You say megabyte, I say mebibyte

> ><snip>
> >> It is
> >> irrelevant that the prefixes mean something else in the
> >> decimal system because computers don't use the decimal
> >> system, it is only converted to that for the benefit of the
> >> users.
>
> >oh boy
>
> >well, this aspect of your argument is unique to you. I would be
> >suprised if anybody else nodded in agreement to that. Looks like
> >mishmash. You said this sort of thing in the previous thread that I
> >mentioned.
>
> Which part? <snip>
>
> the part where you make use of words like binary, decimal, and number
> system.
>

[snip]

> The 2^20 prefix is a different prefix to the 10^6
> prefix, even though both go by the same name of Mega.

That is where you all make your mistake. The prefix / term Mega does not
have 2 meanings. It has 1 meaning - 10^6 AKA 1 million. 2^20 is not Mega -
it is commonly mistaken for Mega, but is not Mega.
 >> Stay informed about: You say megabyte, I say mebibyte 

On Fri, 8 Feb 2008 10:51:56 -0000, "GT"
<ContactGT_remove_ RemoveThis @hotmail.com> wrote:

><jameshanley39 RemoveThis @yahoo.co.uk> wrote in message
>news:3ec43e14-0956-42a6-909f-28ebfbdb92bd@1g2000hsl.googlegroups.com...
>> On 8 Feb, 05:50, kony <s... RemoveThis @spam.com> wrote:
>> <snip>
>>> The industry did settle for a term that used a prefix having
>>> a different value in the decimal system, knowing that it
>>> did, choosing to do so to represent a binary value that was
>>> different than the decimal value.
>>
>> this is "chinese"
>
>As well as nonsense. Mega means 1,000,000 in decimal.

Except in the computer industry which uses it to describe a
binary, not decimal value.


>You can convert this
>decimal number to any base you choose,

So long as it still has the same numerical value this is
true. Since it does not, and the actual quantity is
necessarily based on binary true/false, on/off, 0/1 logical
design, not decimal. A decimal prefix is an invalid
expression in a binary system.

>but the term mega still means 10^6.

Except in the computer industry


>No industry or individual is free to change that standard.

Right, that's why it doesn't matter what NIST tried to
declare. That "standard" became a standard when the
computing industry made it their standard.


>Unfortunately
>Microsoft has used the wrong value and everyone else has followed suit, but
>it is still wrong!

Whether you feel they shouldn't have used the (roughly
equivalent) wrong value or not, they DID. However, no it
was not Microsoft that started it all, it was that computers
are inherantly binary - MS and windows were preceeded by the
industry standard using the binary value.


>Just because one of the biggest companies in the world
>mis-uses a term, doesn't mean we have changed the standard!
>

You don't seem to have the history right. When these
standards were first created, if you'd been around at the
time then you would have had an opportunity to plead your
case. After the industry established the standard - before
there was any "windows" at all, it is fairly irrelevant that
the prefix means something else in another field of study.
 >> Stay informed about: You say megabyte, I say mebibyte 

On Fri, 8 Feb 2008 13:26:51 -0000, "GT"
<ContactGT_remove_.RemoveThis@hotmail.com> wrote:


>That is where you all make your mistake. The prefix / term Mega does not
>have 2 meanings. It has 1 meaning - 10^6 AKA 1 million. 2^20 is not Mega -
>it is commonly mistaken for Mega, but is not Mega.
>

Wanna bet? You might have some memory in your computer,
care to tell us how the manufacturer (following
international standards) rates it's capacity?
 >> Stay informed about: You say megabyte, I say mebibyte 

On Fri, 8 Feb 2008 14:56:42 -0000, "GT"
<ContactGT_remove_.DeleteThis@hotmail.com> wrote:

> I
>have yet to see a single reply (quoting Wikipedia indicates a lost
>argument!) that supports your argument that Mega is 2^20.

Ok, here ya go:
http://www.dramexchange.com/

Entire page full of memory chips bought and sold by the
major players in the industry. megabit, gigabit, megabyte,
gigabyte all in specific binary values.

It's not that there isn't anything supporting the binary
argument, it's that you choose to ignore everything around
you, the very industry that uses the term. Microsoft just
used the standard terms that pre-dated them, BECAUSE it was
standard, they certainly didn't pull the number out of thin
air for no reason.
 >> Stay informed about: You say megabyte, I say mebibyte 

On Fri, 8 Feb 2008 10:49:38 -0000, "GT"
<ContactGT_remove_ RemoveThis @hotmail.com> wrote:


>Mega is a standard term meaning 10^6.

Except in the computer industry.



> Mebi is a standard term meaning 2^20.

To someone not in the computer industry and thus, ignorant
of the correct terms.


>Trying to use Mean to mean 2^20 is an attempt to redefine the standard term
>and is therefore wrong.

Except in the computer industry. The evidence is
staggering, all around us. Even those who claim we should
use different terms are already conceding we are supposed
to "change" the standard way of expression to their new way
that they feel is more philosophically correct. There'd be
nothing to change if they weren't trying to mess with
standard definitions.
 >> Stay informed about: You say megabyte, I say mebibyte 

On Fri, 8 Feb 2008 10:54:22 -0000, "GT"
<ContactGT_remove_ RemoveThis @hotmail.com> wrote:


>> GT doesn't want to accept that other bodies with supposed
>> authority, like Webster's dictionary, don't typically invent
>> new words but instead incorporate them after a large enough
>> group of people have settled on a standard definition.
>
>More than happy to accept this. I even agree with this. The problem I have
>is when somebody or some company tries to change a standard that is already
>well established.

Show us any evidence of a person using the term megabyte by
the definition you claim is correct prior to, oh let's pick
a date out of thin air like 1968, 40 years ago. Actually I
don't think you can find anyone using your defintion prior
to '98, a full 30 years later except after the hard drive
manufacturers switched... and by the way there have been
several class action lawsuits about their doing so since a
hard drive is a binary storage medium.

IF you can't find one example of someone using the terms
before they were considered a standard (decades ago) you
have no evidence there was even any minority, let alone a
majority decimally-defined value for megabyte.



>This change goes against the majority and is not valid.
>

There was no majority defining megabyte the way you insist
we should. Never. once you tack byte on the meaning is a
very specific one.
 >> Stay informed about: You say megabyte, I say mebibyte 

On Fri, 8 Feb 2008 10:53:03 -0000, "GT"
<ContactGT_remove_ RemoveThis @hotmail.com> wrote:

>
>"Miles Bader" <miles.bader RemoveThis @necel.com> wrote in message
>news:buok5lgysq0.fsf@dhapc248.dev.necel.com...
>> "GT" <ContactGT_remove_ RemoveThis @hotmail.com> writes:
>>> Standards have to be defined by controlling bodies with authority,
>>> they don't just become standard because lots of people use them!
>>
>> Hardly.
>>
>> Standards authorities can help smooth the way, but they can equally well
>> just get in the way and botch things up. We should shun them when they
>> do the latter.
>
>Nonsense. Ever heard of ISO?
>

Hmm. Have you read any of their documents?
Here's one, now in it they wrote:
"Ultra DMA 133 Megabyte/s transfer mode"

Is 133 megabytes adhering to your decimal system definition
of mega? No.

http://isotc.iso.org/livelink/livelink/3917454/JTC001-N-7429.pdf?func=....Fetch&
 >> Stay informed about: You say megabyte, I say mebibyte 

On 9 Feb, 19:29, "jameshanle...@yahoo.co.uk"
<snip>
>
> If there is a standard saying it is 2^20 then it is obscure and not
> well recognised, and irrelevant. As far as I know there isn't one, but
> there may be.
>

I retract that a bit. It would not suprise me if there was a formal
standard for Mega in the context of RAM . Nevertheless, it makes no
difference. The arguments against you have nothing to do with
requiring such a standard.

Even if there was, and it was well known and (if the standard i.e. per
se, was) accepted by masses, or a majourity of or all techies, it
would make no difference to anybody.

It would not break your argument any more than it already has been.

And given the stupid reasons you have given, you still would not
retract them. Because as you would rightly point out to defend your
stupid argument, the mathematical standard (with 10^6) for those
prefixes came first anyway.
 >> Stay informed about: You say megabyte, I say mebibyte 

"kony" <spam.RemoveThis@spam.com> wrote in message
news:trspq3p4p941gj1v8hk8gn3edvvsepi8r2@4ax.com...
> On Fri, 8 Feb 2008 10:51:56 -0000, "GT"
> <ContactGT_remove_.RemoveThis@hotmail.com> wrote:
>
>><jameshanley39.RemoveThis@yahoo.co.uk> wrote in message
>>news:3ec43e14-0956-42a6-909f-28ebfbdb92bd@1g2000hsl.googlegroups.com...
>>> On 8 Feb, 05:50, kony <s....RemoveThis@spam.com> wrote:
>>> <snip>
>>>> The industry did settle for a term that used a prefix having
>>>> a different value in the decimal system, knowing that it
>>>> did, choosing to do so to represent a binary value that was
>>>> different than the decimal value.
>>>
>>> this is "chinese"
>>
>>As well as nonsense. Mega means 1,000,000 in decimal.
>
> Except in the computer industry which uses it to describe a
> binary, not decimal value.

Nope. 500MB is not a binary value it is a decimal value!


>>You can convert this
>>decimal number to any base you choose,
>
> So long as it still has the same numerical value this is
> true. Since it does not, and the actual quantity is
> necessarily based on binary true/false, on/off, 0/1 logical
> design, not decimal. A decimal prefix is an invalid
> expression in a binary system.
>
>>but the term mega still means 10^6.
>
> Except in the computer industry

In every industry - its a *standard*!

>>No industry or individual is free to change that standard.
>
> Right, that's why it doesn't matter what NIST tried to
> declare. That "standard" became a standard when the
> computing industry made it their standard.

Wrong. The standard is 10^6, the computing industry can't change that no
matter how hard you try.

>>Unfortunately
>>Microsoft has used the wrong value and everyone else has followed suit,
>>but
>>it is still wrong!
>
> Whether you feel they shouldn't have used the (roughly
> equivalent) wrong value or not, they DID. However, no it
> was not Microsoft that started it all, it was that computers
> are inherantly binary - MS and windows were preceeded by the
> industry standard using the binary value.
>
>
>>Just because one of the biggest companies in the world
>>mis-uses a term, doesn't mean we have changed the standard!
>>
>
> You don't seem to have the history right. When these
> standards were first created, if you'd been around at the
> time then you would have had an opportunity to plead your
> case. After the industry established the standard - before
> there was any "windows" at all, it is fairly irrelevant that
> the prefix means something else in another field of study.

None of us were aroung! The standard was formed long before any of us were
born. The standard is 10^6.
 >> Stay informed about: You say megabyte, I say mebibyte 

"kony" <spam RemoveThis @spam.com> wrote in message
news:potpq3pes6gir1tu4ibib8ftkv806262ur@4ax.com...
> On Fri, 8 Feb 2008 14:56:42 -0000, "GT"
> <ContactGT_remove_ RemoveThis @hotmail.com> wrote:
>
>> I
>>have yet to see a single reply (quoting Wikipedia indicates a lost
>>argument!) that supports your argument that Mega is 2^20.
>
> Ok, here ya go:
> http://www.dramexchange.com/

Very interesting, but I see nothing on there from any authority stating a
change in the standard SI terms, therefore your post re-inforces the point
that there is no change to that standard meaning of the SI unit Mega - mega
is 10^6.
 >> Stay informed about: You say megabyte, I say mebibyte 

<jameshanley39.TakeThisOut@yahoo.co.uk> wrote in message
news:17f7e90c-1e37-46b9-a82a-9094b4f87982@s13g2000prd.googlegroups.com...
> On 9 Feb, 19:29, "jameshanle...@yahoo.co.uk"
> <snip>
>>
>> If there is a standard saying it is 2^20 then it is obscure and not
>> well recognised, and irrelevant. As far as I know there isn't one, but
>> there may be.
>>
>
> I retract that a bit. It would not suprise me if there was a formal
> standard for Mega in the context of RAM.

There is a formal standard for Mega in any context (including RAM) - its
10^6, or 'million'.
 >> Stay informed about: You say megabyte, I say mebibyte 

"kony" <spam RemoveThis @spam.com> wrote in message
news:bmtpq3l64c3p2nmsqbpq255i1d2caskq5r@4ax.com...
> On Fri, 8 Feb 2008 13:26:51 -0000, "GT"
> <ContactGT_remove_ RemoveThis @hotmail.com> wrote:
>
>
>>That is where you all make your mistake. The prefix / term Mega does not
>>have 2 meanings. It has 1 meaning - 10^6 AKA 1 million. 2^20 is not Mega -
>>it is commonly mistaken for Mega, but is not Mega.
>>
>
> Wanna bet? You might have some memory in your computer,
> care to tell us how the manufacturer (following
> international standards) rates it's capacity?

Bet accepted:
The label suggests that this DIMM should be capable of holding 1GB, which as
we know from th SI units is 1x10^9, or 1,000,000,000 Bytes. However the DIMM
actually holds 1,073,741,824 Bytes, or 1.07 * 10^9 (or GB). The label is
unfortunately under-stating the capacity of the DIMM by 7%.
 >> Stay informed about: You say megabyte, I say mebibyte 

"kony" <spam.RemoveThis@spam.com> wrote in message
news:k6upq39p1lpvounaokptvos6ug1iuo1d0s@4ax.com...
> On Fri, 8 Feb 2008 10:49:38 -0000, "GT"
> <ContactGT_remove_.RemoveThis@hotmail.com> wrote:
>
>
>>Mega is a standard term meaning 10^6.
>
> Except in the computer industry.

No, in every industry - it is a *standard*.

>> Mebi is a standard term meaning 2^20.
>
> To someone not in the computer industry and thus, ignorant
> of the correct terms.

Which you clearly are!

>>Trying to use Mean to mean 2^20 is an attempt to redefine the standard
>>term
>>and is therefore wrong.
>
> Except in the computer industry.

No, in every industry - it is a *standard*.

> The evidence is
> staggering, all around us. Even those who claim we should
> use different terms are already conceding we are supposed
> to "change" the standard way of expression to their new way
> that they feel is more philosophically correct. There'd be
> nothing to change if they weren't trying to mess with
> standard definitions.

Absolutely - there should be nothing to change. The standard SI terms have
been around for decades, centuries - you should just accept the standard SI
terms and stop moaning that they don't quite apply to the computing industry
and therefore stop trying to 'bend' them and just use the correct terms!
 >> Stay informed about: You say megabyte, I say mebibyte