GNOME Bugzilla – Bug 580471
Invalid unit used to show network throughput
Last modified: 2011-11-11 10:03:55 UTC
Network speed should be in 1000s of bits per second, as it is used everywhere else. kbit/s = 1,000 bit/s Mbit/s = 1,000,000 bit/s Other information: Please add at least an option to show network throughput in kbytes/s or kbit/s All IT engineers use unit of bits per second. (https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/366235)
Sure it should be configurable but i have disagree: bit/s are OK for network guys but at the application/user level, bytes is what matters.
(In reply to comment #1) > Sure it should be configurable but i have disagree: bit/s are OK for network > guys but at the application/user level, bytes is what matters. > I'm totally disagree with you. All users know, that network throughput of devices are in bits/sec. For example, 100-mbit ethernet, 128K DSL connection, 36600 modem connection, IP-telephony require some amount of bits/sec. Users are going to system-monitor to see how full network channel is loaded. For example, Internet provider said, that 3 mbit connection available during 8 working hours. So i should see that Internet provider really can provide 3 MBit. Only file-downloading speed is mesaured in bytes/sec. When we talk about low levels of the net, only bits/sec must be used.
Also, Windows, macosx and nearly all software shows network speed in bits/sec.....
For general networking, you usually measure in SI standard decimal bits per second. kbit/s = 1,000 bit/s Mbit/s = 1,000,000 bit/s Gbit/s = 1,000,000,000 bit/s "100-mbit" ethernet is 100,000,000 bits per second "128K" DSL is 128,000 bits per second "56K" modem is 56,000 bit per second See http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_device_bandwidths#Conventions
Yes, I totally agree with you. Throughput of network device should measured in bits/sec, kbits/sec, Mbits/sec, Gbit/sec and so on. Not in bytes/sec or kB/sec
WTF ! I've been on of the first to advocate for the use of SI units. Ubuntu refused it and shipped for a long time patches to use wrong units. So i really don't care about so called IT guys at launchpad. The current byte unit is totally valid whether you agree or not. Unless you can name me a contemporary way to exchange bits not grouped by 8. I really think that displaying bytes is better for end-user. Luser hardly know about bytes, most of them don't have a clue about what is a bit and buy 20Mbps DSL line because the vendor says bigger is better. And in the end, they hardly get 10Mbps without ever complaining or even noticing. But if instead, they are downloading many thing at the same time (web, torrents, etc), it's much more convenient to be able to compare individual download speed against the overall network rate. For example to set rate limit. This saves a lot of << 3 and >> 3, which is definitely an expansive operation for human brain. I'm definitely going to make the patch so users are free to choose.
1. MiB is an IEC unit, not an SI unit. k- = 1000 is SI, Ki- = 1024 is IEC. They are both standards and each is more appropriate in different situations. K- = 1024 is the problem child that we need to lose. 2. Network bandwidth (which includes all the headroom, encoding, parity bits, etc) are measured in decimal bits per second. This is the standard way to do it. Bytes per second is for things like file transfers, not raw network bandwidth. 3. Ubuntu's not just one person. The patches have been abandoned for the last few releases and System Monitor shows MiB now as it should. Ubuntu users are strongly in favor of standard units, and strongly opposed to the K = 1024 convention: http://brainstorm.ubuntu.com/idea/4114/ http://brainstorm.ubuntu.com/idea/18560/ From what I've seen, most people involved are in favor of standardizing Gnome, too, so it's only a matter of time until the standards are followed everywhere.
The most meaningful for me -- is to see network throughput in some units of bits.
(In reply to comment #6) > The current byte unit is totally valid whether you agree or not. Unless you can > name me a contemporary way to exchange bits not grouped by 8. Please see comment #2 > I really think that displaying bytes is better for end-user. Luser hardly know > about bytes, most of them don't have a clue about what is a bit and buy 20Mbps > DSL line because the vendor says bigger is better. And in the end, they hardly > get 10Mbps without ever complaining or even noticing. Please see comment #2 Everywhere when someone talking about network throughput of some device or some line, he is talking about bits/sec. From "Hardware" point of view: 1. When i buy HDD, i see in shop: "80 GB" 2. When i buy Memory i see in shop: "256 MB" 3. When i buy channel / modem / ethernet card i see "3Mbit / 64Kbit / 100Mbit" I don't talk about 1000 and 1024. I want to say that if look to reality, all users know, that network throughput is measured in bits/sec > But if instead, they are downloading many thing at the same time (web, > torrents, etc), it's much more convenient to be able to compare individual > download speed against the overall network rate. imho it's not frequent situation. The most frequent situation is to look how network channel is full. In other words, users should see full throughput and real, and compare them. > I'm definitely going to make the patch so users are free to choose. Maybe show speed in both units at the same time ?
Fixed in karmic koala. YAY!
Created attachment 148126 [details] bad vertical rule ticks
Ticks for the vertical ruler (when enabling speed in bits) calculated not well. I mean they are not divided by 10 as in other places. See attachment.
Created attachment 148127 [details] text does not fit Moreover, text does not fit, when kbits used to show speed. (Russian translation)
Isn't that a problem with your language translation ?
1. Tickas are not rounded to 10-units - it is not problem of language translation. 2. "Text does not fit" is the problem of not-rubber controls, i.e. statically specified coordinats of controls. This is bad.
Currently (in system monitor 3.2.1) the user can choose in the preference wether to use bits or bytes, so probably this should be closed.
No, bug is done incorrectly, so I can not say that it is closed. See my screenshots. Still same for Ubuntu 11.10 (Oneiric).
There is an option in edit->Preferences->Resources, Show network speed in bits. Does checking that solve the problem?
> There is an option in edit->Preferences->Resources, Show network speed in bits Yes, speed is shown in bits per second, but ruler ticks are not aligned properly, as in other meters. When speed is in bytes/sec, ticks are aligned correctly. See screenshots.
More precisely: Upper limit for grpah "speed in bits per second" is not aligned to some rounded number of bits/per second, say, 10,20,50,1000 and so on.
The issue shown in the "text does not fit" screenshot is tracked as bug 602124, with possible patch to fix it (needs updating.) The issue shown in the "bad vertical rule ticks" screenshot is tracked in bug 656840, with a working patch to fix it properly. Do you agree that this bug can be closed then, and the other ones take care of properly.
I've commited the fix from bug #656840 and like Robert said bug #602124 tracks the other issue. Therfore, I'm closing this bug.