Messages in this thread | | | Date | Wed, 27 Nov 1996 02:42:00 -0500 | From | Rob Hagopian <> | Subject | Re: GB vs. MB |
| |
>> I don't know of too many SCSI floppy drives though... :-) > >The Zip drive counts I think. It is 93 to 100 MB, depending >on what a MB is and which bytes you include in your count.
Yes, and it's different formatted or unformatted... (1.4 [1.44] MB floppies are also 2.0MB unformatted... I don't know if the latter is in 10^6 or 2^20 notation :-|)
>> I think that linux should report what's true, not what the >> marketers shove down our throats. A megabyte is 2^20, it >> should be reported as such. > >People expect a disk MB to be 10^6 now, so maybe Linux should >do what people expect. With 2^20, it looks like Linux makes >disks get smaller.
I _*WISH*_ Linux did what I expected :-) Seriously, even BIOS to BIOS will report different sizes for a HD. Linux shouldn't sucumb to such a low level. When I see MB come out of linux, I expect it to mean MegaByte (2^20). When I see it in an ad, that's when I expect it to mean MarketingByte (10^6 :-). Of course, we could always report everything in bytes, that'd be consistant :-)
>I think we should just be glad that hard disk manufacturers >don't throw in a factor of 4 for compression -- not yet anyway.
Yet. I shudder to think what will happen if/when we get hardware compression on drives. -Rob
| |