Initially the SI prefixes were used and used 1024 instead of 1000
Only CPUs and RAM use 1024. Floppy disks going way back to the 1970’s used 1000.
Comment on Why a kilobyte is 1000 and not 1024 bytes
PsychedSy@sh.itjust.works 10 months agoThat was a retcon, though. Initially the SI prefixes were used and used 1024 instead of 1000. I feel like people started getting more fussy about it as hard drives started hitting hundreds of gb.
Initially the SI prefixes were used and used 1024 instead of 1000
Only CPUs and RAM use 1024. Floppy disks going way back to the 1970’s used 1000.
Fair on the floppy thing. I was too young to have worried about that.
Eyron@lemmy.world 10 months ago
How do you define a recon? We’re kilograms 1024 grams, too? When did that change. It seems it’s meant 1000 since metric was created in the 1700s, along with a binary prefix.
From the looks of it, software vendors were trying to recon the definition of “kilo” to be 1024.
PsychedSy@sh.itjust.works 10 months ago
Kilo was used outside of decimal power rules for data storage/memory because it could only use binary powers at smaller scales. Well, that’s the standard we went with anyway.
They didn’t ‘retcon’ the use of kilo as applicable to other units, they went with the closest power of two. When hard drive manufacturers decided to use power of tens it confused people and eventually got standardized by making kb power of ten and kib power of two.
From the looks of it you aren’t familiar with the situation.
Eyron@lemmy.world 10 months ago
This is all explained in the post we’re commenting on. The standard “kilo” prefix, from the metric system, predates modern computing and even the definition of a byte: 1700s vs 1900s. It seems very odd to make the argument that the older definition is the one trying to retcon.
The binary usage in software was and is common, but there’s definitely more recent, and causes a lot of confusion because it doesn’t match the older and bigger standard. Computers are very good at numbers, they never should have tried the hijack in existing prefix, especially when it was already defined by existing International standards. One might be able to argue that the us haven’t really adopted the metric system at the point of development, but the usage of 1,000 to define the kilo, is clearly older than the usage of 1,024 to define the kilobyte. The main new (last 100 years) thing here, is 1,024 bytes is a kibibyte.
Kibi is the recon. Not kilo.
wewbull@feddit.uk 10 months ago
Kilo meaning 1,000 inside computer science is the retcon.
Tell me, how much RAM do you have in your PC. 16 gig? 32 gig?
Surely you mean 17.18 gig? 34.36 gig?
PsychedSy@sh.itjust.works 10 months ago
I’m not sure if you just didn’t read or what. It seems like you understand the history but are insistent on awkward characterizations of the situation.
No. They didn’t modify the use of kilo for other units - they used it as an awkward approximation with bytes. No other units were harmed in the making of these units.
And they didn’t hijack it - they used the closest approximation and it stuck. Nobody gave a fuck until they bought a 300gb hd with 277gb of free space.