[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread] 

List:       kde-devel
Subject:    Re: How to configure konqueror to show KB and MB instead of KiB and
From:       Michael Howell <mhowell123 () gmail ! com>
Date:       2009-07-09 16:22:37
Message-ID: 200907090922.46368.mhowell123 () gmail ! com
[Download RAW message or body]

[Attachment #2 (multipart/signed)]


On Wednesday 08 July 2009 22:40:31 Michael Pyne wrote:
> So now that the IEC has said so, Arora is leading me astray when it says a
> file is 64.7 KB?  My flash cards aren't really 4GB?
Not just the IEC. The HD manufacturers also agree.

> You can thump the specs on the desk all you want but you can't just change
> the definition of the units in this context without at least some more
> buy-in from just KDE, a point you yourself have made in your response below
> when you mention doing unprecedented things.
KDE is not doing anything particularly confusing. KDE is *not*, I repeat, is 
*not* using K=1000. It is using Ki=1024. The only unambiguous measure the 
computer industry has.

> "decades ago".  I mean, seriously, listen to that.  Right or wrong, the
> definition of these units are backed up by *decades* of actual usage, so
> you're going to have a very hard time convincing a lot of people that their
> values magically changed once some IEC engineers signed a form to issue a
> new standard.
By that logic, imperial measures should still be used worldwide.

> And it's unfair to say "propagated by lazy software developers" because
> that's what the unit was (at least for memory capacities).
The people designing computers were largely mathematicians. As mathematicians, 
they knew better than to do something as confusing as that. Laziness had 
everything to do with it.

> > Unfortunately, the meaning of the *B units has become sufficiently
> > diluted to the point where we now have two equally-passionate groups
> > of people arguing over what they mean, and for all the messages that
> > have flown back and forth, we are no closer to agreement.  If
> > anything, the two sides have become entrenched and I don't see how
> > further discussion will get us closer to an answer.
> >
> > Given the above, I've changed my mind -- I no longer think KDE should
> > have any units other than the *iB units.  Those are the only units we
> > seem to be able to agree on.  The meaning of the *B units has been
> > sufficiently diluted to the point that NO MATTER what definition we
> > pick, someone will likely misinterpret them.
>
> Well there is apparently interest in having real decimal units.  My only
> real complaint is that it can't (yet) be the "kilobyte".
If computer OS manufacturers used binary measures, correctly represented, and 
HD manufacturers continue using EIC bytes, that sounds like a migration to me.

> Go out and look on Google or Yahoo about kilobyte being 1024.  You'll find
> pages telling you to impress your friends with the little-known fact that a
> kilobyte is 1024 bytes, dozens of articles "explaining" kilobytes,
> megabytes, etc.  If anything, the unit has become more ubiquitous to mean
> 1024 in computer applications over time, not less.
If you're interested, you can look it up. Most won't until they see something 
(an extra i, perhaps?).

> > > How about we name it dkB (note the lowercase k), with equivalents all
> > > the way up (dMB, dGB, dTB, etc.)?  That way people who really do want
> > > to see units in powers of 10 can, with no uncertainty as to what units
> > > they are getting, and those of us who just want to go on with our lives
> > > can continue to use KiB (or its misspelling KB).
> >
> > I think we already have too many units.  KDE really *would* be doing
> > something unprecedented with this, as it really does break with what
> > everyone else is doing (nevermind the standards).
> >
> > You objected before
> > to confusing users with KB = 1000 -- I think this would be an even
> > worse source of confusion.
>
> You can't have it both ways.  It can't be OK to confuse users by changing
> KB or forcing KiB and simultaneously not OK to confuse users by allowing a
> explicitly base 10 kedibyte (I'm sure you'll notice I just made up that
> name on the spot).  You will confuse thousands more users (backed up by
> decades of experience using the units) by making KB base-10 than you will
> by showing new units which the user has to manually select.  Even worse,
> the user would have to have manually selected the KB, and therefore been
> seeking it out in the first place!  This user was probably expecting the KB
> he's used for decades. Talk about confusing.
Showing decimal KB is _not_ what KDE does right now. Right now, KDE uses KiB. 
What is being proposed is a localization feature, where KDE allows the user to 
choose traditional KB, EIC KB, and KiB, just like they can choose 12/24 hour 
clocks and cm/in.

> At the same time it's can't be OK for KDE to do something unprecedented
> with units on the one hand (1000 byte KB) but not on the other hand (dkB).
Except that KB is sometimes used for 1000. See HD manufacturers. *Nobody* uses 
dkB, making it more unprecedented than 1000 KB.

> > We need to disambiguate the existing units, not make up new ones.
> > That's why "KiB" et al were created in the first place.
>
> Well I'd argue that my proposal is exactly in line with existing practice.
> Somehow computer users survived for decades with 1024-byte kilobytes before
> it became a major issue with mass storage manufacturers.  So we
> disambiguated by making up new units.
And they can live with 1024-byte kibibytes. Sounds easy enough.

> But now we still have a disconnect over the old units, so I say we could
> disambiguate the other way.  Perfect Solomon's logic, we have KiB and then
> we have kdB.  Actually that could be confused easily with deci-, let's see
> here... how about ↁ to mean explicitly decimal bytes?  (And from there, kↁ,
> Mↁ, Gↁ, etc.)  (In case it doesn't show up, it's code point U+2181, Roman
> numeral five thousand, which looks to me vaguely like a D-within-a-D).
If you really want to, lets use KdB. Simple enough.

> But less snarkily if you take one thing away from this email, let it be
> this: Right now KB predominantly means, regardless of what IEC and SI may
> /want/, 1024 bytes.  It would not be good form for KDE to be the project to
> throw grenades at their users (some of whom have used 1024 byte KBs for
> years if not actually decades).  With the introduction and gradual uptake
> of -ibibytes then perhaps it's something that can be rethought at the KDE 5
> or 6 timeframe but now is not the time to make the switch.
KDE is supposed to be innovative. See Plasma, KIO, KParts, and Nepomuk. Why 
not be innovative again, and lead the way with unambiguous measures.

> If enough users want the decimal units then there's no reason not to allow
> it, but I don't want us to get caught showing KB meaning 1000 when the user
> thinks it means 1024 so it needs to be very clear.  After all, users have
> taken hard disk manufacturers to court over just this very topic.
Which is exactly why we should use KiB. Let them choose traditional or EIC KB, 
but let's use a sane and unambiguous measure by default.

> Regards,
>  - Michael Pyne

-- 
Please don't send HTML mail. If you forward mail, please remove the garbage. 
Thanks!
 
Michael Howell 
mhowell123@gmail.com


["signature.asc" (application/pgp-signature)]

>> Visit http://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/kde-devel#unsub to unsubscribe <<


[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread]