| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
Bazza LXF regular

Joined: Sat Mar 21, 2009 11:16 am Posts: 1393 Location: Loughborough
|
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
Oyster
Joined: Fri Nov 02, 2007 3:58 pm Posts: 12 Location: Sydney, Australia
|
Posted: Sun Mar 28, 2010 11:51 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Sounds fine to me, as long as it's consistent so people know what they're looking at. |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
shinso
Joined: Wed Mar 10, 2010 9:47 pm Posts: 13 Location: UK
|
Posted: Sun Mar 28, 2010 10:40 pm Post subject: |
|
|
First the Mac like close, minimise and maximise buttons in 10.4, and now base-10 units like Mac.
I really can't understand why they are doing this. _________________ I meant to do that. |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
nordle LXF regular

Joined: Fri Apr 08, 2005 10:56 pm Posts: 1497
|
Posted: Sun Mar 28, 2010 11:08 pm Post subject: |
|
|
I never understood as a kid why the olds had so much trouble with millimeters, centimeters etc Couldn't appreciate the whole decimalisation, shillings etc changes they had to get used to.
"Sweet its going to be a balmy 25c tomorrow"
"What's that in real money?" was the reply.
Well, I guess I'm going to start to have a basic idea of the annoyance.
Then again, its just a case of remembering..... wonder if all the apps, such as the media burning apps, and drive partition apps will all get sorted together.... _________________ I think, therefore I compile |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
Rhakios Moderator

Joined: Thu Apr 07, 2005 12:18 am Posts: 7484 Location: Midlands, UK
|
Posted: Sun Mar 28, 2010 11:52 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| shinso wrote: | First the Mac like close, minimise and maximise buttons in 10.4, and now base-10 units like Mac.
I really can't understand why they are doing this. |
Made me think of this:
 _________________ Bye, Rhakios |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
nelz Moderator

Joined: Mon Apr 04, 2005 12:52 pm Posts: 8036 Location: Warrington, UK
|
Posted: Mon Mar 29, 2010 1:06 am Post subject: |
|
|
I'm not Ubuntu's biggest fan, but they are doing the right thing here. The SI units are defined as powers of 10, not 2, so using k to represent 1024 is corrupting a standard. The current situation, where some use binary and some use decimal units is confusing. To take Nordle's currency analogy, it like some quoting prices with VAT and some without, but not telling you which.
If you want to represent 1024, use the correct prefix, kibi, kilo has been defined as 1000 for hundreds of years. The confusion only arises because this situation was allowed to continue for far too long. All power to Ubuntu for taking a stand on this. _________________ "Insanity: doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results." (Albert Einstein) |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
shinso
Joined: Wed Mar 10, 2010 9:47 pm Posts: 13 Location: UK
|
Posted: Mon Mar 29, 2010 10:30 am Post subject: |
|
|
nelz: I understand, but why base 10? _________________ I meant to do that. |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
nelz Moderator

Joined: Mon Apr 04, 2005 12:52 pm Posts: 8036 Location: Warrington, UK
|
Posted: Mon Mar 29, 2010 10:56 am Post subject: |
|
|
Because that's what SI metric units have been defined in for hundreds of years. kilo has meant 100 since Adam was a lad, why corrupt it to mean something else because you can't be bothered to think up your own prefix?
How would you feel if your employer decided to make an hour 66 minutes, but still expect you to work the same number of hours for the same pay? What time would you turn up when someone said "see you in half an hour"? _________________ "Insanity: doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results." (Albert Einstein) |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
shinso
Joined: Wed Mar 10, 2010 9:47 pm Posts: 13 Location: UK
|
Posted: Mon Mar 29, 2010 12:19 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Hrm it will be interesting to see how this plays out. _________________ I meant to do that. |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
ollie Moderator

Joined: Mon Jul 25, 2005 12:26 pm Posts: 2749 Location: Bathurst NSW Australia
|
Posted: Mon Mar 29, 2010 12:57 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| nelz wrote: | | ... kilo has meant 100 since Adam was a lad ... |
kilo = 1000 since the late 1600's but if you want to start your own measuring system that's fine
It will just bring storage into line with manufactures' hard drive specifications. Computers have used binary because early computers with valves, and still do today, use electricity to represent everything as on or off. Perhaps this is getting ready for quantum computing  |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
Bazza LXF regular

Joined: Sat Mar 21, 2009 11:16 am Posts: 1393 Location: Loughborough
|
Posted: Mon Mar 29, 2010 1:06 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Hi ollie...
> Perhaps this is getting ready for quantum computing :D
I wonder how many quantum corruptions will occur with
the transition?
;oD _________________ 73...
Bazza, G0LCU...
Team AMIGA... |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
gn2 LXF regular

Joined: Sun Dec 14, 2008 10:34 pm Posts: 135
|
Posted: Tue Mar 30, 2010 10:19 am Post subject: |
|
|
| shinso wrote: | | ~ why base 10? |
Look at your hands, how many digits do you see?  |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
nelz Moderator

Joined: Mon Apr 04, 2005 12:52 pm Posts: 8036 Location: Warrington, UK
|
Posted: Tue Mar 30, 2010 10:59 am Post subject: |
|
|
Ten, which is why I can count to 1023 on them  _________________ "Insanity: doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results." (Albert Einstein) |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
Bazza LXF regular

Joined: Sat Mar 21, 2009 11:16 am Posts: 1393 Location: Loughborough
|
Posted: Tue Mar 30, 2010 12:20 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Hi nelz...
> Ten, which is why I can count to 1023 on them :)
ROTFLMAO... _________________ 73...
Bazza, G0LCU...
Team AMIGA... |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
shinso
Joined: Wed Mar 10, 2010 9:47 pm Posts: 13 Location: UK
|
Posted: Tue Mar 30, 2010 5:04 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| gn2 wrote: | Look at your hands, how many digits do you see?  |
Yeah but as nelz points out, computers use binary
And as crappy as my laptop may be, it doesn't need to use my fingers to count. _________________ I meant to do that. |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
| View previous topic :: View next topic |
|