Talk:PlayStation Portable/pointless bickering

Mebibyte vs Megabyte

According to the Manual of Style " If a contributor changes an article's usage from kilo- etc. to kibi- etc. where the units are in fact binary, that change should be accepted. However, because they are less familiar, binary unit prefixes such as MiB should be linked at least once per article to avoid confusion. Link as MiB to avoid a disambiguation page." we have to let it stay as MiB, and sadly we will have to deal with the hundreds of times people change it back to MB. Seraphim 02:00, 13 February 2006 (UTC)

Correct, and to make it very clear, this is one of those circumstances in which the changed quantity references certainly refer to the binary powers appropriately described by the IEC prefixes. Note that the references to things like "512 MB memory stick" have not been changed, because in that particular case, 512 × 10⁶ bytes is a more accurate description of the capacity. Since it is common convention in mass storage marketing to prefer the strict SI definitions of the prefixes involved, it is appropriate to leave those as they are (note that I did change one memory stick reference back that was inappropriately modified to "MiB"). In the paragraphs talking about system RAM, the IEC binary prefixes are correct, appropriate, and most importantly unambiguous. Classical (incorrect) usage of the SI prefixes in a binary sense cannot be justified by mere convenience. It is far better to be encyclopaedic by using unambiguous terminology where possible and risk forcing some readers to learn an additional tidbid. -- uberpenguin 02:22, 13 February 2006 (UTC)

You state " In the paragraphs talking about system RAM, the IEC binary prefixes are correct" Correct according to whom? Sony themselves have stated that the units are in MB, not in MiB. I would consider them to be a more accurate source than merely an expression of being "encyclopediac". Do you have a clear, defined link that expressly states that the PSP's memory is stored in MiB and not MB? If you don't, then contrary to your wishes, the unit MB (as Sony themselves uses) should be used. Daniel Davis 02:25, 13 February 2006 (UTC)

They use MB because it is acceptable to use it as a synonym for MiB. It's hard to find a source for it because it is considered common knowledge that when discussing memory/harddrive size MB actually means MiB. It's hard to explain why it meaning literally MB instead of MiB is a given unless you know alot about computer architecture, so here's a really bad explination as to how we know :) Inorder to access a byte in memory you need to give the computer it's address. Because computer addressing lines are binary 0 or 1, if you have 256MiB of memory you have 20 lines (the MiB) + 8 more lines(if you add 9 more lines it's 512MiB), 256MiB = 2^28 possible addressable locations. If it was actually 256MB that would be 256,000,000 which is 1111010000100100000000000000 in binary, however we can easially access location 1111010000100100000000000001 by just changing the last bit which means that there are more then 256,000,000 possible addressable locations... I'm doing a really bad job at explaining this, but it's true. Seraphim 03:18, 13 February 2006 (UTC)

I know what the terminology is, Seraphim (I have a degree in Computer Operations). However, my actual query is as such- do we have a legitimate, verified source that specifically states that in this particular instance Sony isn't being accurate when they use the MB term? As in something concrete that demonstrates beyond a shadow of a doubt that the use of MiB is what should be used in this instance. Daniel Davis 03:32, 13 February 2006 (UTC) (Doom127)

The fact that it is referring to Computer Memory is proof enough (in my opinion) since giving it 256,000,000 bytes of memory is extremely illogical. Seraphim 03:50, 13 February 2006 (UTC)

Logical or not, every source we have clearly uses the term MB, not MiB. Given that fact, and the fact that we don't have any actual evidence that strikes contrary to Sony's own statements, we must conclude that Sony is accurate in its term of MB- and that the usage of MiB instead is original research. Unless there is some actual evidence that refutes Sony, we must assume that what they state in their specifications is indeed a fact. Daniel Davis 04:50, 13 February 2006 (UTC) (Doom127)

They aren't incorrect in using the term MB at all. MB is considered a synonym for MiB, and using MB in place of MiB is completly valid and accurate in the vast majority of cases. However according to the wikipedia Manual of Style if an editor changes MB to MiB we must accept the change due to the fact that it is a disambiguation (word that has 2 meanings vs word that has 1). I'd rather keep it as MB also since it is by far the most common wording, and the wording that Sony uses. However if we keep reverting it and someone decides to make a big deal out of it we will have no position to stand on. Seraphim 05:00, 13 February 2006 (UTC)

The Manual Of Style also specifically states that the terminology should be changed "In articles where the precise byte capacities are important to the description", and that "The use of the new binary prefix standards in the Wikipedia is not required". Thus, we are not bound to the MiB usage in this case, as the precise byte capacity isn't important to the description (a single byte difference isn't going to be truly relevant in describing the PSP's storage capacity), and since it goes against the established literature. In short, we are not bound to the MiB standard. Daniel Davis 05:07, 13 February 2006 (UTC) (Doom127)

You stopped quoting one line too soon and started one too late :P "The use of the new binary prefix standards in the Wikipedia is not required, but is recommended for use in all articles where binary capacities are used." and "If a contributor changes an article's usage from kilo- etc. to kibi- etc. where the units are in fact binary, that change should be accepted." it is indisputable that it is a binary capacity, and even though we aren't required to make the change someone decided to make the change, therefore we are instructed to accept the change. Seraphim 05:15, 13 February 2006 (UTC)

Actually, no, we are not "instructed" to keep the change. As you placed in your own quote, it is a recommendation, not an order. And a recommendation is not an instruction. While it may be a strong suggestion to keep the terminology in many cases (which is why "should" is used instead of "must"), this case warrants a differing position from the Wikipedia style guidelines. Daniel Davis 05:20, 13 February 2006 (UTC) (Doom127)

It's pretty clear that the MoS dictates that we accept the change. If we choose to continue reverting it and someone makes an issue out of it we will be found in the wrong since we are going against the MoS. The "recommendation" is only about the actual changing of the wording, it specifically says that if someone does make the change we must accept the change ("If a contributor changes an article's usage from kilo- etc. to kibi- etc. where the units are in fact binary, that change should be accepted."). Seraphim 05:25, 13 February 2006 (UTC)

No, it's not. Again, a "should" is not a "must". The Wiki style guidelines aren't a hard set of rules, Seraphim. There are times when using obscure language would just serve to muffle and confuse thought. This is one of those times. Since you yourself stated that it was a "disambiguation", the use of the common term is far more correct in this instance, especially given the fact that Sony themselves uses it. Daniel Davis 05:28, 13 February 2006 (UTC) (Doom127)

Like I have said a few times now, I agree that MB is what we should have in the article. However from a CYA (cover your ass) standpoint we need to leave MiB in the article. Wikipedia guidelines are actionable, if someone wanted to make a deal out of us reverting that change we would be found at fault. Seraphim 05:34, 13 February 2006 (UTC)

"Wikipedia guidelines are actionable"? I disagree with that statement, since the page itself states: "The guidelines here are just that: guidelines are not inflexible rules", and "Wikipedians are not required to follow any of these rules." Right there at the top of the style guideline page. Daniel Davis 05:59, 13 February 2006 (UTC) (Doom127)

WP:RULES says "A guideline is something that is (1) actionable and (2) consensual" so yeah it's actionable. I won't revert if you put back the MB stuff, however if someone does decide to make an issue of it, you won't have much of a case since you are deciding to circumvent the Manual of Style. Seraphim 06:06, 13 February 2006 (UTC)

The rules ALSO state that Guidelines " are not set in stone "and " should be treated with common sense and the occasional exception ". Obviously the style guidelines, since they SPECIFICALLY STATE that they are NOT required to be followed in any way shape or form, fall into the exception category, and are not "actionable"- something provided for in the rules. In other words, while most guidelines are actionable, those like the style ones described above, are not. Daniel Davis 06:10, 13 February 2006 (UTC) (Doom127)

What a wholly silly argument.

Whether guidelines are actionable is useless rules-lawyering, and besides the point.

Do we have a source stating that these measurements are in mebibytes? If so, we should use MiB. If not, we should use MB, because the reliable source we're using (Sony, for example here) uses MB.

Before anyone brings up guidelines and policies and such, remember that verifiability is one of Wikipedia's three pillars (and an ironclad policy to boot), so you'll need a source for any claim that "Sony really means mebibytes when they say megabytes." - A Man In Bl♟ck (conspire | past ops) 06:27, 13 February 2006 (UTC)

Man in Black, Wholly Silly Arguments are the best kind. :)

In all seriousness though, during the entire four hour debate regarding the whole back and forth between mebi and mega, there hasn't been anything posted that definitively stated that Sony meant "mebi" when they said "mega". Only the statement by someone that "they were the same thing". If someone can provide evidence that Sony intended "mebi", then they are welcome to present it, otherwise Mega should stand. Daniel Davis 06:35, 13 February 2006 (UTC) (Doom127)

No source will be found about this issue specifically since it is just accepted knowledge. The PSP spec sheet is source enough since they use MB in a binary sence (as shown by the numbers 256 and 512). Sources can be found about MB being an acceptable replacement for MiB, but the odds that someone actually took the time to write something that specifically talks about MiB in relation to the PS3 are very very low. It would be an impossibility for sony to be using MB as the 1,000,000 bytes defination, i've already explained why above. Seraphim 06:39, 13 February 2006 (UTC)

"No source will be found about this issue"- Then the debate is moot and Megabyte should stand. If an assertion is made, then facts MUST be presented in order for the assertion to stick. An assertion was made that Sony used "mega" when they meant "mebi". Thus proof needs to be provided. Said proof is not forthcoming, therefore there is no argument. Daniel Davis 06:42, 13 February 2006 (UTC) (Doom127)

It's not an assertion or anything, it's the defination of a word. If you need a reference you can just use the dictionary definations of MegaByte and Mebibyte. Since the word MegaByte is being used to describe something in binary the meaning of it is 1024 bytes aka a MebiByte. It's alot like arguing that a person sprinted down the street instead of ran down the street. Both words are usually interchangable. Seraphim 06:46, 13 February 2006 (UTC)

There's no source stating that "Sony means mebibytes when they say MB"? Then the argument is done! No source -> doesn't belong on Wikipedia. - A Man In Bl♟ck (conspire | past ops) 06:52, 13 February 2006 (UTC)

By the way, Seraphim, you state that a Mebibyte is 1024 bytes. That's a kilobyte or at least it's SUPPOSED to be. I've known that since fourth grade...[[1]]. Daniel Davis 06:56, 13 February 2006 (UTC)

Yeah yeah T_T that's what I get for typing fast. I've done some digging, and I found that there are actually 2 different things going on. Number 1) I found a source that proves that as far as the memorysticks go they are using MB as 1,000,000 bytes, if you go here click on "Self Help" then "Memory Cards" then choose the memory stick Pro duo, and then choose any size you want, and then click on the top FAQ question it clearly says that as far as memory sticks go MB = 1,000,000 bytes. However if you go to here it says that as far as RAM goes it is measured in Mebibytes, so does this page. RAM/Memory is measured in MiB, Storage of hardware devices use MB. Also to quote from wikipedia's Megabyte page "Note that computers address memory in base 2 due to the design of how computers store information and use it. The only places where bits or bytes are referenced in multiples of ten are in the transferal of information (communications) and storage on disk or tape. Random Access Memory would be most inefficient if bits and bytes were stored and referenced in base ten. This difference is misused by the commercial industry to confuse consumers into making bad purchasing decisions." So what have we learned. I can verify that Onboard Memory is given in MiB and that storage mediums use MB.

Therefore the fact that sony should have used MiB is verifiable, since they were discussing Onboard Random Access Memory. And also changing the Memory stick line to MiB is incorrect. Seraphim 07:53, 13 February 2006 (UTC)

And yet, out of that entire paragraph, there's nothing there that actually states that Sony itself meant "MiB" when they listed their specs. Neither brainsip (the first link), nor the freedictionary, nor wikipedia's Megabyte page have anything to do with Sony's use of the term "Megabyte".

By the way, you're also mistaken when you state that "onboard memory is given in MiB". On the contrary, onboard memory from the very beginnings of the computer world has used the same bit-byte-kilobyte-megabyte-gigabyte-terabyte-petabyte standard since "byte" seperated itself from a method of eating. In fact, I've NEVER heard the terms associated with MiB used when it comes to onboard memory in computers, at all. Daniel Davis 08:00, 13 February 2006 (UTC)

Your correct, it has used bit-byte-kilobite ect ect, that is because the binary based naming system wasn't developed until 1998. You've never heard the term because it never took off, most RAM manufactures still (as they have since they started) refer to 1 MiB as 1MB, that is because the 2 words are interchangable. I have provided plenty of sources that show not that the PSP meant MiB, but that the standard meaning of MB when your talking about RAM is actually MiB. Therefore I don't need to prove that Sony meant MiB, you need to prove that sony Meant 1MB = 1,000,000 bytes. Since we are talking about RAM and RAM is measured in MiB but labled as MB. Seraphim 08:20, 13 February 2006 (UTC)

So... the binary based naming system hasn't been accepted by almost any actual companies, such as RAM manufacturers, PC makers... and Sony. Which means, when they write MB, they MEAN MB, not MiB. A "Standard meaning" is one that must be ACCEPTED by people in order to BECOME a standard. I could take a hard drive and call it "moldy old shoe" all I wanted, but that doesn't mean that the terms "moldy old shoe" and "hard drive" would thus become synonymous with the device at all. And all your "sources" say nothing about the PSP or Sony's usage of the term MB. On the contrary, your own statement that MiB "never took off" says completely the OPPOSITE- that when a company says "MB", they mean "MB". Not "MiB".

Including Sony.

By the way, saying "Therefore I don't need to prove that Sony meant MiB" is nothing but a cop-out. You're trying, again, to prove that when Sony SAID MB, they MEANT MIB. Nothing but that. I don't need to remind you of that, and to try and misdirect the discussion is unneeded. Daniel Davis 08:27, 13 February 2006 (UTC)

The binary based naming system was put in place because people were writing MB which was incorrect due to it being a prefix that was based on a base 10 system instead of a base 2 system. When the number of bytes were small the difference was minor and not really noteworthy, however as time went on and capacities got bigger and bigger using the base 10 system became misleading since it is not directly equivilant to the base2 system. Inorder to deal with this ambiguity the binary prefixes were created. Because they were not widely adopted it is still common use today to say MB when referring to 1,048,576 bytes, and that is acceptable. Here are the facts, plain and simple. If i'm talking about RAM 1MB = 1,048,576 bytes = 1MiB. If i'm talking about storage mediums 1MB = 1,000,000 bytes != 1MiB. Because when talking about RAM the standard is 1MB = 1,048,576 bytes it means that the MB = MiB equivilancy is correct. What you are claiming sony meant was that the PSP has 32x1,000,000 bytes of memory, which is not the standard of 32x1,048,576. So once again, since we are talking about ram not storage capacity, and in ram the standard is 1MB = 1,048,576bytes = 1MiB, it is not up to me to provide a source that says sony meant 1MB = 1,048,576bytes because that is the accepted standard. Since what you are suggesting is a deviation from the standard, it is up to you to provide the reference that says sony did not mean 32x1,048,576 bytes. I have provided plenty of resources that back up my statements about RAM being 1MB = 1,048,576 bytes. Placing the sony comments in context their meaning is obvious. Seraphim 08:40, 13 February 2006 (UTC)

Will u people knock it off? Sony said MB so they meant MB nuff said- your bickering has made like half a damn page of all this tehcnical crap that nobody cares about! fightn about what you think sony meant or dindt mean doesn't matter, put down what they said and leave it alone at that, ok. So stop arguing cause you make wikipedia suck when you do it and nobody wants to be around an article when you do this or edit too! If you want to fight go do it on an im or an email or something, stop wasting peps time by filling this pages with all this junk! 4.243.62.145 08:36, 13 February 2006 (UTC)

The issue is the MB sony meant is not the MB that Doom127 is arguing that it is. Seraphim 08:40, 13 February 2006 (UTC)

Who are you to say what Sony meant or did not mean? You're being extremely presumptive, and on top of that, what you now assert as "the issue" has absolutely nothing to do with what the original topic was in the first place; ie- whether or not "MB" should be used on the PSP page, or whether it should be "MiB". Honestly, I don't really care what you think Sony "meant" because, despite all the guessings and questions about their motives- they wrote down MB, (the term for megabyte) in their press releases and all the technical specifications, and thus "MB" is what gets used on the front page. I'm done arguing with you, as it's obvious you've run out of cohesive rebuttals and this debate is beginning to piss people off. Off to sleep with me! Daniel Davis 08:47, 13 February 2006 (UTC) (Doom127)

Fact 1, sony said the PSP has 32MB RAM. Fact 2, when talking about ram 1MB = 1,048,576bytes. Fact 3, 1MiB = 1,048,576 bytes. This entire thread of discussion was started by A Man in Black when he said "Do we have a source stating that these measurements are in mebibytes?" I have shown that when it comes to RAM 1MB is equivilant in every way to 1 mebibyte. Therefore it is correct to state that the measurment is indeed in mebibytes. This thread had nothing to do with changing the information in the article, I already said i'm fine with keeping MB in there since MB is an accepted synonym for MiB, this thread was in responce to A Man in Black inquiring to the verifiability about the MB = MiB argument, which I have proven is verifiable in the context of RAM Seraphim 09:00, 13 February 2006 (UTC)