• Christian@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    7
    ·
    2 hours ago

    The first one is correct as others have said, but the second one is not ambiguous enough to confuse anyone nor weird enough for anyone to bat an eye at, you’re fine with either.

  • communism@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    6
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    2 hours ago

    One point three two, or one three two if it’s obvious from context where the decimal point is. That’s how you’re meant to pronounce digits after the decimal point in general.

  • deur@feddit.nl
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    9
    ·
    4 hours ago

    I agree that the precision is not that valuable as some have said. I’d just read the numbers off as one point two three megabytes since anyone who cares can reconstruct the number, anyone who doesn’t can stick to the first few sig figs.

    For 257.62 GB I’d say “two hundred fifty seven point six two”. Yep. I put in the effort for the most significant of the digits, I dont bother beyond that.

    8249.19 GB? About 8 terabytes. Doesnt really matter anymore.

  • EvilBit@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    25
    ·
    6 hours ago

    I grew up with science classes telling us always state the digits individually. One point three two.

    • TheRealKuni@midwest.social
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      47 minutes ago

      “about a meg” because it’s almost unthinkable anyone cares about 3 tenths of a meg much less 2 hundredths.

      Tell me you never used floppy discs as a storage medium without telling me.

    • notarobot@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      5 hours ago

      I’d round up to one and a half. Also remove “bytes” and “bites”. 1.32 MB is “one and a half megs” or even “a meg and a half”

  • Valmond@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    10
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    5 hours ago

    I mostly heard it one point thirty two? Grew up in Sweden, living in France. If someone says one point three two I’d assume they’re Americans.

    I might be totally wrong, just stating what I have heard

    • pipes@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      3 hours ago

      I had the same experience (also European), but didn’t know the Americans changed it specifically for bytes

    • tetris11@lemmy.mlOP
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      5 hours ago

      No that’s interesting, I was wondering if there was a cultural divide.

      Thirty two sounds so alien to me, but I heard it in a Nerdstalgic video and wondered if it was an American thing

    • blackbrook@mander.xyz
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      5
      ·
      5 hours ago

      The only way you could use ‘thirty two’ correctly for that number would be ‘one and thirty two hundredths’ which would be pretty unusual.

    • SatyrSack@feddit.org
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      6
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      5 hours ago

      Agree. For things like semantic versioning, in which “1.20.1” and “1.2.1” are two different things, you want to pronounce them “one point twenty point one” and “one point two point one”, respectively. But that is a bit of an outlier. File size should be pronounced “normally”, because “1.20” and “1.2” are the same value.

        • davidgro@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          2 hours ago

          In that case it’s actually the twentieth (or more likely twenty first) minor version though, it’s not actually a decimal

  • sprite0@sh.itjust.works
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    4
    ·
    5 hours ago

    growing up with floppy disks and diskettes on the east coast US it was ‘one point two megabyte’ and ‘one point four four megabyte’ exclusively

    • davidgro@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      2 hours ago

      Very little, around 60k.

      A 1.44 “MB” floppy is 1440k, or about 1.406 real MB, and of that the space used by the FAT file system reduces it to around 1.38 free space.
      For some reason I couldn’t find the exact number and don’t have any handy to check it myself.

      • over_clox@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        edit-2
        2 hours ago

        The floppy disk format is based on the FAT12 file system.

        https://www.cs.drexel.edu/~johnsojr/2012-13/fall/cs370/resources/UnderstandingFAT12.pdf

        And with enough creative tweaks to that file system, you can get DMF 1.68MB format, and if you think a bit outside the box and erase the redundant secondary FAT table and settle on a max of only 16 files on the disk, you can squeeze a few more kilobytes out of that even.

        I actually made a number of custom modded blank disk images with more storage space, I might dig out the full specs of all the variants later.