From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id ; Thu, 27 Dec 2001 00:59:10 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id ; Thu, 27 Dec 2001 00:58:59 -0500 Received: from dsl-213-023-038-250.arcor-ip.net ([213.23.38.250]:9992 "EHLO starship.berlin") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id ; Thu, 27 Dec 2001 00:58:51 -0500 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII From: Daniel Phillips To: Dominik Mierzejewski , Linux Kernel List Subject: Re: Configure.help editorial policy Date: Thu, 27 Dec 2001 07:02:31 +0100 X-Mailer: KMail [version 1.3.2] In-Reply-To: <20011223174608.A25335@thyrsus.com> <20011227091702.A8528@zapff.research.canon.com.au> <20011226233413.GA17037@msp-150.man.olsztyn.pl> In-Reply-To: <20011226233413.GA17037@msp-150.man.olsztyn.pl> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7BIT Message-Id: Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On December 27, 2001 12:34 am, Dominik Mierzejewski wrote: > Although I thought there was an agreement that decimal kilobyte is kB, > and binary kilobyte is KiB, decimal megabyte is MB, binary megabyte is MB > and so on, wasn't there? Not in my book. As far as I'm concerned, somebody who tells me that one KB of memory or disk is 1,000 bytes is a liar. When a disk manufacturer chooses to interpret KB in such a way as to make their disk seem bigger, I just say to myself "ok, they lied, that's what they do, they're in business and they don't care". Now could we just ignore the self-serving doublespeak promulgated by greedy manufacturers, and continue using KB please? Kilo, as in memory -> 1024 Kilo, as in distance or weight -> 1,000 Difficult? /me wonders when the kibblebytes thread is going to end -- Daniel