed Dec 07, 2005 5:35 pm Post subject:
Re: why do computer scientists say 1KB=1024 bytes?!! |
|
|
| Quote: |
Remember "nybbles"?
Sure. One hexadecimal character. A convenient unit.
- Randy
|
No it wasn't. It was 1 1/3 octets. :-) |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
zzbunker@netscape.net
Guest
|
| Posted:
Wed Dec 07, 2005 5:35 pm Post subject:
Re: why do computer scientists say 1KB=1024 bytes?!! |
|
|
jmfbahciv@aol.com wrote:
| Quote: | In article <1133944327.883571.223730@z14g2000cwz.googlegroups.com>,
"zzbunker@netscape.net" <zzbunker@netscape.net> wrote:
onehappymadman@yahoo.com wrote:
What's so special about 2^10 that computer scientists say it's 1k? The
SI system says 1k is 1000. 2^10 is not 1000, it is 1024.
Why not just say 1 KB = 2^9.965784285 bytes (= 1000)? If you're going
to nerd out, then nerd out completely, I say.
They say that because a byte is eight bits.
This is a recent definition of a byte.
It's doesn't really matter what SI, or Physics,
IEEE and ASCIII retards have to say about the issue.
You are an idiot.
/BAH
|
Well, you work for Haliburton, So your opimiom is not only
irrelevent,
to IEEE, it''s also irrelevent to the Uiniverse |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
GregS
Guest
|
| Posted:
Wed Dec 07, 2005 5:35 pm Post subject:
Re: why do computer scientists say 1KB=1024 bytes?!! |
|
|
In article <1133969055.200760.285590@g44g2000cwa.googlegroups.com>, "Randy Poe" <poespam-trap@yahoo.com> wrote:
| Quote: |
Mark Fergerson wrote:
jmfbahciv@aol.com wrote:
.. That's why a lot of older
documentation talked about 'octets'.
We never did. I don't recall ever typing that word.
I think I may have seen that one in IP documentation.
An IP(v4) address consists of four octets.
Remember "nybbles"?
Sure. One hexadecimal character. A convenient unit.
- Randy
|
I didn't know hexidecimal was derived by IBM from sexadecimal!
greg |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Randy Poe
Guest
|
| Posted:
Wed Dec 07, 2005 5:35 pm Post subject:
Re: why do computer scientists say 1KB=1024 bytes?!! |
|
|
Mark Fergerson wrote:
| Quote: | jmfbahciv@aol.com wrote:
.. That's why a lot of older
documentation talked about 'octets'.
We never did. I don't recall ever typing that word.
|
I think I may have seen that one in IP documentation.
An IP(v4) address consists of four octets.
| Quote: | Remember "nybbles"?
|
Sure. One hexadecimal character. A convenient unit.
- Randy |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Jeff
Guest
|
| Posted:
Wed Dec 07, 2005 5:35 pm Post subject:
Re: why do computer scientists say 1KB=1024 bytes?!! |
|
|
First, 1 KB used to be a significant amount of memory. Some systems
were designed such that the required amount of memory was estimated at
about 1000 bytes. So the hardware guys went to work and designed a
memory system. They realized they would need at least 10 discreet
address lines so that each of the 1000 memory locations would have a
unique address. Then they discovered that it would be cheaper to
design the memory system so that the number of memory locations matched
the addressing system rather than the other way around. Hence the
memory chips had 2^10 locations which very closely matched the 1000
locations that was desired. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Keith Williams
Guest
|
| Posted:
Wed Dec 07, 2005 5:35 pm Post subject:
Re: why do computer scientists say 1KB=1024 bytes?!! |
|
|
In article <43969D5D.FD560DEF@hotmail.com>,
rabbitsfriendsandrelations@hotmail.com says...
| Quote: |
"[Mr.] Lynn Kurtz" wrote:
On Wed, 7 Dec 2005 04:04:05 +0000 (UTC),
glhansen@steel.ucs.indiana.edu (Gregory L. Hansen) wrote:
1024 is close enough to 1000 for jargon. The meaning is determined from
the context. If you want to sling around a more exact jargon, then use
kibibyte, mebibyte, and gibibyte.
Hey, it isn't just in technical electronics. Ever measured a "2 by 4"?
2 x 4 is the 'unplaned size' btw.
|
s/is/used to be/
They're no longer 2"x4" before planing. They don't waste 35%.
--
Keith |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Ben Rudiak-Gould
Guest
|
| Posted:
Wed Dec 07, 2005 11:44 pm Post subject:
Re: why do computer scientists say 1KB=1024 bytes?!! |
|
|
| Quote: | Remember "nybbles"?
Sure. One hexadecimal character. A convenient unit.
No it wasn't. It was 1 1/3 octets. :-)
|
Calvin: "A bushel is a unit of weight equal to four pecks." What's a peck?
Hobbes: A quick smooch.
[beat]
Calvin: You know, I don't understand math at all.
-- Ben |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
|
|
FAQ
Memberlist
Register
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in