"intelligent" disk drives

[Fred Cisin]

>   > I don't think that there is any question that 102400 is
>   >a totally indefensible, irresponsible, and ridiculous number
>   >for defining a "Megabyte".

On Tue, 20 Nov 2007, Ensor wrote:
> You're quite right, the actual number is "1048576" or 1024KB. But that's not
> your point is it?
Yes, it is.
There are arguments for 2 ^ 20  (1048576)
There are arguments for 10 ^ 6  (1000000)

But (10 ^ 3) * (2 ^ 10)   (1024000)  manages to combine the disadvantages
of both systems.