[digikam] [Bug 374135] New: Storage capacity shows lower unit than actual capacity

classic Classic list List threaded Threaded
10 messages Options
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

[digikam] [Bug 374135] New: Storage capacity shows lower unit than actual capacity

bugzilla_noreply
https://bugs.kde.org/show_bug.cgi?id=374135

            Bug ID: 374135
           Summary: Storage capacity shows lower unit than actual capacity
           Product: digikam
           Version: 5.3.0
          Platform: Archlinux Packages
                OS: Linux
            Status: UNCONFIRMED
          Severity: minor
          Priority: NOR
         Component: Import
          Assignee: [hidden email]
          Reporter: [hidden email]
  Target Milestone: ---

How to reproduce:

- Open the import window
- Hover over the camera media and album library storage "progress bars"

The capacity of my 128 GB memory card is shown as "119.2 Mi B". It should
instead:

- Display the correct unit.
- Not include a space inside the unit.
- Display SI 1000-based units like "GB" instead of "GiB", since the former is
the standard for storage nowadays.

--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are the assignee for the bug.
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

[digikam] [Bug 374135] Storage capacity shows lower unit than actual capacity

bugzilla_noreply
https://bugs.kde.org/show_bug.cgi?id=374135

--- Comment #1 from Maik Qualmann <[hidden email]> ---
Git commit 3650af4e9fdbc0d3c4d72ad3a2620110682e5069 by Maik Qualmann.
Committed on 25/12/2016 at 11:36.
Pushed by mqualmann into branch 'master'.

fix displaying wrong unit in the import tooltip and remove spacing

M  +1    -1    libs/imageproperties/imagepropertiestab.cpp
M  +5    -5    utilities/importui/widgets/freespacewidget.cpp

https://commits.kde.org/digikam/3650af4e9fdbc0d3c4d72ad3a2620110682e5069

--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are the assignee for the bug.
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

[digikam] [Bug 374135] Storage capacity shows lower unit than actual capacity

bugzilla_noreply
In reply to this post by bugzilla_noreply
https://bugs.kde.org/show_bug.cgi?id=374135

Maik Qualmann <[hidden email]> changed:

           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
                 CC|                            |[hidden email]

--- Comment #2 from Maik Qualmann <[hidden email]> ---
Dolphin for exemple shows also 1024 based unit (GiB). The function to show 1000
base unit is already implemented. I'm more for the current state, what do you
think Gilles?

Maik

--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are the assignee for the bug.
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

[digikam] [Bug 374135] Storage capacity shows lower unit than actual capacity

bugzilla_noreply
In reply to this post by bugzilla_noreply
https://bugs.kde.org/show_bug.cgi?id=374135

[hidden email] changed:

           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
                 CC|                            |[hidden email]

--- Comment #3 from [hidden email] ---
The way to display storage unit hurt me also, but this have been normalized by
IEC in 1998 and adopted by open source world step by step.

Read well this wikipedia pages :

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Megabyte
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gigabyte#Consumer_confusion

If the current storage capacity details respect the norm, this is the right
way.

Gilles Caulier

--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are the assignee for the bug.
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

[digikam] [Bug 374135] Storage capacity shows lower unit than actual capacity

bugzilla_noreply
In reply to this post by bugzilla_noreply
https://bugs.kde.org/show_bug.cgi?id=374135

--- Comment #4 from Victor Engmark <[hidden email]> ---
(In reply to caulier.gilles from comment #3)

> The way to display storage unit hurt me also, but this have been normalized
> by IEC in 1998 and adopted by open source world step by step.
>
> Read well this wikipedia pages :
>
> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Megabyte
> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gigabyte#Consumer_confusion
>
> If the current storage capacity details respect the norm, this is the right
> way.

AFAICT these articles support my assertion that 1000-based units should be
used:

- IEC recommends 1000-based units: "1 MB = 1000000 bytes (= 10002 B = 106 B) is
the definition recommended by the International System of Units (SI) and the
International Electrotechnical Commission IEC.[2] This definition is used in
networking contexts and most storage media, particularly hard drives,
flash-based storage,[3] and DVDs […]"
- "Practically all manufacturers of hard disk drives and flash-memory disk
devices[3][4] continue to define one gigabyte as 1000 000 000 bytes, which is
displayed on the packaging."

While GiB is technically *accurate*, GB would therefore be *less confusing*.

--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are the assignee for the bug.
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [digikam] [Bug 374135] Storage capacity shows lower unit than actual capacity

Simon Frei
On 25/12/16 14:44, Victor Engmark wrote:

> https://bugs.kde.org/show_bug.cgi?id=374135
>
> --- Comment #4 from Victor Engmark <[hidden email]> ---
> (In reply to caulier.gilles from comment #3)
>> The way to display storage unit hurt me also, but this have been normalized
>> by IEC in 1998 and adopted by open source world step by step.
>>
>> Read well this wikipedia pages :
>>
>> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Megabyte
>> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gigabyte#Consumer_confusion
>>
>> If the current storage capacity details respect the norm, this is the right
>> way.
> AFAICT these articles support my assertion that 1000-based units should be
> used:
>
> - IEC recommends 1000-based units: "1 MB = 1000000 bytes (= 10002 B = 106 B) is
> the definition recommended by the International System of Units (SI) and the
> International Electrotechnical Commission IEC.[2] This definition is used in
> networking contexts and most storage media, particularly hard drives,
> flash-based storage,[3] and DVDs […]"
> - "Practically all manufacturers of hard disk drives and flash-memory disk
> devices[3][4] continue to define one gigabyte as 1000 000 000 bytes, which is
> displayed on the packaging."
>
> While GiB is technically *accurate*, GB would therefore be *less confusing*.
>
Whether base 10 or base 2 units are used is debatable, but the naming is
not. It is ubiquitously agreed upon that GB/MB/... mean base 10 and
GiB/MiB/... base 2. True, there is still lots of places where GB/MB/...
is wrongly used for base 2 values, but that is erroneous. Some
circumvent the problem by only writing the prefix (G/M/...) which can
mean anything, but that is in my opinion simply lazy. AFAIK in the linux
world base 2 is still prevailing while windows mostly uses base 10 (I
don't know about apple).
As long as digikam uses consistently the same base in my opinion
anything is fine, just use the correct prefixes. I guess changing from
one prefix to the other would be simply too much effort for too little gain.

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

[digikam] [Bug 374135] Storage capacity shows lower unit than actual capacity

bugzilla_noreply
In reply to this post by bugzilla_noreply
https://bugs.kde.org/show_bug.cgi?id=374135

--- Comment #5 from Simon <[hidden email]> ---
On 25/12/16 14:44, Victor Engmark wrote:

> https://bugs.kde.org/show_bug.cgi?id=374135
>
> --- Comment #4 from Victor Engmark <[hidden email]> ---
> (In reply to caulier.gilles from comment #3)
>> The way to display storage unit hurt me also, but this have been normalized
>> by IEC in 1998 and adopted by open source world step by step.
>>
>> Read well this wikipedia pages :
>>
>> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Megabyte
>> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gigabyte#Consumer_confusion
>>
>> If the current storage capacity details respect the norm, this is the right
>> way.
> AFAICT these articles support my assertion that 1000-based units should be
> used:
>
> - IEC recommends 1000-based units: "1 MB = 1000000 bytes (= 10002 B = 106 B) is
> the definition recommended by the International System of Units (SI) and the
> International Electrotechnical Commission IEC.[2] This definition is used in
> networking contexts and most storage media, particularly hard drives,
> flash-based storage,[3] and DVDs […]"
> - "Practically all manufacturers of hard disk drives and flash-memory disk
> devices[3][4] continue to define one gigabyte as 1000 000 000 bytes, which is
> displayed on the packaging."
>
> While GiB is technically *accurate*, GB would therefore be *less confusing*.
>
Whether base 10 or base 2 units are used is debatable, but the naming is
not. It is ubiquitously agreed upon that GB/MB/... mean base 10 and
GiB/MiB/... base 2. True, there is still lots of places where GB/MB/...
is wrongly used for base 2 values, but that is erroneous. Some
circumvent the problem by only writing the prefix (G/M/...) which can
mean anything, but that is in my opinion simply lazy. AFAIK in the linux
world base 2 is still prevailing while windows mostly uses base 10 (I
don't know about apple).
As long as digikam uses consistently the same base in my opinion
anything is fine, just use the correct prefixes. I guess changing from
one prefix to the other would be simply too much effort for too little gain.

--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are the assignee for the bug.
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

[digikam] [Bug 374135] Storage capacity shows lower unit than actual capacity

bugzilla_noreply
In reply to this post by bugzilla_noreply
https://bugs.kde.org/show_bug.cgi?id=374135

Maik Qualmann <[hidden email]> changed:

           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
   Version Fixed In|                            |5.4.0
             Status|UNCONFIRMED                 |RESOLVED
         Resolution|---                         |FIXED
      Latest Commit|                            |https://commits.kde.org/dig
                   |                            |ikam/3650af4e9fdbc0d3c4d72a
                   |                            |d3a2620110682e5069

--- Comment #6 from Maik Qualmann <[hidden email]> ---
Many programs use 1024-based for example Dolphin, Krusader... The operating
systems iOS and Windows (uses wrong unit) also. File manager under Ubuntu?
Newer versions of OS X use 1000-based. At the moment we will not change it.

Maik

--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are the assignee for the bug.
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

[digikam] [Bug 374135] Storage capacity shows lower unit than actual capacity

bugzilla_noreply
In reply to this post by bugzilla_noreply
https://bugs.kde.org/show_bug.cgi?id=374135

Maik Qualmann <[hidden email]> changed:

           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
                 CC|                            |[hidden email]

--- Comment #7 from Maik Qualmann <[hidden email]> ---
*** Bug 374432 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***

--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are the assignee for the bug.
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

[digikam] [Bug 374135] Storage capacity shows lower unit than actual capacity

bugzilla_noreply
In reply to this post by bugzilla_noreply
https://bugs.kde.org/show_bug.cgi?id=374135

Maik Qualmann <[hidden email]> changed:

           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
                 CC|                            |[hidden email]

--- Comment #8 from Maik Qualmann <[hidden email]> ---
*** Bug 377248 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***

--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are the assignee for the bug.