Sidebar Sidebar
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.

Is there any way to change 10.6 so that it is by "1024" instead of "1000"....

T

taylert123

macrumors newbie
Original poster
Sep 1, 2009
19
0
or whatever it is exactly :)

Everything else in the whole computer world works with the other system, so the sizes of things are now ridiculously different and I want it to use the binary system instead of what it's using now.

Sorry if I used any incorrect terms! I'll check back in a couple hours, got a paper to write :p
 
taylert123 said:
or whatever it is exactly :)

Everything else in the whole computer world works with the other system, so the sizes of things are now ridiculously different and I want it to use the binary system instead of what it's using now.

Sorry if I used any incorrect terms! I'll check back in a couple hours, got a paper to write :p
Click to expand...

What actual problem is this change to base 10 space representation for storage media causing you?

There is not going to be a simple way to change this. Apple would not make this easy to do just from a support perspective.

S-
 
sidewinder said:
What actual problem is this change to base 10 space representation for storage media causing you?

There is not going to be a simple way to change this. Apple would not make this easy to do just from a support perspective.

S-
Click to expand...

Every other computer out there that I come into contact with uses the base 2 (2, right?) system and these incongruities are going to cause me great confusion.

So there's nothing I can do currently? Even a third party work around would be helpful.
 
taylert123 said:
Every other computer out there that I come into contact with uses the base 2 (2, right?) system and these incongruities are going to cause me great confusion.

So there's nothing I can do currently? Even a third party work around would be helpful.
Click to expand...

Well... uh, what about df?

Terminal-> 'man df'
 
If I were Apple, I'm not sure I'd make the change, but by the same token, I don't see the problem. For every computer geek that knows a 1TB drive is really a 976,562,500 megabyte drive, there are a dozen people who don't. Using base 10 is one step to make computers "for the rest of us."

mt
 
taylert123 said:
Every other computer out there that I come into contact with uses the base 2 (2, right?) system and these incongruities are going to cause me great confusion.

So there's nothing I can do currently? Even a third party work around would be helpful.
Click to expand...
How are these "incongruities" going to cause you great confusion. Lay out a "real world" scenario because I don't buy it. What do you do that this is going to be any problem at all?

No, no third-party workarounds either.....

S-
 
mysterytramp said:
If I were Apple, I'm not sure I'd make the change, but by the same token, I don't see the problem. For every computer geek that knows a 1TB drive is really a 976,562,500 megabyte drive, there are a dozen people who don't. Using base 10 is one step to make computers "for the rest of us."

mt
Click to expand...

I agree 100%. It's only a matter of time before this method is adopted across all platforms.
 
I bet there is a "defaults write" command that will switch it back. We just have to find it... But I'm with you, I want the "correct" (in my mind) way back. I want the PHYSICAL size of my disk and apps, not some rounded off number.
 
Here's a real world problem:
You would like to download (or copy) a large file from online or windows (or anyplace that will list the size using the old convention). Let's say your small storage device (usb drive or the like) has just just enough space by a few megabytes, but the file won't fit, because you have been told the size in two different formats.

Also, I think I will find it rather annoying, being a computer engineer, and having always known the 1024 convention, to suddenly be the idiot who doesn't understand the size of files anymore!
 
Why do you need to change it?

It's just a different way of measuring it. It doesn't affect normal usage at all. You hard drive is still the same size no matter how they measure it.
 
marioman38 said:
^ Rounded off number? Its just different units.
Click to expand...
No kidding--but it's essentially no different. I will concede "rounding" was probably not the best term. That being said, there are 1,024MB in a gigabyte (or gibibyte, if you must). End of story. Don't try to protect me from the cold, hard facts of Base 2! :) I just prefer (as do other apparently) the "technically correct" measurement.

EDIT: Ha! Firefox recognizes gibibyte as a misspelled word!
 
Seriously, does it matter why I want it the other way? I also see it as the "correct" way and it makes more sense to me in that convention. I realize that the size isn't actually different, but the conflicting measurements are still going to mess with me. It's like if you were measuring something with centimeters when you thought you were measuring with inches.


And if you find it pcguru83, let me know :)
 
pcguru83 said:
No kidding--but it's essentially no different. I will concede "rounding" was probably not the best term. That being said, there are 1,024MB in a gigabyte (or gibibyte, if you must). End of story. Don't try to protect me from the cold, hard facts of Base 2! :) I just prefer (as do other apparently) the "technically correct" measurement.

EDIT: Ha! Firefox recognizes gibibyte as a misspelled word!
Click to expand...
Well, technically the way you want is not correct.

giga = 1,000,000,000

So a gigabyte is 1,000,000,000 bytes. Not 1,073,741,824 bytes.

S-
 
dukebound85 said:
doesnt matter

the industry has defined a gigabyte to mean in base 2 over the last 30+ years, regardless what the prefix means
Click to expand...

in 1999 ANSI defined Gigabyte as base 10 not base 2, and the prefix giga, mega, tera are SI prefixes, which are base 10.
 
pcguru83 said:
I bet there is a "defaults write" command that will switch it back. We just have to find it... But I'm with you, I want the "correct" (in my mind) way back. I want the PHYSICAL size of my disk and apps, not some rounded off number.
Click to expand...
I hope someone does find that value to flip over to give me back my beloved Base 2.
 
pcguru83 said:
<snip> That being said, there are 1,024MB in a gigabyte (or gibibyte, if you must).
Click to expand...
sidewinder said:
Well, technically the way you want is not correct.
giga = 1,000,000,000
So a gigabyte is 1,000,000,000 bytes. Not 1,073,741,824 bytes.
S-
Click to expand...

They did cover themselves with the text in bold, no?

Eidorian said:
I hope someone does find that value to flip over to give me back my beloved Base 2.
Click to expand...

Also, the change in base-2 to base-10 is only in Finder as far as I can see. You can still get the general convention in Terminal or any other unix utility. Heck, QuickTimeX and iTunes still reports in base-2.
 
dukebound85 said:
doesnt matter

the industry has defined a gigabyte to mean in base 2 over the last 30+ years, regardless what the prefix means
Click to expand...

It has, has it? Find me a magnetic storage medium that has used the base 2 number to define its capacity. I remember floppy disks use kilobytes to define their capacity and it was a kilo = 1000, or base 10. All the hard drives I can recall have used base 10 numbers to define their capacity.

Your argument has no legs to stand on. Just because the OS folks decided to do it one way does not make it the correct way. The fact that this is so confusing makes it the wrong way. They want to keep using base 2 numbers? Fine. Say the disk has 3.2GiB free. Make it an OS preferences setting so we can see it as GB or GiB. Seems simple enough and the right thing to do.

S-
 
duykur said:
in 1999 ANSI defined Gigabyte as base 10 not base 2, and the prefix giga, mega, tera are SI prefixes, which are base 10.
Click to expand...

In 1999 they were about 20 years late. People had been using Kilobyte=1024 bytes for 20 years by then. And still are 10 years later. As all the "proper" comp users here are proud to announce (though not before apple switched, which is interesting), Kilo technically means 1000. But nobody cares. Nobody ever cared. Not until apple decided out of the blue to change it to base-10 on their OS. Now we have a legion of apologists cramming SI down everyone's throats while those same people didnt give a flying crap about it a year ago.

I suppose Intel should start marketing their CPUs with 4.19MB L2 cache now, right? Or how about ram manufacturers advertising as 4.29GB ram instead of 4gb.
No. They shouldn't. Because thats not how the world works. On paper a kilobyte can be 1000 bytes, but thats not how things work. Apple cant magically make drives access in 500kb sectors.
 
So when we supposedly save "6GB" of space with Snow Leopard, was that based on Base 10 or Base 2. =)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.
Top Bottom
Back