Velocity Reviews > KB v Kb

# KB v Kb

Roger Johnstone
Guest
Posts: n/a

 02-28-2005
In <9LxUd.3312235\$(E-Mail Removed)> MarkH wrote:
> http://www.velocityreviews.com/forums/(E-Mail Removed)z (Bruce Sinclair) wrote in
> news:motUd.5035\$(E-Mail Removed):
>
>> In article <(E-Mail Removed)>, "Shane (
>> aka froggy)" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:
>>> degrees Kelvin?

>>
>> That would have a little degree sign by it
>>

>
> No degree sign, because there is no such thing as degrees Kelvin!
>
> 313 Kelvin is a temperature
> 20 degrees Celsius is a temperature

It's 313 kelvins, not 313 Kelvin. SI units are always lower case,
although the abbreviation K is upper case since it's named after a
person, and if you have more than 1 kelvin then it's kelvins since it's
a unit not a scale.

--
Roger Johnstone, Invercargill, New Zealand
http://vintageware.orcon.net.nz/
__________________________________________________ ______________________
No Silicon Heaven? Preposterous! Where would all the calculators go?

Kryten, from the Red Dwarf episode "The Last Day"

MarkH
Guest
Posts: n/a

 02-28-2005
Roger Johnstone <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in news:20050228194443808+1300
@News.Individual.NET:

> It's 313 kelvins, not 313 Kelvin. SI units are always lower case,
> although the abbreviation K is upper case since it's named after a
> person, and if you have more than 1 kelvin then it's kelvins since it's
> a unit not a scale.

Thanks for the correction. It has been a while since I did 7th form
1985, so my memory of 20 years ago is not 100%.

Also we have been getting some temperatures pushing past 300 kelvins over
the last couple of weeks and that may have overheated my brain a little.

--
Mark Heyes (New Zealand)
See my pics at www.gigatech.co.nz (last updated 20-Jan-05)
"There are 10 types of people, those that
understand binary and those that don't"

A.D.
Guest
Posts: n/a

 02-28-2005
Allistar wrote:
> Cliff wrote:
>
>
>>Can someone please enlighten me as to current usage of KB and Kb
>>I had always thought that Kb meant Kilobit and KB Kilobyte.
>>Is this in fact right or have I been labouring under a misapprehension?
>>I could never really see the need to measure things in Kilobits and lots
>>of apps seem to use Kb to refer to Kilobytes.
>>Is this now the accepted usage?
>>I have no axe to grind either way. I would just like to know.

>
>
> And to start the trollfest:
>
> Kb (kilobit) is technically 1000 bits.
> Kib (kibibit) is technically 1024 bits.
>
> When talking about computer storage most people use Kb when they mean Kib. I
> do as well, just what I'm used to I suppose.
>
> Companies use this difference (which is not insignificant) when selling
> hard-drives to make the number appear larger. I.e. they say 80Gb when they
> mean Gb, and most of us would assume they mean Gib.
>
> Allistar.

Aren't hard drives measured in "GB" not "Gb"?

*frown* 8 bits in a byte...
*frown* carry the 1....
*frown* dammit a 80Gb = 9.7GB approx... basterds, short changed!

A.D.

SchoolTech
Guest
Posts: n/a

 02-28-2005
In article <dXsUd.5023\$(E-Mail Removed)> in nz.comp on Mon, 28
Feb 2005 12:44:07 +1300, Cliff <(E-Mail Removed)> says...
> Can someone please enlighten me as to current usage of KB and Kb
> I had always thought that Kb meant Kilobit and KB Kilobyte.
> Is this in fact right or have I been labouring under a misapprehension?
> I could never really see the need to measure things in Kilobits and lots of
> apps seem to use Kb to refer to Kilobytes.
> Is this now the accepted usage?
> I have no axe to grind either way. I would just like to know.

It's always been the way I have understood it.

Serial data transmission customarily uses Kbps as data is transmitted one
bit at a time, and that bit could be a data bit, or a start or stop bit.

Kib and KiB are also possible new variants thereof.

SchoolTech
Guest
Posts: n/a

 02-28-2005
In article <(E-Mail Removed)> in nz.comp on
Mon, 28 Feb 2005 18:34:29 +1300, Bruce Knox <(E-Mail Removed)>
says...
> On Mon, 28 Feb 2005 12:47:13 +1300, thing <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:
>
> >Cliff wrote:
> >> Can someone please enlighten me as to current usage of KB and Kb
> >> I had always thought that Kb meant Kilobit and KB Kilobyte.
> >> Is this in fact right or have I been labouring under a misapprehension?
> >> I could never really see the need to measure things in Kilobits and lots of
> >> apps seem to use Kb to refer to Kilobytes.
> >> Is this now the accepted usage?
> >> I have no axe to grind either way. I would just like to know.
> >>
> >>

> >
> >
> >kb = kilobit, kB = kilobyte. Networks usually work in kb or Mb.
> >
> >eg 100Mbit/sec is typical LAN.
> >
> >regards
> >
> >Thing

> I have to disagree with your lower case k. Any modifier about a unit
> should be a capital and below a unit lower case. eg M=mega m=milli.

Actually, kilo has always been the exception to this rule from the
original French metric units.

SchoolTech
Guest
Posts: n/a

 02-28-2005
In article <cvuaqh\$e6m\$(E-Mail Removed)> in nz.comp on Mon, 28 Feb 2005
06:39:29 GMT, Matthew Poole <(E-Mail Removed)> says...
> In article <dXsUd.5023\$(E-Mail Removed)>, "Cliff" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:
> >Can someone please enlighten me as to current usage of KB and Kb
> >I had always thought that Kb meant Kilobit and KB Kilobyte.
> >Is this in fact right or have I been labouring under a misapprehension?
> >I could never really see the need to measure things in Kilobits and lots of
> >apps seem to use Kb to refer to Kilobytes.
> >Is this now the accepted usage?
> >I have no axe to grind either way. I would just like to know.
> >

> B (uppercase) refers to bytes. b (lowercase) refers to bits.
> Apparently it's acceptable to use Gb and Tb to refer to gigabytes and
> terabytes, respectively, but as we now move to network speeds that are
> measured in Gb/s it seems very stupid.
> Certainly for capacity measurements of K and M, the upper- and
> lowercase distinction matters.

How? kilo is abbreviated as a lowercase k, often incorrectly written as
uppercase.

Whereas for Mega and milli, there is a difference between M and m.

SchoolTech
Guest
Posts: n/a

 02-28-2005
> Allistar wrote:
> > Companies use this difference (which is not insignificant) when selling
> > hard-drives to make the number appear larger. I.e. they say 80Gb when they
> > mean Gb, and most of us would assume they mean Gib.

Are hard drives being made out of plaster these days?

Bruce Sinclair
Guest
Posts: n/a

 02-28-2005
In article <9LxUd.3312235\$(E-Mail Removed)>, MarkH <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:
>(E-Mail Removed) (Bruce Sinclair) wrote in
>news:motUd.5035\$(E-Mail Removed):
>> In article <(E-Mail Removed)>, "Shane (aka
>> froggy)" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:
>>
>>> degrees Kelvin?

>>
>> That would have a little degree sign by it

>
>No degree sign, because there is no such thing as degrees Kelvin!
>
>313 Kelvin is a temperature
>20 degrees Celsius is a temperature

I have seen degrees used for both and both used alone. IME, all are
acceptable.

Bruce

-----------------------------------------------------------------------
It was so much easier to blame it on Them. It was bleakly depressing to
think that They were Us. If it was Them, then nothing was anyone´s fault.
If it was Us, what did that make Me ? After all, I´m one of Us. I must be.
I´ve certainly never thought of myself as one of Them. No-one ever thinks
of themselves as one of Them. We´re always one of Us. It´s Them that do
the bad things. <=> Terry Pratchett. Jingo.

Caution ===== followups may have been changed to relevant groups
(if there were any)

Bruce Sinclair
Guest
Posts: n/a

 02-28-2005
In article <(E-Mail Removed)>, Roger Johnstone <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:
>In <9LxUd.3312235\$(E-Mail Removed)> MarkH wrote:
>> (E-Mail Removed)z (Bruce Sinclair) wrote in
>> news:motUd.5035\$(E-Mail Removed):
>>
>>> In article <(E-Mail Removed)>, "Shane (
>>> aka froggy)" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:
>>>> degrees Kelvin?
>>>
>>> That would have a little degree sign by it
>>>

>>
>> No degree sign, because there is no such thing as degrees Kelvin!
>>
>> 313 Kelvin is a temperature
>> 20 degrees Celsius is a temperature

>
>
>It's 313 kelvins, not 313 Kelvin. SI units are always lower case,
>although the abbreviation K is upper case since it's named after a
>person, and if you have more than 1 kelvin then it's kelvins since it's
>a unit not a scale.

I disagree. But that's the great thing about standards ... there are so many
to choose from

Bruce

-----------------------------------------------------------------------
It was so much easier to blame it on Them. It was bleakly depressing to
think that They were Us. If it was Them, then nothing was anyone´s fault.
If it was Us, what did that make Me ? After all, I´m one of Us. I must be.
I´ve certainly never thought of myself as one of Them. No-one ever thinks
of themselves as one of Them. We´re always one of Us. It´s Them that do
the bad things. <=> Terry Pratchett. Jingo.

Caution ===== followups may have been changed to relevant groups
(if there were any)

MarkH
Guest
Posts: n/a

 02-28-2005
(E-Mail Removed)z (Bruce Sinclair) wrote in
news:3CKUd.5208\$(E-Mail Removed):

> In article <9LxUd.3312235\$(E-Mail Removed)>, MarkH
> <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:
>>
>>No degree sign, because there is no such thing as degrees Kelvin!
>>
>>313 Kelvin is a temperature
>>20 degrees Celsius is a temperature

>
> I have seen degrees used for both and both used alone. IME, all are
> acceptable.

Only if acceptable is another word for wrong. The degree thing is used for
Celsius/centigrade and Fahrenheit which are both relative scales, the
Kelvin scale is an absolute one and it was decided long ago by the ISO
standards people that a temperature in kelvins should not use degrees.

--
Mark Heyes (New Zealand)
See my pics at www.gigatech.co.nz (last updated 20-Jan-05)
"There are 10 types of people, those that
understand binary and those that don't"