Not really. The average person sees 8TB and assumes it means 8000GB. And… well… now it does.
Only a very small amount of people (tech nerds) could think it actually means 8192GB, and that each of those GB was actually 1024MB, and so on, and the people who know that also probably won’t be fooled by the misleading thing you say is happening.
Personally I’m fine with kilo/mega/giga/tera meaning kilo/mega/giga/tera, as opposed to kilo/mega/giga/tera plus some extra. Nobody is stopping you from measuring things in GiB and getting the numbers you desire.
If a HDD is a 1 TiB, it should be marketed as such. If it is 1TB, it should be marketed as such.
If you buy a 1TB HDD and it appears as 931GB in Windows, then that is expected behaviour, as Microsoft has chosen to incorrectly label GiB as GB. Take it to them. They’re the multi-trillion dollar company to be angry at.
If they instead showed a GB number (rather than showing the GiB number but labelling it as GB) it would show the 1000GB as expected.
I know you’re really going for a “you’re a corporate bootlicker in the pockets of WD and Seagate”, but it’s really not sticking. I think you’re just going out looking for an argument.
Not really. The average person sees 8TB and assumes it means 8000GB. And… well… now it does.
Only a very small amount of people (tech nerds) could think it actually means 8192GB, and that each of those GB was actually 1024MB, and so on, and the people who know that also probably won’t be fooled by the misleading thing you say is happening.
Personally I’m fine with kilo/mega/giga/tera meaning kilo/mega/giga/tera, as opposed to kilo/mega/giga/tera plus some extra. Nobody is stopping you from measuring things in GiB and getting the numbers you desire.
and how many people see a 1 tb hard drive and see that it only gives them 909GB and say “yeah, that’s cool”?
If a HDD is a 1 TiB, it should be marketed as such. If it is 1TB, it should be marketed as such.
If you buy a 1TB HDD and it appears as 931GB in Windows, then that is expected behaviour, as Microsoft has chosen to incorrectly label GiB as GB. Take it to them. They’re the multi-trillion dollar company to be angry at.
If they instead showed a GB number (rather than showing the GiB number but labelling it as GB) it would show the 1000GB as expected.
I know you’re really going for a “you’re a corporate bootlicker in the pockets of WD and Seagate”, but it’s really not sticking. I think you’re just going out looking for an argument.