microsoft get it wrong again

  keith-236785 09:14 19 Oct 06
Locked

You would think that microsoft of all people would get the file sizes right....the new windows mail live they are pushing out via hotmail gives a description of what it offers...in the size of storage it allows it gives this description.

• 2 GB of storage (2 GB = 2,000,000,000 bytes)

now we all know that is wrong and i would have expected microsoft to have at least been accurate with this but it seems that they too have fallin in line with others as describing a GIG as 1000 megabytes when we know it is really 1024 megabytes.

no wonder we feel ripped of by hard drive makers (well i do anyway).

i thought i would share that with you all lol.

  DieSse 10:22 19 Oct 06

*now we all know that is wrong*

The ISO definition of a GigaByte is 1,000,000,000 bytes - so far from being wrong, they are in fact correct.

What we do (or should ) all know, is that computers in some respects have an alternative definition for kilo - instead of 1,000 is 1,024. Nowhere else in tge real workd is such useage "correct" or even appropriate. This is merely a quirk resulting from a shorthand method for expressing binary numbers in decimal.

MS have done the wholly correct thing here and defined exactly which numbering convention the are using - as they do when you look at the properties for disk drive capacity in Windows, too. This means you are not in any doubt at all about how much storage you are getting.

  Forum Editor 23:22 19 Oct 06

and so is Microsoft.

  keith-236785 07:51 20 Oct 06

1 kilobyte is 1024 bytes, 1 megabyte is 1024 kilobytes, 1 gigabyte is 1024 megabytes, so 1 gig would be 1024*1024*1024 quite when someone decided that we werent going to use this principal anymore i dont know....all i can say is it is a lazy way (easy way out) of working the numbers.

you cannot disagree that the numbering format for computers is 1024, hence why we have 1,2,4,8,16,32,64,128,256,512 & 1024 (1 gig)MB (AND ABOVE) memory figures, this is due to the way BINARY numbers are formed and calculated.... dispute that if you can?

this has and always was the correct numbering for computing which dates back for as long as i have ever been computing. (i did my computer studies in 1976 & 77) at a technical college and it was 1024 then.

anyway, thats all i have to say on this matter and i have ticked as resolved.

This thread is now locked and can not be replied to.

Qualcomm Snapdragon 835 benchmarks: Antutu, Geekbench 4, GFXBench and PCMark results

1995-2015: How technology has changed the world in 20 years

This animated short film tells a moving story of domestic violence for Refuge

New iPad 2017 preview: Apple's affordable but underspecced new iPad may appeal to the education…