Ten Thousand Kilometers

[albion]

10 Megametre is technically correct but its lack of use no doubt makes 10,000 kiometres more correct.

I'll have done about 5,000 miles by the end of this year and do hope to be fit enough for a best ever 10,000 miles next.

 

[Rob3rt]

You were right about kilobytes being 1024 bytes, but a megabyte is 1000 kilobytes.

Not so.

1000 does not result from 2 to the power of any integer.

Do a quick Google search.

 

[Jezston]

Alternatively, ask Wolfram.

http://www.wolframalpha.com/input/?i=ten+thousand+kilobytes+in+megabytes

Input interpretation:​

​

Result:​

​

​

​

 

[tyred]

Wow! I've done over 11,000km this year!! I think I'll use km next year, it looks more impressive!!

I've cycled 266,112,000 inches this year

 

[martint235]

I've cycled 266,112,000 inches this year

No one like a smart a$$e

 

[Rob3rt]

Alternatively, ask Wolfram.

http://www.wolframalpha.com/input/?i=ten thousand kilobytes in megabytes

It is perhaps a bit futile to push the point but, that is an approximation, it is not accurate!

Try putting 1024 bytes into Wolfram and it gives you 1.024 kB!

It is quite clearly just applying a power of 10 unit conversion (power of 10 conversion does not apply to binary figures, power of 2 is the convention).

 

[martint235]

This "How many bytes in a ......" question has been running since the dawn of computing. In the 80's I thought it had been generally accepted that 1,024 bytes made a K and 1000 K made an M. However, unless you use 1000 bytes to a K, you can't compare it to metres, kilometres etc.

Are we still standarding a byte at 8 bits or has that now changed? And is it still two bytes to a word?

 

[Dan_h]

This "How many bytes in a ......" question has been running since the dawn of computing. In the 80's I thought it had been generally accepted that 1,024 bytes made a K and 1000 K made an M. However, unless you use 1000 bytes to a K, you can't compare it to metres, kilometres etc.

Are we still standarding a byte at 8 bits or has that now changed? And is it still two bytes to a word?

I depends how big a bit is and what kind of cake we are talking about as to how many bits I can fit in a byte, also if it tastes good then I may take more than 2 bytes between each word... we ARE talking about cake, right???

 

[marinyork]

Jezston, virtually nobody uses the SI definition. But it's down to conventions of what people use. Very few people would say 10Mm either (megametre) and would instead say 1x10^7m instead.

 

[albion]

In the 80's I thought it had been generally accepted that 1,024 bytes made a K and 1000 K made an M.

Not to me it wasn't.
And 1MB of Ram is certainly not 1000K.

Certain hard drive manufacturers found they could be made to look better by adding a few extra MB by rounding the MB down to to the 1000 K.

 

[Dan_h]

Not to me it wasn't.
And 1MB of Ram is certainly not 1000K.

Certain hard drive manufacturers found they could be made to look better by adding a few extra MB by rounding the MB down to to the 1000 K.

According to the SI definition a MB is 10^6 bytes (a round million Bytes) and the correct term for the base 2 version 2^20 (1 048 576 Bytes) is in fact a Mebibyte and should be written as MiB.

http://physics.nist.gov/cuu/Units/binary.html

 

[HLaB]

I've cycled 266,112,000 inches this year

I measure my tubo milage in inches, it probably moved about 20 inches (an inch at a time)

 

[albion]

Whatever the actual definition I'm totally sure we happen to use the word Megabyte in reference to RAM.

I doubt the use of Mebibyte will ever become popular.

edit -
"When discussing computer memory, most manufacturers use megabyte to mean 220 = 1 048 576 bytes, but the manufacturers of computer storage devices usually use the term to mean 1 000 000 bytes. Some designers of local area networks have used megabit per second to mean 1 048 576 bit/s, but all telecommunications engineers use it to mean 106 bit/s. And if two definitions of the megabyte are not enough, a third megabyte of 1 024 000 bytes is the megabyte used to format the familiar 90 mm (3 1/2 inch), "1.44 MB" diskette. The confusion is real, as is the potential for incompatibility in standards and in implemented systems."

Almost exactly as I stated without mentioning the stroy behind hard disk size declarations.
And I also notice those definitions are dated 1998.

 

[heliphil]

5.3 to the power 10 mm for me

 

[brokenflipflop]

It's Ok Jezston, you can tell everyone you've cycled 10,000km, you don't have to make some other stuff up.