zlacker

>>surpri+(OP)
The author decidedly has expert syndrome -- they deny both the history and rational behind memory units nomenclature. Memory measurements evolved utilizing binary organizational patterns used in computing architectures. While a proud French pedant might agree with the decimal normalization of memory units discussed, it aligns more closely to the metric system, and it may have benefits for laypeople, it fails to account for how memory is partitioned in historic and modern computing.

>>waffle+pC
What are you talking about? The article literally fully explains the rationale, as well as the history. It's not "denying" anything. Seems entirely reasonable and balanced to me.

>>crazyg+nL
Yea I don't understand the issue here. SI is pretty clear, and this post explains the other standard a little bit.

It's really not all that crazy of a situation. What bothers me is when some applications call KiB KB, because they are old or lazy.

>>nixpul+8P1
...old lazy and wrong! Capital K is for Kelvin.

>>ZoomZo+cU1
>Capital K is for Kelvin.

It should be "kelvin" here. ;)

Unit names are always lower-case[1] (watt, joule, newton, pascal, hertz), except at the start of a sentence. When referring to the scientists the names are capitalized of course, and the unit symbols are also capitalized (W, J, N, Pa, Hz).

[1] SI Brochure, Section 5.3 "Unit Names" https://www.bipm.org/documents/20126/41483022/SI-Brochure-9-...

>>schiff+AW1
Thus there's no ambiguity. kB is power of 10 and KB is clearly not kelvin bytes therefore it's power of two. Doesn't quite fit the SI worldview but I don't see that as a problem.

>>fc417f+N12
I often see it with "kB" too, so the proposed (ugly) hack doesn't really solve the problem.

I think the author had it just right. There's a lot of inertia, but the traditional way can cause confusion.