Re: GB vs. MB
Thu, 28 Nov 1996 22:03:34 +0800 (HKT)

> Don't you think a k should be 1000 and not 1024 then too? And when we say
> that a file is 5k, we mean exactly 5000 bytes? And a 5M file is 5000000
> bytes? Should du be changed to report blocks of 1000 (or 500)? Should df
> be changed to report 1000-blocks instead of 1024-blocks?

That will mean nightmares for tape block size calculation, don't do

> > This is 1996, and a disk MB is 10^6, like it or not.
> Why should a disk MB be different from a RAM MB? Just because of the
> marketdroids thought it was a good idea? "OUT, OUT!" said Saint Dogbert to
> the Demons of Stupidity.

Don't forget that a hard disk is nonetheless made up of sectors, which
are usually in 512B size. So if, the size of a disk is small, the
convenience to use k=1024 will make the size calculation neater, just
divide the no. of sector by 2, and no decimal point ever. But for
larger size, it comes the incentive to use k=1000 and M=10^6 for

Oh NO! The size of RAM chips is just climbing up following hard disk
size, I can't tolerate in one day to see the ads for a 65.5Mb RAM chip
on sale!

> Johan Myreen


Stephen Siu Ming Wong     Internet:   [ O O ]
Dept of Computer Science        \_-_/
Chinese University of                                          _| |_
Hong Kong                    Pager: 7229-4680                 / \_/ \