logo Sign In

Harmy's STAR WARS Despecialized Edition HD - V2.7 - MKV (Released) — Page 614

Author
Time

Only in salesman’s GB.

"Right now the coffees are doing their final work." (Airi, Masked Rider Den-o episode 1)

Author
Time

It is all about representation of size/space. Like how people complain that a 4TB drive will show up as 3-something TB when formatted. In those cases you’re not actually robbed of any space, just that the space was misrepresented by those marketing it (base 2 [computer ones and zeros] vs base 10 [people counting on their ten fingers]). To your computer a MegaByte is not 1,000 KiloBytes, but 1,024 KiloBytes (1GB is 1,024MB, 1TB is 1,024GB etc.), to a marketing firm, they pretend the transition between KB, MB, GB, TB, etc. happens at 1,000 increments rather than 1,024. Your OS has chosen to cater toward such advertised sizes, so as to make you think they’ve given you more when they really haven’t, and to appease people who are incapable of understanding why things don’t show up as their advertised sizes.

In, short, a DVD-DL advertises a base 10 size of 8.5GB, and that’s about how it will show up on your Mac. It isn’t exactly the best way of doing things, but that’s what’s going on.

(Also, I’ll clarify, 1,024 isn’t some weird, random number, it is a progression from: 2, 4, 8, 16, 32, 64, 128, 256, 512, 1,024. That’s why you see RAM and other types of memory/storage all the time with numbers like these, but the bigger things get, the more tempting it gets to claim something is bigger than it really is by rounding up with creative math, than to actually have to supply that extra storage.)

Author
Time

yoda-sama said:

to a marketing firm, they pretend the transition between KB, MB, GB, TB, etc. happens at 1,000 increments rather than 1,024

I don’t mean to pick on yoda-sama in particular, but I do want to point something out. The prefixes Mega, Giga, etc, are ambiguous when referring to memory or storage capacities. These prefixes have meant increments of 1,000 or 1,000,000 for a very long time, and some electronics makers sort of co-opted the prefixes to mean 1,024 and 1,048,576. Today JEDEC uses the term Gigabyte to mean 1,000,000 bytes, while the IEC uses the same term to mean 1,048,576. So no matter which way you use the term, you are correct and a major international engineering consortium will back you up on your claim.

Which means that the term is infuriatingly meaningless when applied to memory or storage capacities, but neither usage is wrong. If you want to be unambiguous, you really have no option but to use different prefixes specifically designed for binary values–Mebi, Gibi, etc, which absolutely positively mean 1,024 and 1,048,576 and can mean nothing else. This is why you will sometimes see “MiB” and “GiB”. Those aren’t alternate abbreviations for MB and GB–they’re a completely different, and better, unit to be using for such things.

Project Threepio (Star Wars OOT subtitles)

Author
Time

Catbus, you are my hero, that was very well said.

Author
Time

Well, I was trying to keep it somewhat simple as he was obviously still a bit confused. I do agree with all you’ve said, though I figured bringing in Mebi, etc. would be extreme overkill for the point I was trying to get across… Still, well said.

Author
Time

We in the computer world got along just fine with mega before marketing idiots screwed things up. Mebi can suck it.

Author
Time

I call them “real units” or “binary units” and “salesman’s units”.

"Right now the coffees are doing their final work." (Airi, Masked Rider Den-o episode 1)

Author
Time

As a physics student I prefer the alternate prefixes: Kibi, Mebi, Gibi, etc. since they differentiate themselves from the clearly defined SI unit prefixes. This confusion would not have happened if nobody had ever used those prefixes to describe base 2 multiples.

Author
Time

It’s a computer. It should always involve base 2 multiples. That’s how computers work. And that’s why until a certain point in time when marketing guys stuck their noses where they didn’t belong, all we had were base 2 multiples. All storage devices were specified in base 2. Why don’t you see anyone trying to say a byte should be 10 bits instead of 8? Who the hell wants to count in eights? The fact remains that people in the computer world, you know, the ones who designed/built/programmed them, all used the prefixes with base 2 multiples until non-computer people decided sometime in the last 1990s that they wanted to use base 10 instead, for no other reason than the make their storage devices seem bigger than they were. If you buy 16 GB of memory today it is a base 2 multiple, not base 10. Why is that? Oh, that’s right. Because it’s a freakin’ computer. 😄

Author
Time

Well, in the early days there did exist computers that used 6, 7, 9 bit bytes until the 8-bit byte, 16-bit word, 32-bit double word became the norm (though I think the size of word and double word still vary).

"Right now the coffees are doing their final work." (Airi, Masked Rider Den-o episode 1)

Author
Time

Molly said:

Well, in the early days there did exist computers that used 6, 7, 9 bit bytes until the 8-bit byte, 16-bit word, 32-bit double word became the norm (though I think the size of word and double word still vary).

I trust Molly on this, seeing how she’s a computer and all now.

Star Wars Revisited Wordpress

Star Wars Visual Comparisons WordPress

Author
Time

_Shorty said:

It’s a computer. It should always involve base 2 multiples. That’s how computers work. And that’s why until a certain point in time when marketing guys stuck their noses where they didn’t belong, all we had were base 2 multiples. All storage devices were specified in base 2. Why don’t you see anyone trying to say a byte should be 10 bits instead of 8? Who the hell wants to count in eights? The fact remains that people in the computer world, you know, the ones who designed/built/programmed them, all used the prefixes with base 2 multiples until non-computer people decided sometime in the last 1990s that they wanted to use base 10 instead, for no other reason than the make their storage devices seem bigger than they were. If you buy 16 GB of memory today it is a base 2 multiple, not base 10. Why is that? Oh, that’s right. Because it’s a freakin’ computer. 😄

I’m not saying computer units should not use base 2 multiples. I’m saying they should never have used SI prefixes to describe them since to just about anyone, not just marketing people, a “kilo” anything is 1000 not 1024.

Author
Time

slumberdore said:

_Shorty said:

It’s a computer. It should always involve base 2 multiples. That’s how computers work. And that’s why until a certain point in time when marketing guys stuck their noses where they didn’t belong, all we had were base 2 multiples. All storage devices were specified in base 2. Why don’t you see anyone trying to say a byte should be 10 bits instead of 8? Who the hell wants to count in eights? The fact remains that people in the computer world, you know, the ones who designed/built/programmed them, all used the prefixes with base 2 multiples until non-computer people decided sometime in the last 1990s that they wanted to use base 10 instead, for no other reason than the make their storage devices seem bigger than they were. If you buy 16 GB of memory today it is a base 2 multiple, not base 10. Why is that? Oh, that’s right. Because it’s a freakin’ computer. 😄

I’m not saying computer units should not use base 2 multiples. I’m saying they should never have used SI prefixes to describe them since to just about anyone, not just marketing people, a “kilo” anything is 1000 not 1024.

Fair enough. Though, this probably started here in 'Merica, and we don’t care what other places do with their "kilo"s or other “metrick” thingys, we say it is 1024, so it is 1024, unless we feel it is 1000.

Author
Time

Damn it, nerds. I follow this thread for (a) debate/discussion regarding Harmy’s despecializing efforts and (2) ETA requests motivated by the upcoming birthday of someone’s dad/cousin/stepsister’s uncle’s half-brother.

Author
Time

My plumber’s brother’s birthday is coming up soon, any ETA on when the next version is coming up?

Author
Time

And just like that, we’re back on track!

Author
Time
 (Edited)

matt said:

Damn it, nerds. I follow this thread for (a) debate/discussion regarding Harmy’s despecializing efforts and (2) ETA requests motivated by the upcoming birthday of someone’s dad/cousin/stepsister’s uncle’s half-brother.

And I hope you expected us to notice your varying listing standards in the middle of our standards discussion… Also, plumbers’s brothers’ birthdays matter.

Edit: Did you choose your user name on purpose such that whenever you’re quoted your name ends up italicized?

Author
Time

slumberdore said:
I’m not saying computer units should not use base 2 multiples. I’m saying they should never have used SI prefixes to describe them since to just about anyone, not just marketing people, a “kilo” anything is 1000 not 1024.

But it always meant 1024 to us computer people when talking about computers. That’s the most important part. We’re talking about computers. Not negotiating a coke deal with Scarface.

Author
Time

_Shorty said:

slumberdore said:
I’m not saying computer units should not use base 2 multiples. I’m saying they should never have used SI prefixes to describe them since to just about anyone, not just marketing people, a “kilo” anything is 1000 not 1024.

But it always meant 1024 to us computer people when talking about computers. That’s the most important part. We’re talking about computers. Not negotiating a coke deal with Scarface.

Also fair, it is representing computer-related storage size… It probably should always be in computer terms…

Author
Time

As they’re saying, though… Star Wars! 😄

Author
Time

_Shorty said:

But it always meant 1024 to us computer people when talking about computers. That’s the most important part. We’re talking about computers. Not negotiating a coke deal with Scarface.

It’s not even consistent within computing. A 1 Megahertz CPU has a clock rate of 1,000,000 cycles per second not 1,048,576.

Author
Time

yoda-sama said:

matt said:

Damn it, nerds. I follow this thread for (a) debate/discussion regarding Harmy’s despecializing efforts and (2) ETA requests motivated by the upcoming birthday of someone’s dad/cousin/stepsister’s uncle’s half-brother.

And I hope you expected us to notice your varying listing standards in the middle of our standards discussion… Also, plumbers’s brothers’ birthdays matter.

Edit: Did you choose your user name on purpose such that whenever you’re quoted your name ends up italicized?

I might never have noticed that if you hadn’t pointed it out. Now I can imagine a hard eye-roll to go along with my name whenever I’m quoted. “Uuugh… so matt said…”

Author
Time

slumberdore said:
It’s not even consistent within computing. A 1 Megahertz CPU has a clock rate of 1,000,000 cycles per second not 1,048,576.

You’ll note “byte” and “hertz” are different words that mean different things, too.

Author
Time

_Shorty said:

slumberdore said:
It’s not even consistent within computing. A 1 Megahertz CPU has a clock rate of 1,000,000 cycles per second not 1,048,576.

You’ll note “byte” and “hertz” are different words that mean different things, too.

That’s fair, clockspeed can hardly be considered as base-anything. Anyway, we should probably bring this bit of off topic to an end soon. To the guy running the Mac and wanting to burn the AVCHD ISO file to a DVD-DL, yes, there is a reason the file size looks bigger than it should, it has to do with how your OS is representing the file size, not a problem with the file itself, it should be fine, but let us know if you have any actual problems when you do burn it.