"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, Tony Duell wrote:
> Especially as you've dropped an order of magnitude there (sorry, couldn't
> resist).

Thanks
If I'm this clumsy with a keyboard, I'd better be very careful when
soldering.

> Assuming you meant 1024000 (1024*1000), I agree totally. I can justify
> 1024^2 (1048576). I can justify 10^6 (1000000). But to mix the 2 systems
> is ridiculous
> I wonder what defintions have been used for a gigabyte. 2^30 and 10^9 are
> obvious and easy to justify. Did anyone ever use 2^20*10^ or 2^10*10^6 I
> wonder?

Well, probably 2^20*10^ 3 (your turn)
I've seen both.  But usually expressed in terms of MBs
("A GB is 1024 MB"/"A GB is 1000 MB")
(1024000000/1048576000)?

It's as futile an argument as trying to explain "DB9".
(a 25 pin shell, usually with 1 through 8 and 20)


--
Grumpy Ol' Fred     		cisin at xenosoft.com