Permalink Submitted by sephiroth1234 (not verified) on Sun, 07/10/2011 - 03:39
We may say this is a metric data measurement, but speaking of data, its is computed by a number ALWAYS raised to 2. So the "1000's" there must be "1024's"...
Note: 1024 is the nearest number to 1000 which is raised to 2.
Permalink Submitted by Thicky (not verified) on Sun, 07/10/2011 - 07:24
Well, we don't want to make this more complex than it already is right? :)
Having weird numbers like 1024 will only confuse people. Besides, the difference wouldn't enough to consider when you are talking about it to the zettabyte degree.
Comments
Wrong equivalents!
We may say this is a metric data measurement, but speaking of data, its is computed by a number ALWAYS raised to 2. So the "1000's" there must be "1024's"...
Note: 1024 is the nearest number to 1000 which is raised to 2.
Well, we don't want to make
Well, we don't want to make this more complex than it already is right? :)
Having weird numbers like 1024 will only confuse people. Besides, the difference wouldn't enough to consider when you are talking about it to the zettabyte degree.
The equivalents are fine.
The equivalents are fine. 1024's would make zebibyte and not zettabyte.
More here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Zebibyte
But then...
But then it wouldn't sound as awesome.... zebibyte just doesn't have the ring that zettabyte does!
:P
zettabyte is awesome.. note
zettabyte is awesome.. note Indonesian state will never reach it.
Add new comment