Comment 20 for bug 538165

I'm not sure I really understand why the units policy is so strange -- file sizes have always been reported on pretty much any OS I can think of as base-2 even when using SI units (wrongly).

To now go to changing to base-10 just to use the SI units correctly seems wrong -- why not simply update the MB to MiB, and etc? That way, everything, from RAM sizes, to file sizes, will use the same familiar general sizes, and the units are updated to be correct, and more importantly, educational.

So what if hard drive manufacturers use base-10 units? No OS ever has, and to change it to avoid confusion is solving the wrong problem, imo. We should fix the units and presentation, not create even more inconsistency -- I love that command line tools get an exemption in the units policy, and now CD media may too.

If we are aiming for less confusion, creating even more inconsistency makes no sense. Why not do something more simple and more logical -- pick the binary measurements that have been in use for decades (hence the cli exemption), and update the SI units to IEC units /everywhere/.

Just my two cents, even though I doubt we will see any change on the units policy, even though it has clearly not been thought through to be logical.

Also, I am disappointed to see that Mac OS X has gone to SI units for reporting hard drive sizes as well, although I suspect from their KB article that they still report file sizes using base-2 and using SI units. More inconsistency, yet the units policy actually references this wrongheaded approach.