![]() | This template was considered for deletion on 26 June 2021. The result of the discussion was "keep". |
![]() | Computing Template‑class | ||||||
|
![]() | Computer science Template‑class | |||||||||||||
|
![]() |
|
Why are parentheses being used to distinguish between the decimal and binary sense of the units? This distinction is the most confusing part of the table. It deserves its own column to keep the two clearly separated. Lets join the Symbol and Name columns with parentheses instead. Those values are much less likely to be confused. Also, this helps to demonstrate that "Kibit" is a non-pronounceable symbol for kibibit just as "kb" is a non-pronounceable symbol for kilobit. This is an important distinction which was not apparent in the previous table. 12.135.134.146 22:52, 6 September 2006 (UTC)
Since a byte equals 8 bits, and 1 KB can equal 1024 bytes, 1 Kb therefore can equal 1024 bits. Microsoft, for example, in their operating systems counts 1024 bits as a kb, as does most networking software for windows, such as Net.Medic, and cfosspeed, both of which I use. -- Rebroad 21:31, 10 March 2006 (UTC)
According to Microsoft (pretty much an expert witness in this area), they define a kilobit as 1024 bits. See here. Therefore, I'm reverting the article, until the previous reverter quotes a definitive and reputable source that claims a kilobit is NOT 1024 bits. Thanks. -- Rebroad 21:36, 10 March 2006 (UTC)
PC magazine (another knowledgeable IT source) see here also says it is 1024 bits. -- Rebroad 21:38, 10 March 2006 (UTC)
About.com also says it can equal 1024 bits (in addition to saying it often means 1000 bits). See here. -- Rebroad 21:39, 10 March 2006 (UTC)
Also Total Telecom (an IT communications expert) says here that a kilobit is 1024 bits. -- Rebroad 21:47, 10 March 2006 (UTC)
If nothing else, I think putting both interpretations of the SI prefix names in this template fails to meet NPOV: The conventional usage of these terms varies from one field of data processing to another. In order to keep this template more generally applicable, it should simply and objectively state the official, standard definitions, which in some situations are the only ones that are in use. Then, on a case-by-case basis, entries that include this template can decide if an additional note (or template) is appropriate to describe the conventional usage in the specific field being discussed. Mditto 23:33, 11 March 2006 (UTC)
I find the template confusing. On the left it uses the symbol b for bit (as in Mb for megabit) and on the right it uses bit for the same purpose (Mibit for mebibit). Why not pick one of them and stick with it? See also WP:MOSNUM talk page Thunderbird2 13:27, 21 October 2007 (UTC)
Wikipedia_talk:Manual_of_Style_(dates_and_numbers)#Bits_-_IEEE_1541_defines_b_as_symbol_not_bit
TechControl ( talk) 15:40, 21 January 2009 (UTC)
Everybody agree that the computer industry has often used the SI prefixes to mean powers of 2. That is fundamentally wrong as they are defined without any ambiguity by the SI. Be it a widely commited error or not, it still is an error (from the viewpoint of the SI). They both are conventions. I argue that the most widely accepted, most consistent and clearest convention should win. SI wins on all counts. I think we should put something along the lines of "(deprecated, confusing)" besides the column title "Binary usage", however my "so dear friend" Shreevatsa reverted my changes both times. Is Wikipedia (its mecanisms) losing here? Compvis ( talk) 19:22, 24 April 2010 (UTC)
It's too complex for here. Please continue discussion on Wikipedia talk:Manual of Style (dates and numbers)#binary SI prefixes vs decimal SI prefixes only. − Woodstone ( talk) 06:47, 26 April 2010 (UTC)
Please see the Template talk:Quantities of bytes page for a discussion on how we should display the decimal and binary values in these tables. This discussion is initiated because of the that substantially changed the approach. — Quantling ( talk | contribs) 15:35, 6 February 2012 (UTC)
I corrected the abbreviations for the ISO/IEC 80000[1] and JEDEC memory standards such as 100B.01 and JESD21-C.
Although its predecessor, IEC 60027-2[2], assigned the abbreviation Kibit to the kibibit, with the rest being succeeded by -b instead of -bit, ISO/IEC 80000 replaced that abbreviation with just the -bit ending.
And the JEDEC memory standards don't have words behind the abbreviations; the abbreviations are effectively standalone: "All JEDEC standards avoid the use of the terms megabit, megabyte and gigabyte and refer to memory capacity as a number followed by the units. (64Mb, 256MB, 1GB.)"[3]
I wanted to include this quote as a caption in the table, but I couldn't figure out how. Could someone else please take the liberty of doing so?
NOTE: I say, specifically, that I "corrected" the abbreviations not from an assumed position of prescriptivistic arrogance, but because what I was correcting was information purporting to reflect the standards. But they didn't, and the thing about de jury standards is that if something is different than what the documentation states, it's wrong. Thus, assuming my information was correct, then what I did really was to correct them.
References:
1. World Heritage Encyclopedia. "Binary Prefix" › "Specific Units of IEC 60027-2 A.2 and ISO/IEC 80000", Reproduced by World Public Library under a Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 3.0 Unported (CC BY-SA 3.0). Accessed 2015-11-19 (UTC-5).
2. United States, National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST). "Prefixes for Binary Multiples". Accessed 2015-11-19 (UTC-5).
3. World Heritage Encyclopedia. "JEDEC Memory Standards" › "Redefinition of Some Standard SI Prefixes", Reproduced by World Public Library under a Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 3.0 Unported (CC BY-SA 3.0). Accessed 2015-11-19 (UTC-5). — Preceding unsigned comment added by SarahTehCat ( talk • contribs) 00:43, 20 November 2015 (UTC)
I have removed the JEDEC column: there is no basis for such a column. In particular, JEDEC appears to say nothing at all about "Kbit", etc. in the binary prefix sense. Without a source, we should not be synthesizing information. — Quondum 21:13, 2 July 2021 (UTC)
...factually wrong since JEDEC are simply using those units and prefixes, not defining them.It's literally in their online dictionary, unless you're suggesting dictionaries don't define things, that is precisely what JEDEC is doing. — Locke Cole • t • c 01:36, 8 July 2021 (UTC)
Accordingly, IEC should have significantly more authority on units and prefixes... and yet, they do not have much "authority" on these units in the real world. We're well over 20 years since these units were initially "created", and so far we have less than 2% of scholarly works using them, and less than 1% of sources overall using them (and close to 0% of newspapers/magazines using them). And yet they feature prominently in this table, as if they have equal exposure/usage as the units that have been around since the beginning. Memory suggests it wasn't used in other areas of computing when it was (heck, even JEDEC does that), but apparently Traditional is "misleading". I have serious misgivings about the IEC column remaining given the sheer lack of widespread adoption and use in our sources. — Locke Cole • t • c 16:16, 8 July 2021 (UTC)
It also defines 'b' (not 'bit') as the symbol for bit... why on Earth would they need to define "bit" as a symbol for itself...?
Another is to remove the Kbit column entirely.. well that doesn't fly, see the Intel source below which has used both. — Locke Cole • t • c 19:56, 10 July 2021 (UTC)
a prefix to units of semiconductor storage capacity. A " prefix" is something one affixes before something else. JEDEC is stating it is a "prefix" for "units of semiconductor storage capacities". A " bit" is one such unit. Ergo: " Kbit".
That’s how it works. — Locke Cole • t • c 21:13, 11 July 2021 (UTC)
JEDEC ... defer to IEC in their documents by stating that the binary usage of metric prefix is deprecated... this is demonstrably false. They clearly and unambiguously define kilo/mega/giga/etc. and then note that a standards body has come up with an "alternative system". They quote that document which itself states that the classic units are "deprecated", however, JEDEC does not state this and says the defined units within the JEDEC dictionary reflect "common usage". As to your attacks on me personally, it's adorable, it truly is, that you cling to this notion that your "holy unit" is somehow relevant when you make baseless claims like
[the units] are used in thousands of cutting-edge applications and computer administration tools these days. Stop embarrassing yourself with such nonsense. Apple, Microsoft and other major players in the computing industry continue to use the traditional prefixes with no sign they intend to stop. Needlessly confusing our readers to push your nonsense is the very definition of crank philosophy. — Locke Cole • t • c 16:16, 8 July 2021 (UTC)
If the Kbit column stays at all (an open question) it should be labelled 'deprecated'... surely you've mixed up the IEC column by accident, and that's OK. It's the outlier here with little to no practical real world use. — Locke Cole • t • c 19:56, 10 July 2021 (UTC)
The IEC prefixes are by far the most widely used method of disambiguation in scientific publications.. I'm lucky we're at {{ Quantities of bits}} and not {{ Quantities of bits used for disambiguation}}. Clearly as a unit of measure with scant use by anyone but the standards bodies pushing them, they have no place in an encyclopedia that documents the world as it is. — Locke Cole • t • c 19:56, 10 July 2021 (UTC)
References
So as recently as 2008, Intel (they're this small manufacturer of microchips, they're used in a few devices by companies interested in that sort of thing), had a definition in this PDF for kilobit, megabit and gigabit in a nicely laid out table (page iv in PDF, reproduced below):
Other Common Notation
# | Used after a signal name to identify an active-low signal (such as USBP0#) |
GB | Gigabyte (1,073,741,824 bytes) |
GB/sec | Gigabytes per second |
Gbit | Gigabit (1,073,741,824 bits) |
KB | Kilobyte (1024 bytes) |
Kbit | Kilobit (1024 bits) |
kbits/sec | 1000 bits per second |
MB | Megabyte (1,048,576 bytes) |
MB/sec | Megabytes per second |
Mbit | Megabit (1,048,576 bits) |
Mbit/sec | Megabits per second |
xxh | An address or data value ending with a lowercase h indicates a hexadecimal value. |
x.x V | Volts. Voltages are DC unless otherwise specified. |
* | This symbol is used to indicate third-party brands and names that are the property of their respective owners. |
But I know not everyone thinks Intel is a relevant player in the computing industry anymore, so maybe them using these terms like this doesn't hold much weight. After all, IEC, and I mean everyone has heard of IEC before (can I get a high-five?), they've standardized an alternative system of units for computing technology. Obviously we'd be fools to listen to Intel, or Apple, or Microsoft or any of those manufacturers. — Locke Cole • t • c 00:07, 9 July 2021 (UTC)
bytes | bits | |||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Site | kilobyte | kibibyte | terabyte | tebibyte | kilobit | kibibit | terabit | tebibit |
intel.com | 1,500 | 3 [1] | 2,240 | 4 | 668 | 0 | 301 | 0 |
microsoft.com | 4,370 | 135 | 8,210 | 91 | 784 | 2 | 553 | 0 |
amd.com | 75 | 0 | 252 | 0 | 3 | 0 | 6 | 0 |
apple.com | 2,620 [2] | 359 [2] | 6,180 [2] | 281 [2] | 1,130 [2] | 8 [2] | 765 [2] | 6 [2] |
netgear.com | 58 | 1 [1] | 349 | 9 [1] | 4 [1] | 0 | 4 [1] | 0 |
crucial.com | 25 | 0 | 63 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 1 | 0 |
Also worth mentioning a Google search of site:intel.com kibibyte
currently turns up three hits (one of them on community.intel.com, an end user forum), while site:intel.com kilobyte
turns up 1,500 hits. I've also added microsoft.com as a point of comparison, and included results for bits and bytes units. I'll try to expand this as I get time.
Looking at these results turned up this interesting article by Raymond Chen, a developer with Microsoft who has worked on Microsoft Windows since some of its earliest days on the shell/Windows Explorer. In the article he explains why Microsoft has not embraced the IEC prefixes. — Locke Cole • t • c 17:05, 10 July 2021 (UTC)
The previous discussion seemed to have a (slight) bias less averse to Memory, so I went ahead and changed the binary K/M/B/T column that way. That edit had been in place for a month until today, consistency with the sister templates broken again. Possibly we can reach a consensus here before another edit war is started.
I'd like to ask you which variant is more agreeable to you? Please give a clear Memory, Traditional, Either, or Neither, feel free to elaborate, but please keep your vote concise. -- Zac67 ( talk) 08:16, 19 September 2021 (UTC)
Couple of responses
Dondervogel 2 ( talk) 14:14, 19 September 2021 (UTC)
I'm not at all comfortable with 'Traditional', for the reasons given, and even less so when the other two templates use 'Memory'; the three templates should be consistent. I also agree the terms are not limited to memory, so how about 'Legacy' as the heading for the old "JEDEC" column, for all 3 templates? Dondervogel 2 ( talk) 09:46, 10 November 2021 (UTC)
References
Having seen no further comments for over a week, I implemented the change. For consistency, I will now update the 2 sister templates. Dondervogel 2 ( talk) 17:33, 20 November 2021 (UTC)
The proper description instead of legacy is deprecated. JEDEC was wrong from the beginning, accepted because everyone got tired of the issue. JEDEC is the last hope of the refuseniks of unambiguous units, because JEDEC docs do list the deprecated usage as acceptable. JEDEC does NOT set standards for units. Their documents simply state common practice in the industry, and this is clearly documented in their work products, as has been pointed out in the past. They make it clear that the binary use is DEPRECATED, but still in use. This is what deprecated means, something else is preferred in place of traditional use. Legacy has similar meaning but does not imply as strongly that a new standard is accepted. kbrose ( talk) 15:52, 23 September 2022 (UTC)
The definitions of kilo, giga, and mega based on powers of two are included only to reflect common usage. IEEE/ASTM SI 10‑1997 states "This practice frequently leads to confusion and is deprecated."source Note that they first state that their definitions
reflect common usage, and they go on to quote IEEE/ASTM SI 10-1997 which says that, NOT JEDEC. Are you and Dondervogel's positions so weak that you must LIE to try and force your way through? — Locke Cole • t • c 19:41, 23 September 2022 (UTC)
But they stated that this is DEPRECATEDWhere do they state this? — Locke Cole • t • c 19:58, 23 September 2022 (UTC)
Your continued personal attacksIt's not a personal attack if it's true.
for which you have no real argumentsI have plenty of real arguments, I note with interest that you lot have yet to reply to those because you're actually projecting here: YOU don't have any real arguments.
accepted standardsYou never mentioned your interest in stand-up comedy. I wish you well on that endeavor.
People don't change over night. Unit changes historically have taken decades or generations to evolve.It's been 23 years since they adopted this as a "standard". Wikipedia even briefly adopted it in WP:MOSNUM before walking it back because, shockingly, nobody was following along and it only confused readers. — Locke Cole • t • c 20:05, 23 September 2022 (UTC)
Thank you for restoring the timeline.And destroying the threaded conversation... I've restored it. Please stop moving my comments and replies of others against our wishes.
Thanks also for pointing out the linkI, too, am grateful for the link. It clearly shows what we've known for years: JEDEC has not deprecated these units. — Locke Cole • t • c 04:19, 26 September 2022 (UTC)
Please have someone read the linked passage out loud to you.Oh, I've read it. Repeatedly. As before, I shall try to help you all understand it again. The very document link you use is what is called a "uniform resource identifier", or what we in the industry call a " URI". These links are typically plaintext. The link you cited above (which I also cited in the diff from earlier) is this: https://www.jedec.org/standards-documents/dictionary?title=mega+(M). You'll note I've highlighted the word "dictionary" in the URI. A "dictionary", in case you didn't know, is where words are "defined". The page itself also says "Dictionary" at the top, and the page title as defined in the HTML for the page states it is a "dictionary".
and it's not their place to defineYou sure about that?
You obviously haven't registered that the ultimate authority for units and prefixes is IEC.Apparently neither has 99% of the world.
Regarding your repetitive messing with the chronological order hereThe order was fine for many replies until you decided to take it upon yourself to ignore the threading of my and other replies to restore the unthreaded "closure" by Dondervogel 2 to an inappropriate place. As the discussion is not over, it's not appropriate to have a comment that might mislead readers into thinking it is finished. Especially as I've linked to this section from WT:MOSNUM in an attempt to gather further input.
How is anyone not participating here supposed to understand the logic?I'm honestly past the point of caring whether or not you understand anything, to be honest. It's exhausting explaining, re-explaining, and then doing it all again a year later over something as fucking simple as a DICTIONARY DEFINITION in a JEDEC standard.
Yet again, this behavior shows your lack of communicative competence.Coming from someone preaching WP:AGF and bemoaning the lack of civility, I'll take that as a complement. Maybe next time get someone to read it to you out loud. — Locke Cole • t • c 05:36, 26 September 2022 (UTC)
Two editors are questioning the consensus reached in November 2021 for replacing 'JEDEC' with 'legacy'. Can we identify a new consensus in September 2022? Let's use this space to identify the options. The most promising ones I see are JEDEC (the version we started with, and remained in place between 2017 and 2020) and legacy (the heading that was stable for about 10 months before the present dispute). Are there any other options worth including in the list? Pinging Headbomb Kbrose Locke Cole Stepho-wrs Woodstone Zac67 Dondervogel 2 ( talk) 11:41, 27 September 2022 (UTC)
As stated above, JEDEC is factually wrong as they quote the deprecation of those ambiguous prefixes and have no authority for defining those things to start with.You're telling me that JEDEC (Joint Electron Device Engineering Council), the organizational standards body behind RAM specifications and storage specifications like MMC, that JEDEC
have no authority for defining those things? Do you have a source for that statement or is it just your personal opinion? — Locke Cole • t • c 18:32, 27 September 2022 (UTC)
It is your personal opinion that JEDEC defines unitsNo, it is not. It's JEDEC's opinion as well, as I have explained above, repeatedly.
while they clearly state that they don'tWonderful! Where do they say this?
Where are your sources?Same as before.
JEDEC clearly defers to those bodies that define UNITS.Where do they do that?
If you still don't get that, stop this farce. This is leading nowhere.See, this is the difference between us: I read what is written. You read what you want to see. The
farcehere is promoting a unit that is not used by 99% of our sources as if it were on equal footing with what has been the standard units since the dawn of computing... — Locke Cole • t • c 22:31, 29 September 2022 (UTC)
{{
rfc|sci|hist}}
the invocation once we're ready. —
Locke Cole •
t •
c
23:54, 27 September 2022 (UTC)I completely missed Quondum. Pinging him now, with my humble apologies for previous omission @ Quondum: Sorry! Dondervogel 2 ( talk) 10:22, 28 September 2022 (UTC)
You seem to imply you invited him to the discussion because you are confident he will support your position.Where did I imply this? I expect an answer to this Dondervogel 2. — Locke Cole • t • c 22:31, 29 September 2022 (UTC)
Hello, all. I assume this is about using terminology like “gibibits” and so on… Time out… excuse me, but my spell checker on my laptop computer just auto-corrected “gibibits” so I had to retype it to reinforce that I really meant to type that. There! Retyped: G-i-b-i-b-i-t-s.
Indeed, a consensus was reached in November 2021. Has something changed insofar as real-world usage by mainstream computer manufacturers like Dell and Apple, or in the mainstream computer press (like this PC World review or this MacWorld review), that warrants changing the status quo? Greg L ( talk) 23:27, 29 September 2022 (UTC)
OK, so we now have the following list of options
It's a long list. How do we whittle it down to a more manageable number? Dondervogel 2 ( talk) 23:53, 1 October 2022 (UTC)
Dondervogel 2 ( talk) 11:42, 2 October 2022 (UTC)
|
| |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Orders of magnitude of data |
Multiple-byte units | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Orders of magnitude of data |
I have updated the 3 templates to bring them back into consistency. Dondervogel 2 ( talk) 12:28, 2 October 2022 (UTC)
This is a multiple question RFC:
1. What should the column name for the column shown in this revision as "JEDEC" be going forward?
2. Should the above named column be positioned before the "IEC" column? Please answer yes or no.
3. Should the full list of entries be provided up to yottabyte/yottabit? Please answer yes, no, or the maximum value you would support.
Thank you for your participation. — Locke Cole • t • c 01:19, 10 October 2022 (UTC)
I added "Computing" after seeing it in use at petabyte, otherwise this matches the full list above. — Locke Cole • t • c 01:19, 10 October 2022 (UTC)
Computing would mean it is the predominant form there which isn't true (the whole world of networking doesn't use binary prefixes); JEDEC is a trade organization not normative for units/prefixes and not known to all/many readers, binary prefixes likely predate them; Metric is entirely wrong; Historical might be misleading as they're still in common use. -- Zac67 ( talk)
@ Dondervogel 2: With regard to where the units should end, wouldn't it be at least Exabyte/EB (see images)? Microsoft Windows, which according to Usage share of operating systems for desktops/laptops represents about 75% of users (for gaming it rises to 96% for Steam desktop users) uses PB and EB in the binary sense. This also addresses your concern that the units aren't used to refer to storage, clearly Microsoft and Google/Android believe the units do. As the IEC units are also unknown to the vast majority of the world, aren't used in the vast overwhelming majority of our sources, it does our readers a disservice to list them first. — Locke Cole • t • c 21:31, 10 October 2022 (UTC)
...for disambiguation. That is what IEC prefixes are for...Do you have a source for that claim? My reply also didn't mention IBM, but as you only took issue with Ubuntu, I'll start by stating the obvious: Linux is used in only a fraction of consumer-facing systems. Wikipedia presents the world as it is, not as individual editors or standards bodies would like us to present it. That it is used in a handful of places by HP or IBM, or at all by Ubuntu, is irrelevant when these same manufacturers/vendors utilize the mixed usage in public-facing areas such as HP in their online catalog and marketing. These are the things our readers see and are familiar with, and this is what our sources support. — Locke Cole • t • c 17:21, 12 October 2022 (UTC)
@ Woodstone: With the images from Windows 10 (see right/above) showing uses of PB and EB in Windows Explorer, would you support extending to those? Headbomb also indicated these units are used by Android as well, which is a large installed base as well for mobile devices (phones, tablets, etc). See also this Intel support page for storage. In so far as "Computing" goes, as I explained, petabyte refers to this definition as "Computing" but the IEC definition as "SI". For these column headers we would have "IEC" as we have now and "Computing" to cover the widespread use of the binary meaning in the larger computer (hardware and software) industry. — Locke Cole • t • c 03:51, 11 October 2022 (UTC)
Even if they were, this has little or no bearing on the templateOf course it has bearing, our articles must be well sourced, verifiable, and not present undue weight to topics. I won't discuss conduct issues here, but there are editors who are using these units in articles where neither the sources nor our MOS support it. — Locke Cole • t • c 17:22, 12 October 2022 (UTC)
I agree with Locke Cole and share the same concerns. Having this table used in any other article than Binary prefix (and perhaps some closely related articles) induces other editors—many of whom are novices to Wikipedia and don’t know about WP:COMPUNITS—to use the binary prefixes in wholly inappropriate ways; this isn't news to anyone here.
Since probably only about one milliuno of the computer industry uses the binary prefixes, it makes no sense to have these units in articles as doing so only seeds confusion. I think we need another version of this table without the binary prefixes for most ordinary articles about computers. Greg L ( talk) 23:39, 12 October 2022 (UTC)
This incredible notion of eliminating confusion by censoring the use of the official binary units is so outrageously stupid, because there always was confusion before their definition, and this was the very reason for their introduction. The industry had come to a point where they needed to be unambiguous, just like many other fields had to convert to metric units for compatibility, trade, safety. It is true today, that one can never be certain anymore which system of storage units is in use in many places. It is unfortunate, surely, but the way to get past this is not to go backward–this is definitively impossible–but to be progressive and eliminate every ambiguous use, except perhaps in the discussion of historical facts and contexts. kbrose ( talk) 01:08, 13 October 2022 (UTC)
consensus among a limited group of editors, at one place and time, cannot override community consensus on a wider scale.In short, that ship has sailed and won’t be re-prosecuted here.
@ Headbomb: Can you state a position on the 2nd and 3rd questions please? Thanks! — Locke Cole • t • c 20:44, 13 October 2022 (UTC)
@ Dondervogel 2: And yet Microsoft Windows utilizes it for hard drive storage. As do other operating systems. — Locke Cole • t • c 04:45, 15 October 2022 (UTC)
A hasty, badly formatted demo of an another layout for Multiple-byte units | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
| |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Orders of magnitude of data |
(Trying to start a new thread here but I don't know how - this'll have to do until someone comes along to fix it). @
Headbomb: The claim Deprecated and legacy are not acceptable, because these are neither deprecated nor legacy units is incorrect. The use of decimal prefixes with a binary meaning is deprecated by international standards bodies
ISO and
BIPM. For example:
Dondervogel 2 ( talk) 19:30, 18 October 2022 (UTC)
Why are you still arguing the merits of terminology like “kibibits” and advocating its adoption, Kbrose? This was settled in 2008 by a widely established consensus. Hardly anyone but some odd Sheldon Coopers who program in Linux know what that weird terminology means. My spell checker (from a computer company, no less) just flagged “gigibits” and suggested “giblets”; so much for its “adoption” by the industry in any shape, form, or fashion. It’s time for the die-hard fans to straighten up and get with the program.
Now the task at hand is to get all our computer articles in compliance with WP:COMPUNITS. Tables featuring these odd prefixes only serve to keep the dreams of a handful of hold-out wikipedians alive that by continually salting every computer-related article they can possibly find with these tables, like billboards every 16 kibifeet along a highway (4.9938 kilometers), that less experienced editors who don’t know to read MOSNUM will start *oopsy*-using the units and the grass roots swell of adoption will force the hands of Dell and Apple and the rest of the computer world, who will finally see the light and follow Wikipedia’s way. Well…
Perhaps. Maybe that will happen. But the community spoke and it’s time to cease with fervently wishing for the Pleasant Outcome Fairy to grant our wishes.
WP:COMPUNITS is clear. Mentioning the units at every turn for no other reason than to mention the units at every turn doesn’t cut it and never did. It’s time to use the table of binary prefixes only in articles directly discussing the units. The decision now is what, precisely, a table for regular computer-related articles, as WP:COMPUNITS intended, will look like. Greg L ( talk) 00:28, 19 October 2022 (UTC)
Serious editors frankly don't participate in these issues as fervently as the refuseniks, because they have more productive things to do.Maybe you should go do those things before you find yourself blocked from editing. — Locke Cole • t • c 15:31, 22 October 2022 (UTC)
My work is to reflect the reality of standards and their adoptionI wonder if your work might also include accepting that there is little, if any, significant adoption of these units even after 24 years?
The most widely used operating systems in the worldMicrosoft Windows is the most widely used desktop operating system in the world. It doesn't use those terms. Android is the most widely used mobile operating system in the world. It doesn't use those terms. Adobe Creative Cloud is the most widely used graphic design and media production software in the world. It doesn't use those terms.
Get a grasp of reality and do something useful.Yes, please do. — Locke Cole • t • c 03:36, 23 October 2022 (UTC)
The Linux kernelThe Linux kernel that is used in less than 1% of desktop operating systems? Really? That's your silver bullet? Nevermind the fact that Android, which is derived from the Linux kernel, uses a user interface that uses the traditional KB/MB/GB units and not the IEC units (thus hiding it from users, almost as if... they know their users won't comprehend gibibyte/etc). — Locke Cole • t • c 01:26, 24 October 2022 (UTC)
99.99% of the world doesn't use the termsseems to be the world as you know it = OR. In the consumer world, MS Windows is by far the most popular desktop system (75% of the desktop market [11] but only ~30% overall [12]) and we know it's completely ignoring IEC prefixes. However, in the professional world things may be very different. A clear majority of web services runs on Linux [13] which does use and acknowledge IEC prefixes. But @all, that discussion would need to take place for WP:MOSNUM, here's not the right place. Let's focus on the problem at hand which is deciding about the column header. Also, major changes to the table need a separate thread imho. Currently, those issues and all the bickering water down the focused discussion which we should seek to continue. -- Zac67 ( talk) 08:47, 23 October 2022 (UTC)
Unnecessary, the RFC is above, and is still running. This is disruptive and as Neby indicated, RFC closers are more than capable of closing this discussion at the end of the RFC without you coloring or skewing the discussion. —
Locke Cole •
t •
c
18:34, 23 October 2022 (UTC)
|
---|
If someone tried to close this RfC now they would find it hard to see the wood for the trees. The main exam question is what heading to use for the 'JEDEC' column (for want of a better name - I use the term 'JEDEC' here because it's use was stable for 3 years). A brief review of responses so far reveals support (at least acceptable) for either Customary or Customary (RAM) (5 editors), Common or Common usage (4 editors), Deprecated (2 editors), JEDEC (2 editors), Legacy (2 editors). This suggests we might make some progress with a reduced set of options such as:
Would this help?
Dondervogel 2 ( talk) 12:04, 23 October 2022 (UTC)
|
@
Historylikeyou: there is no common usage, historical or otherwise, to use kilobit to mean 1024 bits
– memory chip capacities are generally stated in "kilo/mega/gigabits" referring to powers of 1024. I don't think we need a source for that... --
Zac67 (
talk)
12:41, 30 October 2022 (UTC)
Requested closure here as the RFC was delisted some time ago and comments have mostly came to a stop. — Locke Cole • t • c 00:05, 29 November 2022 (UTC)
Editors might like to join the discussion at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Physics#Add ronna- and quetta- to units articles?. NebY ( talk) 23:22, 18 November 2022 (UTC)
The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
The question arises at Bit and byte prefixes whether the JEDEC column should include the prefix tera. JEDEC defines the prefix giga as a 'multiplier equal to 1 073 741 824 (230 or K3, where K = 1024)', and similar (binary) definitions are provided for kilo and mega. On this basis I can see the case for including KB, MB and GB in the JEDEC column, but there is no equivalent entry for tera, and therefore no justification for extending the column beyond giga IMO. What do others think? Dondervogel 2 ( talk) 01:01, 17 December 2022 (UTC)
The options I see are
Dondervogel 2 ( talk) 10:54, 18 December 2022 (UTC)
Why is this column still an obsession by certain writers here. The only reason it is labeled as it is, is because it provides the only hope for refusenics of unambigous storage units to hang on to a sliver of credibility, when every standards bureau that actually has a voice in the subject matter has deprecated the binary interpretation and stood firm on the new standards, and when new software written these days uses these prefixes accordingly and without which the software may not be distributed in certain environments. And JEDEC in fact agrees with them and refers to their definitions in clear language by pronouncing their ambiguity and deprecation. They state their intent unambiguously in listing them because of ongoing usage. They do not define them in any binding manner. Why is this simply ignored here and why is this column even there? We are listing examples of outdated usage solely because an industry interest group still explains the old usage. Why is it not sufficient to display the standard definitions and discuss deviations in each article in prose? In every other article of units and natural constants or metrics and such the standards orgs are followed rigorously. Why hot here? It's obvious that there still are WP editors who let their personal tastes cloud their mind and deny readers a modern, accurate, unambiguous presentation of these subject matters. Childish belittling the sounds or pronunciations of the units is much like teenager bullying. When the newest SI prefixes got defined this fall, WP editors were eager and quick to add them to every table there is, without regard to actual usage, and without criticism in stupid opinions about their sound or pronunciation. None of these sound any more or less stupid or amusing than giga or pico or any other one. Get rid of the column, or fill it out with a header Deprecated. kbrose ( talk) 20:15, 18 December 2022 (UTC)
![]() | This template was considered for deletion on 26 June 2021. The result of the discussion was "keep". |
![]() | Computing Template‑class | ||||||
|
![]() | Computer science Template‑class | |||||||||||||
|
![]() |
|
Why are parentheses being used to distinguish between the decimal and binary sense of the units? This distinction is the most confusing part of the table. It deserves its own column to keep the two clearly separated. Lets join the Symbol and Name columns with parentheses instead. Those values are much less likely to be confused. Also, this helps to demonstrate that "Kibit" is a non-pronounceable symbol for kibibit just as "kb" is a non-pronounceable symbol for kilobit. This is an important distinction which was not apparent in the previous table. 12.135.134.146 22:52, 6 September 2006 (UTC)
Since a byte equals 8 bits, and 1 KB can equal 1024 bytes, 1 Kb therefore can equal 1024 bits. Microsoft, for example, in their operating systems counts 1024 bits as a kb, as does most networking software for windows, such as Net.Medic, and cfosspeed, both of which I use. -- Rebroad 21:31, 10 March 2006 (UTC)
According to Microsoft (pretty much an expert witness in this area), they define a kilobit as 1024 bits. See here. Therefore, I'm reverting the article, until the previous reverter quotes a definitive and reputable source that claims a kilobit is NOT 1024 bits. Thanks. -- Rebroad 21:36, 10 March 2006 (UTC)
PC magazine (another knowledgeable IT source) see here also says it is 1024 bits. -- Rebroad 21:38, 10 March 2006 (UTC)
About.com also says it can equal 1024 bits (in addition to saying it often means 1000 bits). See here. -- Rebroad 21:39, 10 March 2006 (UTC)
Also Total Telecom (an IT communications expert) says here that a kilobit is 1024 bits. -- Rebroad 21:47, 10 March 2006 (UTC)
If nothing else, I think putting both interpretations of the SI prefix names in this template fails to meet NPOV: The conventional usage of these terms varies from one field of data processing to another. In order to keep this template more generally applicable, it should simply and objectively state the official, standard definitions, which in some situations are the only ones that are in use. Then, on a case-by-case basis, entries that include this template can decide if an additional note (or template) is appropriate to describe the conventional usage in the specific field being discussed. Mditto 23:33, 11 March 2006 (UTC)
I find the template confusing. On the left it uses the symbol b for bit (as in Mb for megabit) and on the right it uses bit for the same purpose (Mibit for mebibit). Why not pick one of them and stick with it? See also WP:MOSNUM talk page Thunderbird2 13:27, 21 October 2007 (UTC)
Wikipedia_talk:Manual_of_Style_(dates_and_numbers)#Bits_-_IEEE_1541_defines_b_as_symbol_not_bit
TechControl ( talk) 15:40, 21 January 2009 (UTC)
Everybody agree that the computer industry has often used the SI prefixes to mean powers of 2. That is fundamentally wrong as they are defined without any ambiguity by the SI. Be it a widely commited error or not, it still is an error (from the viewpoint of the SI). They both are conventions. I argue that the most widely accepted, most consistent and clearest convention should win. SI wins on all counts. I think we should put something along the lines of "(deprecated, confusing)" besides the column title "Binary usage", however my "so dear friend" Shreevatsa reverted my changes both times. Is Wikipedia (its mecanisms) losing here? Compvis ( talk) 19:22, 24 April 2010 (UTC)
It's too complex for here. Please continue discussion on Wikipedia talk:Manual of Style (dates and numbers)#binary SI prefixes vs decimal SI prefixes only. − Woodstone ( talk) 06:47, 26 April 2010 (UTC)
Please see the Template talk:Quantities of bytes page for a discussion on how we should display the decimal and binary values in these tables. This discussion is initiated because of the that substantially changed the approach. — Quantling ( talk | contribs) 15:35, 6 February 2012 (UTC)
I corrected the abbreviations for the ISO/IEC 80000[1] and JEDEC memory standards such as 100B.01 and JESD21-C.
Although its predecessor, IEC 60027-2[2], assigned the abbreviation Kibit to the kibibit, with the rest being succeeded by -b instead of -bit, ISO/IEC 80000 replaced that abbreviation with just the -bit ending.
And the JEDEC memory standards don't have words behind the abbreviations; the abbreviations are effectively standalone: "All JEDEC standards avoid the use of the terms megabit, megabyte and gigabyte and refer to memory capacity as a number followed by the units. (64Mb, 256MB, 1GB.)"[3]
I wanted to include this quote as a caption in the table, but I couldn't figure out how. Could someone else please take the liberty of doing so?
NOTE: I say, specifically, that I "corrected" the abbreviations not from an assumed position of prescriptivistic arrogance, but because what I was correcting was information purporting to reflect the standards. But they didn't, and the thing about de jury standards is that if something is different than what the documentation states, it's wrong. Thus, assuming my information was correct, then what I did really was to correct them.
References:
1. World Heritage Encyclopedia. "Binary Prefix" › "Specific Units of IEC 60027-2 A.2 and ISO/IEC 80000", Reproduced by World Public Library under a Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 3.0 Unported (CC BY-SA 3.0). Accessed 2015-11-19 (UTC-5).
2. United States, National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST). "Prefixes for Binary Multiples". Accessed 2015-11-19 (UTC-5).
3. World Heritage Encyclopedia. "JEDEC Memory Standards" › "Redefinition of Some Standard SI Prefixes", Reproduced by World Public Library under a Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 3.0 Unported (CC BY-SA 3.0). Accessed 2015-11-19 (UTC-5). — Preceding unsigned comment added by SarahTehCat ( talk • contribs) 00:43, 20 November 2015 (UTC)
I have removed the JEDEC column: there is no basis for such a column. In particular, JEDEC appears to say nothing at all about "Kbit", etc. in the binary prefix sense. Without a source, we should not be synthesizing information. — Quondum 21:13, 2 July 2021 (UTC)
...factually wrong since JEDEC are simply using those units and prefixes, not defining them.It's literally in their online dictionary, unless you're suggesting dictionaries don't define things, that is precisely what JEDEC is doing. — Locke Cole • t • c 01:36, 8 July 2021 (UTC)
Accordingly, IEC should have significantly more authority on units and prefixes... and yet, they do not have much "authority" on these units in the real world. We're well over 20 years since these units were initially "created", and so far we have less than 2% of scholarly works using them, and less than 1% of sources overall using them (and close to 0% of newspapers/magazines using them). And yet they feature prominently in this table, as if they have equal exposure/usage as the units that have been around since the beginning. Memory suggests it wasn't used in other areas of computing when it was (heck, even JEDEC does that), but apparently Traditional is "misleading". I have serious misgivings about the IEC column remaining given the sheer lack of widespread adoption and use in our sources. — Locke Cole • t • c 16:16, 8 July 2021 (UTC)
It also defines 'b' (not 'bit') as the symbol for bit... why on Earth would they need to define "bit" as a symbol for itself...?
Another is to remove the Kbit column entirely.. well that doesn't fly, see the Intel source below which has used both. — Locke Cole • t • c 19:56, 10 July 2021 (UTC)
a prefix to units of semiconductor storage capacity. A " prefix" is something one affixes before something else. JEDEC is stating it is a "prefix" for "units of semiconductor storage capacities". A " bit" is one such unit. Ergo: " Kbit".
That’s how it works. — Locke Cole • t • c 21:13, 11 July 2021 (UTC)
JEDEC ... defer to IEC in their documents by stating that the binary usage of metric prefix is deprecated... this is demonstrably false. They clearly and unambiguously define kilo/mega/giga/etc. and then note that a standards body has come up with an "alternative system". They quote that document which itself states that the classic units are "deprecated", however, JEDEC does not state this and says the defined units within the JEDEC dictionary reflect "common usage". As to your attacks on me personally, it's adorable, it truly is, that you cling to this notion that your "holy unit" is somehow relevant when you make baseless claims like
[the units] are used in thousands of cutting-edge applications and computer administration tools these days. Stop embarrassing yourself with such nonsense. Apple, Microsoft and other major players in the computing industry continue to use the traditional prefixes with no sign they intend to stop. Needlessly confusing our readers to push your nonsense is the very definition of crank philosophy. — Locke Cole • t • c 16:16, 8 July 2021 (UTC)
If the Kbit column stays at all (an open question) it should be labelled 'deprecated'... surely you've mixed up the IEC column by accident, and that's OK. It's the outlier here with little to no practical real world use. — Locke Cole • t • c 19:56, 10 July 2021 (UTC)
The IEC prefixes are by far the most widely used method of disambiguation in scientific publications.. I'm lucky we're at {{ Quantities of bits}} and not {{ Quantities of bits used for disambiguation}}. Clearly as a unit of measure with scant use by anyone but the standards bodies pushing them, they have no place in an encyclopedia that documents the world as it is. — Locke Cole • t • c 19:56, 10 July 2021 (UTC)
References
So as recently as 2008, Intel (they're this small manufacturer of microchips, they're used in a few devices by companies interested in that sort of thing), had a definition in this PDF for kilobit, megabit and gigabit in a nicely laid out table (page iv in PDF, reproduced below):
Other Common Notation
# | Used after a signal name to identify an active-low signal (such as USBP0#) |
GB | Gigabyte (1,073,741,824 bytes) |
GB/sec | Gigabytes per second |
Gbit | Gigabit (1,073,741,824 bits) |
KB | Kilobyte (1024 bytes) |
Kbit | Kilobit (1024 bits) |
kbits/sec | 1000 bits per second |
MB | Megabyte (1,048,576 bytes) |
MB/sec | Megabytes per second |
Mbit | Megabit (1,048,576 bits) |
Mbit/sec | Megabits per second |
xxh | An address or data value ending with a lowercase h indicates a hexadecimal value. |
x.x V | Volts. Voltages are DC unless otherwise specified. |
* | This symbol is used to indicate third-party brands and names that are the property of their respective owners. |
But I know not everyone thinks Intel is a relevant player in the computing industry anymore, so maybe them using these terms like this doesn't hold much weight. After all, IEC, and I mean everyone has heard of IEC before (can I get a high-five?), they've standardized an alternative system of units for computing technology. Obviously we'd be fools to listen to Intel, or Apple, or Microsoft or any of those manufacturers. — Locke Cole • t • c 00:07, 9 July 2021 (UTC)
bytes | bits | |||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Site | kilobyte | kibibyte | terabyte | tebibyte | kilobit | kibibit | terabit | tebibit |
intel.com | 1,500 | 3 [1] | 2,240 | 4 | 668 | 0 | 301 | 0 |
microsoft.com | 4,370 | 135 | 8,210 | 91 | 784 | 2 | 553 | 0 |
amd.com | 75 | 0 | 252 | 0 | 3 | 0 | 6 | 0 |
apple.com | 2,620 [2] | 359 [2] | 6,180 [2] | 281 [2] | 1,130 [2] | 8 [2] | 765 [2] | 6 [2] |
netgear.com | 58 | 1 [1] | 349 | 9 [1] | 4 [1] | 0 | 4 [1] | 0 |
crucial.com | 25 | 0 | 63 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 1 | 0 |
Also worth mentioning a Google search of site:intel.com kibibyte
currently turns up three hits (one of them on community.intel.com, an end user forum), while site:intel.com kilobyte
turns up 1,500 hits. I've also added microsoft.com as a point of comparison, and included results for bits and bytes units. I'll try to expand this as I get time.
Looking at these results turned up this interesting article by Raymond Chen, a developer with Microsoft who has worked on Microsoft Windows since some of its earliest days on the shell/Windows Explorer. In the article he explains why Microsoft has not embraced the IEC prefixes. — Locke Cole • t • c 17:05, 10 July 2021 (UTC)
The previous discussion seemed to have a (slight) bias less averse to Memory, so I went ahead and changed the binary K/M/B/T column that way. That edit had been in place for a month until today, consistency with the sister templates broken again. Possibly we can reach a consensus here before another edit war is started.
I'd like to ask you which variant is more agreeable to you? Please give a clear Memory, Traditional, Either, or Neither, feel free to elaborate, but please keep your vote concise. -- Zac67 ( talk) 08:16, 19 September 2021 (UTC)
Couple of responses
Dondervogel 2 ( talk) 14:14, 19 September 2021 (UTC)
I'm not at all comfortable with 'Traditional', for the reasons given, and even less so when the other two templates use 'Memory'; the three templates should be consistent. I also agree the terms are not limited to memory, so how about 'Legacy' as the heading for the old "JEDEC" column, for all 3 templates? Dondervogel 2 ( talk) 09:46, 10 November 2021 (UTC)
References
Having seen no further comments for over a week, I implemented the change. For consistency, I will now update the 2 sister templates. Dondervogel 2 ( talk) 17:33, 20 November 2021 (UTC)
The proper description instead of legacy is deprecated. JEDEC was wrong from the beginning, accepted because everyone got tired of the issue. JEDEC is the last hope of the refuseniks of unambiguous units, because JEDEC docs do list the deprecated usage as acceptable. JEDEC does NOT set standards for units. Their documents simply state common practice in the industry, and this is clearly documented in their work products, as has been pointed out in the past. They make it clear that the binary use is DEPRECATED, but still in use. This is what deprecated means, something else is preferred in place of traditional use. Legacy has similar meaning but does not imply as strongly that a new standard is accepted. kbrose ( talk) 15:52, 23 September 2022 (UTC)
The definitions of kilo, giga, and mega based on powers of two are included only to reflect common usage. IEEE/ASTM SI 10‑1997 states "This practice frequently leads to confusion and is deprecated."source Note that they first state that their definitions
reflect common usage, and they go on to quote IEEE/ASTM SI 10-1997 which says that, NOT JEDEC. Are you and Dondervogel's positions so weak that you must LIE to try and force your way through? — Locke Cole • t • c 19:41, 23 September 2022 (UTC)
But they stated that this is DEPRECATEDWhere do they state this? — Locke Cole • t • c 19:58, 23 September 2022 (UTC)
Your continued personal attacksIt's not a personal attack if it's true.
for which you have no real argumentsI have plenty of real arguments, I note with interest that you lot have yet to reply to those because you're actually projecting here: YOU don't have any real arguments.
accepted standardsYou never mentioned your interest in stand-up comedy. I wish you well on that endeavor.
People don't change over night. Unit changes historically have taken decades or generations to evolve.It's been 23 years since they adopted this as a "standard". Wikipedia even briefly adopted it in WP:MOSNUM before walking it back because, shockingly, nobody was following along and it only confused readers. — Locke Cole • t • c 20:05, 23 September 2022 (UTC)
Thank you for restoring the timeline.And destroying the threaded conversation... I've restored it. Please stop moving my comments and replies of others against our wishes.
Thanks also for pointing out the linkI, too, am grateful for the link. It clearly shows what we've known for years: JEDEC has not deprecated these units. — Locke Cole • t • c 04:19, 26 September 2022 (UTC)
Please have someone read the linked passage out loud to you.Oh, I've read it. Repeatedly. As before, I shall try to help you all understand it again. The very document link you use is what is called a "uniform resource identifier", or what we in the industry call a " URI". These links are typically plaintext. The link you cited above (which I also cited in the diff from earlier) is this: https://www.jedec.org/standards-documents/dictionary?title=mega+(M). You'll note I've highlighted the word "dictionary" in the URI. A "dictionary", in case you didn't know, is where words are "defined". The page itself also says "Dictionary" at the top, and the page title as defined in the HTML for the page states it is a "dictionary".
and it's not their place to defineYou sure about that?
You obviously haven't registered that the ultimate authority for units and prefixes is IEC.Apparently neither has 99% of the world.
Regarding your repetitive messing with the chronological order hereThe order was fine for many replies until you decided to take it upon yourself to ignore the threading of my and other replies to restore the unthreaded "closure" by Dondervogel 2 to an inappropriate place. As the discussion is not over, it's not appropriate to have a comment that might mislead readers into thinking it is finished. Especially as I've linked to this section from WT:MOSNUM in an attempt to gather further input.
How is anyone not participating here supposed to understand the logic?I'm honestly past the point of caring whether or not you understand anything, to be honest. It's exhausting explaining, re-explaining, and then doing it all again a year later over something as fucking simple as a DICTIONARY DEFINITION in a JEDEC standard.
Yet again, this behavior shows your lack of communicative competence.Coming from someone preaching WP:AGF and bemoaning the lack of civility, I'll take that as a complement. Maybe next time get someone to read it to you out loud. — Locke Cole • t • c 05:36, 26 September 2022 (UTC)
Two editors are questioning the consensus reached in November 2021 for replacing 'JEDEC' with 'legacy'. Can we identify a new consensus in September 2022? Let's use this space to identify the options. The most promising ones I see are JEDEC (the version we started with, and remained in place between 2017 and 2020) and legacy (the heading that was stable for about 10 months before the present dispute). Are there any other options worth including in the list? Pinging Headbomb Kbrose Locke Cole Stepho-wrs Woodstone Zac67 Dondervogel 2 ( talk) 11:41, 27 September 2022 (UTC)
As stated above, JEDEC is factually wrong as they quote the deprecation of those ambiguous prefixes and have no authority for defining those things to start with.You're telling me that JEDEC (Joint Electron Device Engineering Council), the organizational standards body behind RAM specifications and storage specifications like MMC, that JEDEC
have no authority for defining those things? Do you have a source for that statement or is it just your personal opinion? — Locke Cole • t • c 18:32, 27 September 2022 (UTC)
It is your personal opinion that JEDEC defines unitsNo, it is not. It's JEDEC's opinion as well, as I have explained above, repeatedly.
while they clearly state that they don'tWonderful! Where do they say this?
Where are your sources?Same as before.
JEDEC clearly defers to those bodies that define UNITS.Where do they do that?
If you still don't get that, stop this farce. This is leading nowhere.See, this is the difference between us: I read what is written. You read what you want to see. The
farcehere is promoting a unit that is not used by 99% of our sources as if it were on equal footing with what has been the standard units since the dawn of computing... — Locke Cole • t • c 22:31, 29 September 2022 (UTC)
{{
rfc|sci|hist}}
the invocation once we're ready. —
Locke Cole •
t •
c
23:54, 27 September 2022 (UTC)I completely missed Quondum. Pinging him now, with my humble apologies for previous omission @ Quondum: Sorry! Dondervogel 2 ( talk) 10:22, 28 September 2022 (UTC)
You seem to imply you invited him to the discussion because you are confident he will support your position.Where did I imply this? I expect an answer to this Dondervogel 2. — Locke Cole • t • c 22:31, 29 September 2022 (UTC)
Hello, all. I assume this is about using terminology like “gibibits” and so on… Time out… excuse me, but my spell checker on my laptop computer just auto-corrected “gibibits” so I had to retype it to reinforce that I really meant to type that. There! Retyped: G-i-b-i-b-i-t-s.
Indeed, a consensus was reached in November 2021. Has something changed insofar as real-world usage by mainstream computer manufacturers like Dell and Apple, or in the mainstream computer press (like this PC World review or this MacWorld review), that warrants changing the status quo? Greg L ( talk) 23:27, 29 September 2022 (UTC)
OK, so we now have the following list of options
It's a long list. How do we whittle it down to a more manageable number? Dondervogel 2 ( talk) 23:53, 1 October 2022 (UTC)
Dondervogel 2 ( talk) 11:42, 2 October 2022 (UTC)
|
| |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Orders of magnitude of data |
Multiple-byte units | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Orders of magnitude of data |
I have updated the 3 templates to bring them back into consistency. Dondervogel 2 ( talk) 12:28, 2 October 2022 (UTC)
This is a multiple question RFC:
1. What should the column name for the column shown in this revision as "JEDEC" be going forward?
2. Should the above named column be positioned before the "IEC" column? Please answer yes or no.
3. Should the full list of entries be provided up to yottabyte/yottabit? Please answer yes, no, or the maximum value you would support.
Thank you for your participation. — Locke Cole • t • c 01:19, 10 October 2022 (UTC)
I added "Computing" after seeing it in use at petabyte, otherwise this matches the full list above. — Locke Cole • t • c 01:19, 10 October 2022 (UTC)
Computing would mean it is the predominant form there which isn't true (the whole world of networking doesn't use binary prefixes); JEDEC is a trade organization not normative for units/prefixes and not known to all/many readers, binary prefixes likely predate them; Metric is entirely wrong; Historical might be misleading as they're still in common use. -- Zac67 ( talk)
@ Dondervogel 2: With regard to where the units should end, wouldn't it be at least Exabyte/EB (see images)? Microsoft Windows, which according to Usage share of operating systems for desktops/laptops represents about 75% of users (for gaming it rises to 96% for Steam desktop users) uses PB and EB in the binary sense. This also addresses your concern that the units aren't used to refer to storage, clearly Microsoft and Google/Android believe the units do. As the IEC units are also unknown to the vast majority of the world, aren't used in the vast overwhelming majority of our sources, it does our readers a disservice to list them first. — Locke Cole • t • c 21:31, 10 October 2022 (UTC)
...for disambiguation. That is what IEC prefixes are for...Do you have a source for that claim? My reply also didn't mention IBM, but as you only took issue with Ubuntu, I'll start by stating the obvious: Linux is used in only a fraction of consumer-facing systems. Wikipedia presents the world as it is, not as individual editors or standards bodies would like us to present it. That it is used in a handful of places by HP or IBM, or at all by Ubuntu, is irrelevant when these same manufacturers/vendors utilize the mixed usage in public-facing areas such as HP in their online catalog and marketing. These are the things our readers see and are familiar with, and this is what our sources support. — Locke Cole • t • c 17:21, 12 October 2022 (UTC)
@ Woodstone: With the images from Windows 10 (see right/above) showing uses of PB and EB in Windows Explorer, would you support extending to those? Headbomb also indicated these units are used by Android as well, which is a large installed base as well for mobile devices (phones, tablets, etc). See also this Intel support page for storage. In so far as "Computing" goes, as I explained, petabyte refers to this definition as "Computing" but the IEC definition as "SI". For these column headers we would have "IEC" as we have now and "Computing" to cover the widespread use of the binary meaning in the larger computer (hardware and software) industry. — Locke Cole • t • c 03:51, 11 October 2022 (UTC)
Even if they were, this has little or no bearing on the templateOf course it has bearing, our articles must be well sourced, verifiable, and not present undue weight to topics. I won't discuss conduct issues here, but there are editors who are using these units in articles where neither the sources nor our MOS support it. — Locke Cole • t • c 17:22, 12 October 2022 (UTC)
I agree with Locke Cole and share the same concerns. Having this table used in any other article than Binary prefix (and perhaps some closely related articles) induces other editors—many of whom are novices to Wikipedia and don’t know about WP:COMPUNITS—to use the binary prefixes in wholly inappropriate ways; this isn't news to anyone here.
Since probably only about one milliuno of the computer industry uses the binary prefixes, it makes no sense to have these units in articles as doing so only seeds confusion. I think we need another version of this table without the binary prefixes for most ordinary articles about computers. Greg L ( talk) 23:39, 12 October 2022 (UTC)
This incredible notion of eliminating confusion by censoring the use of the official binary units is so outrageously stupid, because there always was confusion before their definition, and this was the very reason for their introduction. The industry had come to a point where they needed to be unambiguous, just like many other fields had to convert to metric units for compatibility, trade, safety. It is true today, that one can never be certain anymore which system of storage units is in use in many places. It is unfortunate, surely, but the way to get past this is not to go backward–this is definitively impossible–but to be progressive and eliminate every ambiguous use, except perhaps in the discussion of historical facts and contexts. kbrose ( talk) 01:08, 13 October 2022 (UTC)
consensus among a limited group of editors, at one place and time, cannot override community consensus on a wider scale.In short, that ship has sailed and won’t be re-prosecuted here.
@ Headbomb: Can you state a position on the 2nd and 3rd questions please? Thanks! — Locke Cole • t • c 20:44, 13 October 2022 (UTC)
@ Dondervogel 2: And yet Microsoft Windows utilizes it for hard drive storage. As do other operating systems. — Locke Cole • t • c 04:45, 15 October 2022 (UTC)
A hasty, badly formatted demo of an another layout for Multiple-byte units | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
| |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Orders of magnitude of data |
(Trying to start a new thread here but I don't know how - this'll have to do until someone comes along to fix it). @
Headbomb: The claim Deprecated and legacy are not acceptable, because these are neither deprecated nor legacy units is incorrect. The use of decimal prefixes with a binary meaning is deprecated by international standards bodies
ISO and
BIPM. For example:
Dondervogel 2 ( talk) 19:30, 18 October 2022 (UTC)
Why are you still arguing the merits of terminology like “kibibits” and advocating its adoption, Kbrose? This was settled in 2008 by a widely established consensus. Hardly anyone but some odd Sheldon Coopers who program in Linux know what that weird terminology means. My spell checker (from a computer company, no less) just flagged “gigibits” and suggested “giblets”; so much for its “adoption” by the industry in any shape, form, or fashion. It’s time for the die-hard fans to straighten up and get with the program.
Now the task at hand is to get all our computer articles in compliance with WP:COMPUNITS. Tables featuring these odd prefixes only serve to keep the dreams of a handful of hold-out wikipedians alive that by continually salting every computer-related article they can possibly find with these tables, like billboards every 16 kibifeet along a highway (4.9938 kilometers), that less experienced editors who don’t know to read MOSNUM will start *oopsy*-using the units and the grass roots swell of adoption will force the hands of Dell and Apple and the rest of the computer world, who will finally see the light and follow Wikipedia’s way. Well…
Perhaps. Maybe that will happen. But the community spoke and it’s time to cease with fervently wishing for the Pleasant Outcome Fairy to grant our wishes.
WP:COMPUNITS is clear. Mentioning the units at every turn for no other reason than to mention the units at every turn doesn’t cut it and never did. It’s time to use the table of binary prefixes only in articles directly discussing the units. The decision now is what, precisely, a table for regular computer-related articles, as WP:COMPUNITS intended, will look like. Greg L ( talk) 00:28, 19 October 2022 (UTC)
Serious editors frankly don't participate in these issues as fervently as the refuseniks, because they have more productive things to do.Maybe you should go do those things before you find yourself blocked from editing. — Locke Cole • t • c 15:31, 22 October 2022 (UTC)
My work is to reflect the reality of standards and their adoptionI wonder if your work might also include accepting that there is little, if any, significant adoption of these units even after 24 years?
The most widely used operating systems in the worldMicrosoft Windows is the most widely used desktop operating system in the world. It doesn't use those terms. Android is the most widely used mobile operating system in the world. It doesn't use those terms. Adobe Creative Cloud is the most widely used graphic design and media production software in the world. It doesn't use those terms.
Get a grasp of reality and do something useful.Yes, please do. — Locke Cole • t • c 03:36, 23 October 2022 (UTC)
The Linux kernelThe Linux kernel that is used in less than 1% of desktop operating systems? Really? That's your silver bullet? Nevermind the fact that Android, which is derived from the Linux kernel, uses a user interface that uses the traditional KB/MB/GB units and not the IEC units (thus hiding it from users, almost as if... they know their users won't comprehend gibibyte/etc). — Locke Cole • t • c 01:26, 24 October 2022 (UTC)
99.99% of the world doesn't use the termsseems to be the world as you know it = OR. In the consumer world, MS Windows is by far the most popular desktop system (75% of the desktop market [11] but only ~30% overall [12]) and we know it's completely ignoring IEC prefixes. However, in the professional world things may be very different. A clear majority of web services runs on Linux [13] which does use and acknowledge IEC prefixes. But @all, that discussion would need to take place for WP:MOSNUM, here's not the right place. Let's focus on the problem at hand which is deciding about the column header. Also, major changes to the table need a separate thread imho. Currently, those issues and all the bickering water down the focused discussion which we should seek to continue. -- Zac67 ( talk) 08:47, 23 October 2022 (UTC)
Unnecessary, the RFC is above, and is still running. This is disruptive and as Neby indicated, RFC closers are more than capable of closing this discussion at the end of the RFC without you coloring or skewing the discussion. —
Locke Cole •
t •
c
18:34, 23 October 2022 (UTC)
|
---|
If someone tried to close this RfC now they would find it hard to see the wood for the trees. The main exam question is what heading to use for the 'JEDEC' column (for want of a better name - I use the term 'JEDEC' here because it's use was stable for 3 years). A brief review of responses so far reveals support (at least acceptable) for either Customary or Customary (RAM) (5 editors), Common or Common usage (4 editors), Deprecated (2 editors), JEDEC (2 editors), Legacy (2 editors). This suggests we might make some progress with a reduced set of options such as:
Would this help?
Dondervogel 2 ( talk) 12:04, 23 October 2022 (UTC)
|
@
Historylikeyou: there is no common usage, historical or otherwise, to use kilobit to mean 1024 bits
– memory chip capacities are generally stated in "kilo/mega/gigabits" referring to powers of 1024. I don't think we need a source for that... --
Zac67 (
talk)
12:41, 30 October 2022 (UTC)
Requested closure here as the RFC was delisted some time ago and comments have mostly came to a stop. — Locke Cole • t • c 00:05, 29 November 2022 (UTC)
Editors might like to join the discussion at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Physics#Add ronna- and quetta- to units articles?. NebY ( talk) 23:22, 18 November 2022 (UTC)
The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
The question arises at Bit and byte prefixes whether the JEDEC column should include the prefix tera. JEDEC defines the prefix giga as a 'multiplier equal to 1 073 741 824 (230 or K3, where K = 1024)', and similar (binary) definitions are provided for kilo and mega. On this basis I can see the case for including KB, MB and GB in the JEDEC column, but there is no equivalent entry for tera, and therefore no justification for extending the column beyond giga IMO. What do others think? Dondervogel 2 ( talk) 01:01, 17 December 2022 (UTC)
The options I see are
Dondervogel 2 ( talk) 10:54, 18 December 2022 (UTC)
Why is this column still an obsession by certain writers here. The only reason it is labeled as it is, is because it provides the only hope for refusenics of unambigous storage units to hang on to a sliver of credibility, when every standards bureau that actually has a voice in the subject matter has deprecated the binary interpretation and stood firm on the new standards, and when new software written these days uses these prefixes accordingly and without which the software may not be distributed in certain environments. And JEDEC in fact agrees with them and refers to their definitions in clear language by pronouncing their ambiguity and deprecation. They state their intent unambiguously in listing them because of ongoing usage. They do not define them in any binding manner. Why is this simply ignored here and why is this column even there? We are listing examples of outdated usage solely because an industry interest group still explains the old usage. Why is it not sufficient to display the standard definitions and discuss deviations in each article in prose? In every other article of units and natural constants or metrics and such the standards orgs are followed rigorously. Why hot here? It's obvious that there still are WP editors who let their personal tastes cloud their mind and deny readers a modern, accurate, unambiguous presentation of these subject matters. Childish belittling the sounds or pronunciations of the units is much like teenager bullying. When the newest SI prefixes got defined this fall, WP editors were eager and quick to add them to every table there is, without regard to actual usage, and without criticism in stupid opinions about their sound or pronunciation. None of these sound any more or less stupid or amusing than giga or pico or any other one. Get rid of the column, or fill it out with a header Deprecated. kbrose ( talk) 20:15, 18 December 2022 (UTC)