Comment 15 for bug 538165

"since, like it or not - and I don't - that's how the things are labelled"

And for the record, to present another point of view, I *like* the way hard drives are labeled. Decimal is what people are used to working with in everyday life. We don't use 1024 for anything in real life.

Writing disk and file sizes in base 2 multiples is needlessly confusing and serves no purpose that I know of. It doesn't simplify anything or fit any natural sizing of the numbers. There's nothing about hard drives or files that lends them to binary measurements. The only thing that naturally comes in powers of two is memory, and we have "KiB" and "MiB" for that. It has never made any sense to me why people think it preferable to label a drive that holds close to 100,000,000,000 bytes as "93 GB". It's not logical or user-friendly, and the only rationale I've heard for continuing to do it that way is that Windows does it that way.