>Here lies a good question that usually catches the enforcement brigade out:- >Why did this happen? >Some might say that 'it was all imperial's fault - if they hadn't have used >imperial this would never had happen' >That's plain daft - as you could easily (and equally wrongly) substitute >'imperial' with 'metric'. >Some might say it was due to mixing systems - equally wrong IMHO. >The correct answer would be - communication, ie lack of.
You're missing the point. It is only in a situation where there is a mixture of different measurement systems (a system which you think is a 'good thing') that such an error could have taken place. The extra checking and level of communication necessary in order to prevent such disasters has a cost in itself - which is another reason why having a mismash is unnecessarily expensive. >Herein lies a strange one. Metricists talk about the daftness behind having >14 lbs in a st or 12 in in a foot - but are comfortable with 60 secs in a >min, 24 hrs in a day, etc. Firstly, I am not 'comfortable' with the calendar/time system - it is a stupid system. It's more accurate to say that I'm resigned to it, given the universality of the current system. Unfortunately, many of the awkward conversions are forced on us due to the nature of the universe (the solar day of approx 24 hours does not divide neatly into the solar year of approx 365 days). Even if we disregard the seven day week and the four week month, which are related to the phases of the moon, and arguably no longer relevent to us, we cannot reconcile the day and the year. What is daft is *defining* arbitrary units like the mile, inch & foot to have stupid conversion factors, thus causing *unnecessary* complexity. >There are a few issues with that argument:- >Market forces killed the beta-format, market forces are keeping alive the >imperial format. Pure inertia is delaying (not keeping alive) the demise of the imperial system. It is dying, though, slowly but surely. It just isn't fast enough for some of us. >But in reality I would not do it that way - I'd go down to half inches at >minimum. Or use a rounding factor. And if your answer came to within half an inch of your requirement, you'd have to do it again with more precision. With the metric millimeter, you get far greater precision with no increased awkwardness (integer as opposed to fractional measure). Quite simply, the inch as a basic unit is far too big. >I once put a catflap in the door to the rear of my house. Initially I chose >millimetres to do the task. Using 3 sets of data I went about my task. I >ended up switching to inches (the instructions showed both) as all I had to >work with was single figures (plus fraction) rather than 3 sets of 3 digit >figures. For a coarser level of approximation the centimeter would have been as easy if not more easy. With metric you can shift using powers of 10. The window for which the integral inch is suitable is a lot narrower than the combination of mm or cm. >Most people don't make the effort to learn the relationship between weight >(tcha, mass) and length. I am not talking about that. I am referring to the fact that with imperial you have to learn one set of conversions for length (inch, foot, yard, mile) and other set for mass/weight (ounce, pound, stone). With metric, having learned about milli, centi, kilo etc for length, the same factors are applied to mass/weight or capacity (liter vs pint/gallon). You don't have to be aware of any relationship between mass/length to benefit from that. >Anyway - if we're talking about Unix - what is metric? or imperial? Which >one is MSWindows and which is Unix? ;-) There isn't a direct correlation. The Unix command line syntax is one of the ugliest, unfriendliest things ever foisted on the IT community. On the other hand, Windows is easy to use but not really robust. My comparison was that Unix people are quite comfortable with the horrible command line syntax because they are used to it (takes a *long* time to get used to it though). So people can get used to anything. Whether it's a good idea to do so is another matter. >Is there a non-acceptance that I can have the opinion that in many respects >imperial is *better* and not just *familiar*? >There is no confusion here - this is how I see it. This is how many see it. But you have offered no rational argument that imperial is better, other than the circular logic that it is better for you because you prefer it, and you prefer it because it is better for you. >No-one complained at non-dec currency and when dec-currency came in few >complained after a year or so (I'm basing this on what others have said, I >can't comment too much as I wasn't around to witness it!!!!). I was. A minority did complain and grumble (more in the UK than here of course), that they were losing some vital piece of their culture. In fact, they were simply grumbling because they had to change. You are completely correct about the year later - no one was complaining any more. That is my point. Once the change has settled down, and people move from a dual to a sole new regimen, it becomes a non-issue. >Conversely metric and imperial have been mixed throughout my life, >in fact for more than 4 decades. Currency and length are 2 very diff things. The main difference is that currency is controlled by the government, so they decide what coins and notes you see and deal with. So when they withdraw the old ones, people cease being exposed to the old, and therefore get comfortable with the new. If the government had kept both sets of currencies in circulation allowing people the "choice" of which they used, you would have the same awful mess with currency that we now have with measurement. >St Patrick was Welsh, you know! Most likely he was (although there are those who claim he was Roman or from Gaul too). He certainly wasn't Irish. Fortunately, he found that the Irish were a people that didn't reject new ideas simply because they didn't originate there :-) ----------------------------------------------------------------- Tom Wade | EMail: tee dot wade at eurokom dot ie EuroKom | Tel: +353 (1) 296-9696 A2, Nutgrove Office Park | Fax: +353 (1) 296-9697 Rathfarnham | Disclaimer: This is not a disclaimer Dublin 14 | Tip: "Friends don't let friends do Unix !" Ireland
