Author Topic: rate unites should be in k not in ki  (Read 1414 times)

g2c

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 2
  • Karma: +0/-0
    • View Profile
rate unites should be in k not in ki
« on: February 02, 2012, 08:17:44 AM »
Hi,

for instance, ethernet speed is 10, 100, 1000Mb/s
sonet is 155 / 622 etc Mb/s
My isp speed is 2.5Mb/s

ki is used for storage because computers use binary logic. Nothing in data transmission  technology implies 2^n rates


Nemo

  • qBittorrent Forum
  • Administrator
  • Forum addict
  • *****
  • Posts: 1517
  • Karma: +94/-0
    • View Profile
Re: rate unites should be in k not in ki
« Reply #1 on: February 02, 2012, 09:26:25 PM »
Not needed. Current values are already good enough.
Forum Rules and Guidelines

Forum Admin.
Dutch & Turkish Translator.




loki

  • Forum addict
  • ****
  • Posts: 567
  • Karma: +16/-2
    • View Profile
Re: rate unites should be in k not in ki
« Reply #2 on: February 03, 2012, 03:17:59 AM »
It's actually more accurate labeling, when speaking of actual data to be called in KiB, MiB, GiB, etc... http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kibibyte

g2c

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 2
  • Karma: +0/-0
    • View Profile
Re: rate unites should be in k not in ki
« Reply #3 on: February 03, 2012, 08:18:30 PM »
It is not a labeling. It is the unit in which the dimension (in this case - rate) is measured, just as forces are measured in Newtons and pressure in Pascals. For a rate of, say 10000000b/s, you can use the unit M and write 10Mb/s or you can use the unit Mi and write 9.5367...Mib/s. Using the unit of ki makes sense talking about storage. As for rates, ki has nothing "natural": the rate is fixed by a crystal and this can be adjusted "naturally" to whatever value you (well the standard) decide, no one rate that i am aware about is expressed more simply in ki than in k. ...

The invention of ki, was to have a unit equally valid for not IT pros than for pros. A pro reading a "2KB" chip knows very well that it is NOT 2000 bytes chip but 2048 bytes chip whereas an non IT pro might mistakenly take it to be exactly 2000 bytes.
« Last Edit: February 03, 2012, 08:38:37 PM by g2c »