

Wolfram alpha thinks there are 1000 bytes in a kilobyte apparently - jcapote
http://www.imgur.com/jvehe

======
cperciva
Wolfram Alpha is right. The use of "kB" to refer to 1024 bytes is incorrect
and results from historical issues involving hardware addressing and RAM.

I discuss this in some more detail on the tarsnap (beta testing) website in
explaining why I charge $0.30 per GB-month of storage instead or $0.30 per
GiB-month of storage: <https://beta.tarsnap.com/GB-why.html>

------
icey
I think I caught a discussion elsewhere about this; but Wolfram gets it right
when using the SI notation:

<http://www05.wolframalpha.com/input/?i=1000000+MiB+in+GiB>

~~~
gojomo
Hard drive makers also prefer the SI definition, as it makes the sizes seem
larger.

------
gojomo
When I first heard of 'Kibibytes' and 'KiB', I thought it was silly.

But each time there's confusion, the pedantry looks a little better.

And certainly when writing documentation and user interfaces, the
KiB/MiB/GiB/TiB/PiB distinctions should be made clear.

