Open GoogleCodeExporter opened 9 years ago
Original comment by stuart02
on 18 May 2010 at 9:41
Fixed in r2226 by changing the file size units to base 2 rather than base 10.
Path provided by Max Lohrmann.
Original comment by stuart02
on 18 May 2010 at 8:04
Quick explanation:
Prior to 10.6 Apple (like everyone else) got this wrong. Apple had two
possibilities to fix this and they decided
to stay with the SI-Prefixes and make the transfer at 1000 in turn.
I believe this was mostly because of home users going "Hey I purchased a 1TB
disk why does it only show
950GB?" for years.
Sequel Pro on the other hand is a software for professionals and I think that
for those the /1024 system is
more important as it is used throughout console etc.
So we decided we will do the opposite of Apple and stay with the binary system
but switch to the correct
binary prefixes. SP will now be using KiB => Kibibyte, MiB => Mebibyte, GiB =>
Gibibyte and so on...
You have to start getting this right at some point :)
Original comment by schlabbe...@gmail.com
on 18 May 2010 at 8:10
Sounds good to me - as long as it's correct and consistent :)
Original comment by firehed
on 18 May 2010 at 8:14
I would like to re-open this issue. I think it's stupid to show different sizes
from everybody else.
I fail to see why "professionals" would want 1024 over 1000, I think they don't
care which one it uses as long as the same sizes are used everywhere. And right
now, the sizes are different depending where you look (see screenshot).
In my opinion 1000 is the better size, since it is base-10 and we are using a
base-10 number system. GiB and MiB only max sense if you are using HEX or some
other number that multiplies well by 2. But most of all, I just wish sequel pro
and finder displayed the same numbers.
Original comment by abhibeck...@gmail.com
on 23 May 2013 at 2:18
Attachments:
When I said we'd have to do it right at some point I meant we have to decide on
"1000B = 1KB" or "1024B = 1KiB" not the totally wrong and misleading "1024B = 1
KB" as in the past.
I based my decision for base-2 on some factors:
- The IEC units were especially designed for representing sizes the way they
are actually used by computers (meaning eg. that you can buy 512MB of RAM, not
500MB and that Excel supports 256 columns, not 250 - limitations in computing
usually grow in 2^x, not 10^x)
- I believe the decision to use SI units were purely an evil marketing trick
used by hard disk vendors to upsell their products. While I appreciate that
Apple decided to finally use a correct number+unit combination I've explained
abvoe why I think they settled on SI units. As such I don't think we should
support that marketing plot.
- Interoperability: I work a lot on Linux and Solaris systems and they use IEC
units. The same goes for Windows (though that still uses the wrong unit). I
suspect a lot people that work with SQL databases also work on Linux systems,
so that number would be more useful than a marketing number used only by HDD
vendors and the Finder.
Original comment by schlabbe...@gmail.com
on 23 May 2013 at 2:45
Original issue reported on code.google.com by
firehed
on 17 May 2010 at 11:14