Re: GB vs. MB

Gregory Youngblood (
Wed, 27 Nov 1996 22:05:14 -0600 (CST)

On Wed, 27 Nov 1996, Albert Cahalan wrote:
> From: Kai Schulte <>
> > On Wed, 27 Nov 1996, . Tethys SYSTEM ADMIN X wrote:
> >
> >> You could argue the case that Linux should be trying to appeal to
> >> the mainstream, and shouldn't be so "hackerish". Personally, though,
> >> I don't think being wrong about something is a good idea, even if it
> >> might appeal to the uneducated masses.
> >
> > If you want to "appeal to the masses", write one more of those great
> > "System View" GUIs and add a "commercial mode" widget to make it display
> > totally hyped, flashing, multi-color, glossy-magazine-style numbers.
> I would at least like Linux to agree with the drive label.

> Most of all, I'd like everything to agree.
> This is 1996, and a disk MB is 10^6, like it or not.
> Linux should be compatible with the rest of the world.

Well, now it is my turn to put my 2 cents in.. :)

I certainly hope that no one forces this change. If it is made, then it
should be made as an option taht can be configured either way.

When I look at the size of free disk space or how much space a file takes
up I want it reported as true bytes, megabytes or even gigabytes. Who
cares what the marketing pukes of the world call it, it just isn't right!
Computers operate on base 2, that means 2^10 etc. and not base 10 (10^6).