I wonder what Bing would be thinking right now...

You do know ones actual size, and the other is size of allocated space - multitudes of 4096 bytes assuming you haven't changed it and it's NTFS.

@C0D4 That doesn't make the calculation right

@GiddyNaya it's not an exact conversion, there's usually wasted space you have to account for.

Here some more info on it.

http://differencebetween.net/techno...

There's this really cool thing called "Rounding", which is used to approximate values to reduce complexity in reading
147302B ≈ 144KiB

@retnikt True for Google wrong for windows who clearly shows "kb" rather than "kib"

@shoop I think you meant 1000bytes == 1kilobyte

People who claim 1 kb is a 1000 bytes also run their DE as root under Linux.

I really wish we could commit to the kibi/mebi/etc standard. It's nice how words actually mean what the are supposed to and everyone understands. 1024. No ambiguity.

Kilobyte... wait. Do you mean 2^10 or 10^3? It's gotten so bad that some hard drive manufacturers write in small print on their boxes: " 1gb = 1,000,000,000" which they wouldn't have to if everyone can just agree on the unit.

Or we can all use GiB. because there is no room for confusion. 1024, no debating. Why does this have to be so hard?!

@deadPix3l I agree except there is literally no use for multiples of 10 in regards to data. Everything should be in powers of 2.

Also, "Kibbibyte," etc. sound ridiculously silly.

@deadPix3l Nobody is using this kiwibyte nonsense. The main reason why 1024 makes sense is that memory is usually organised in powers of 2.

@Fast-Nop @Root I 100 percent agree with you. It's a silly word. But a consistent one. Not tainted with the needless confusion of kilo/mega.

Devil's advocate: it's a little against the language to use kilo to mean 1024 just in computers when it means 1000 everywhere else. (Although it's English. It's already a nightmare where many words aren't consistent so ehh)

Ideally we use kilo/mega/giga to mean 1024, but then drive manufacturers either have to cram more bits into their drives, or sell "984GB" drives which is arguably more confusing and worse. It's more truthful but that will get annoying real quick.

@Fast-Nop everyone uses it. Nobody knows they are using it.

"kb" has always been mis-represented as 1024 bytes and changing everything in every system ever to use "kib" apparently goes in the to hard basket.

So we have those that know 1024 bytes = 1kib and we operating systems and manufacturers telling us it's 1kb

@C0D4 I still hold that 1 kB is 1024 bytes. Also, Pluto is a planet. There, I said it!

Storage: 1KB=1000 bytes, because humans can't handle powers of 2 I guess?

Windows: 1KB=1024 bytes, the correct way

Linux: 1KiB=1024 bytes, the pretentious assholes

@deadPix3l Drive manufacturers don't have difficulty making large drives. They make slightly smaller drives and market them as 1TB because they can. Because marketing and cost reduction and consumers who honestly will never know or understand the difference.

@deadPix3l manufacturers use kilo = 10^3 purely because it makes their stick look larger.

Kilo already means 10^3 in SI. Although bytes and bits are not SI-units, the result of redefining kilo is just confusion. I suggest that the opinions of people living in USA are not listened to as they have obvious difficulty in adapting any kind of unit systems that make sense.

@electrineer I agree. I wish we could just switch to metric but I doubt we ever will. And of course they pick the smaller. Bigger numbers are better.... Obviously. But even if 1024 was legally required, I don't think companies would make TB drives until their competitors force them to. Because why change the product, when it's way cheaper to change the box. Capitalism is the best.

It's just some bullshit put forward by disk manufacturers and special snowflakes; disk manufacturers so they can have "bigger" numbers on the box, and special snowflakes so they can make a "contribution" to popular OSS by "fixing" kB and MB to kiB and MiB. Also linking this change to SI units is moronic - you don't have megagrams or megametres, no-one uses hectobyte or kilolitre, it's literary just kilo-{gram, metre, byte} where a prefix has different meaning.

@GiddyNaya Windows is being retarded and describing 1KiB as 1KB, but other than that, the discrepancy is due to rounding

Ya windows should have used KiB to denote KibiBytes and not KB.

1 KiB = 1024 bytes
1 KB = 1000 bytes

@zvyn but like

people who aren't pretentious?

@zvyn Yeah, I'm aware those units exists. When was the last time you used any of these units to describe something? Maybe you've used kW for some home appliance... OK, so my statement wasn't technically correct, but the point remains, for most units an average person either uses a single prefix all the time (e.g. MHz), or uses an unit without a prefix (e.g. volts). An average person talks about cm, mm, m, km, ..., but when it comes to derived units only certain fields have any use for values beyond 1 kV.

@hitko so every quantity should have unique prefixes because everyone just uses one of them anyway? Please stop.

@deadPix3l
You are wrong, prefixes were always standard.
d=deca=10^1
h=hecto=10^2
k=kilo=10^3
M=mega=10^6
G=giga=10^9
T=tera=10^12
P=peta=10^15

@Root On certain data storage devices you need some spare space to account for wear. It is still their fault that they market physical space and not usable space.

@Gregozor2121 you are correct. I never said they weren't.

I said we use them as if they refer to 2**10 instead of 10**3

It's still wrong, but what is wrong will become "right" if everyone misuses it enough (see: literally , Webster's dict)

I was only saying that the KiB and the like are not poisoned with the actual vs assumed, vs drive manufacturers, vs Microsoft issues. Everyone knows a KiB is 1024. No confusion

@hitko Normal users shouldnt complain about the prefixes anyway.
All combinations of units and prefixes are valid. They are used in science. If a normal person wont use those anyway it dosent matter. Those things arent for normal people anyway.