US customary units gain ground in Germany
Klaus von der Heyde
ratio of 4:3, the one measurement to denote the screen size was the
length of its diagonal. In Germany, this was given in centimetres,
like the popular 51 cm. This left some tolerance, so you would expect
something between 50 cm and 52 cm on a 51 cm screen.
Computer monitors, on the other hand, were almost always sold by the
inch, despite legislation requiring otherwise. Some advertisements
carried the metric measurement as well. With the "usual" tolerances,
a 15 inch screen could range from 360 mm to almost 400 mm diagonal
(all 4:3 aspect ratio).
Of course, all this computer stuff exposed us Germans to US units. The
infamous 3.5 inch floppy, which is neither 3.5 inch nor especially
floppy, is a well known example. Most software can handle metric and
US, more or less well. Add the obscure "font size points" and the
ubiquitous DPI (printer/scanner resolution) to the mess.
Today, TV sets are flat screens with aspect ratio of 16:9 or
something. And, guess what, their diagonal is quoted in inches in
advertisements in Germany. That way, it is much easier to compare
your screen size (31") to your jeans' leg length (32") ... :) Of
course, more is always better, but how does the 31" 16:9 screen
relate to one's old 51 cm CRT?
The "inch" (its old german name "Zoll" fell out of favour recently)
has become a unit of measurement to know when shopping for consumer
electronics in Germany.
Klaus
Euric
I think you are confusing products actually being measured in inches
and the inch being used as a trade name (Gewebename). When you buy a
Monitor or similar device you can not buy it by the inch. You buy it
as it is. It isn't like buying wire by the metre or cheese by the
kilogram. You don't say "give me 18.375 inches of that monitor" or
"37.815 inches of those pants.
Inches are acceptable where exactness or precision is not an issue.
CRTs should never have been measured by diagonal but by an X x Y
dimension. Then you would have no problem comparing the 4:3 to the
16:9.
Also, a zoll is not the same as an inch. Both zoll and inch varied
with time and law. The inch was standardized in 1959 when it was set
equal to 0.0254 m.
On this page: http://www.convertunits.com/info/zoll+%5BGermany%5D
The zoll is equal to 0.2634 m. But historically it varied from
location to location and time to time. Metric units are the only true
units of measure that have a historical fixed value.
If inch is making inroads into Germany it is only because those using
it know the population is unfamiliar and use it to create the right
type of confusion in order to cheat the consumer. Write to companies
that insist on using it and get your friends to do the same and get
them to change to all metric usage.
Jukka K. Korpela
> I think you are confusing products actually being measured in inches
> and the inch being used as a trade name (Gewebename).
"Trade name" is something completely different. You mean "marketing
expression". It's still wrong.
> When you buy a
> Monitor or similar device you can not buy it by the inch.
Granted, there's a difference. But expressing some property of a device in
units not accepted by applicable (in this case, EU) legislation is still
wrong.
Similarly, you don't by a car by horsepower or by watt, but if the power of
the engine is expressed in marketing or brochures, it shall, by law, be
expressed in watts. Until the end of next year, it is allowed to express it
in other units as well, provided that this expression is not more prominent
than the expression in SI units.
> You don't say "give me 18.375 inches of that monitor" or
> "37.815 inches of those pants.
I don't, but the advertizes claim their monitor size to be, say, 21 inches.
> Write to companies
> that insist on using it and get your friends to do the same and get
> them to change to all metric usage.
And how long would that take? Can't we just ask the officials to do their
job and force merchants to advertize by the law?
--
Yucca, http://www.cs.tut.fi/~jkorpela/
Peter Niessen
> The "inch" (its old german name "Zoll" fell out of favour recently)
> has become a unit of measurement to know when shopping for consumer
> electronics in Germany.
Ah, where's an Abmahnverein when you really need them?
Cheers, Peter.
>
> Klaus
>
Zipplewrath
[snip]
>
> Inches are acceptable where exactness or precision is not an issue.
That's kind of an odd statement in this context. In the vast
majority of
retail commerce, any reasonable level of precision, or even accuracy,
isn't
particularly required. 2 significant digits is about all the typical
consumer
needs. A 100 count box will rarely actually have 3 decimal places of
precision. Truth is a 50 count box will have some variability.
If inches are acceptable in such cases, this would be inclusive of
almost all retail transactions. Inches are accurate enough to handle
two or three significant digits.
I suspect what you really mean is that the use of nonmetric
dimensions
is relatively acceptable when the dimension doesn't really describe
anything
specific, but is more of a description of a class of features. A
"foot long
sandwich" or a "quarter pounder" are a couple of good examples. In
the
case of the TV dimension, a "35 inch flat screen" is mostly a
differentiation
from a 27 inch or some other size. It is almost understood by the
market
place that if one cares whether it is 35 or 34 inches, one better do
some
more detailed measurement of the exact feature of interest. Truth is
the use of nonmetric units in a metric market is probably a good way
to
indicate that the measurements are not exact in any sense.
Euric
> Euric wrote:
> > I think you are confusing products actually being measured in inches
> > and the inch being used as a trade name (Gewebename).
>
> "Trade name" is something completely different. You mean "marketing
> expression". It's still wrong.
When the unit inch is used to describe something like the size of a
pipe or a monitor in which the number used does not reflect an actual
dimension then it is referred to as a trade name or trade descriptor,
whether that name is the best choice or not. A half inch pipe is more
like 15~16 mm ID, a dimension that is not close to the approximate 13
mm which a half inch is sup[pose to be. A 17 inch monitor is not
really 17 inches. A 3.5 inch floppy is truly 90 mm x 94 mm x 3.3 mm,
neither of these 3 dimensions equals 3.5 inches (88.9 mm).
>
> > When you buy a
> > Monitor or similar device you can not buy it by the inch.
>
> Granted, there's a difference. But expressing some property of a device in
> units not accepted by applicable (in this case, EU) legislation is still
> wrong.
I agree. so why do they get away with it if it is such any easy to
dispute situation?
>
> Similarly, you don't by a car by horsepower or by watt, but if the power of
> the engine is expressed in marketing or brochures, it shall, by law, be
> expressed in watts. Until the end of next year, it is allowed to express it
> in other units as well, provided that this expression is not more prominent
> than the expression in SI units.
>
> > You don't say "give me 18.375 inches of that monitor" or
> > "37.815 inches of those pants.
>
> I don't, but the advertizes claim their monitor size to be, say, 21 inches.
My point is you buy it as is. You buy it by description and not "by
the inch". You don't buy monitors at a price of "so many" euros per
inch. There is no direct correlation between the price of a 21 inch
monitor and one that is 19 inches. That is why the shops are able
sell it this way. They are simply using the inch as a trade name.
>
> > Write to companies
> > that insist on using it and get your friends to do the same and get
> > them to change to all metric usage.
>
> And how long would that take? Can't we just ask the officials to do their
> job and force merchants to advertize by the law?
That should be quite easy. Research and find the appropriate that
distinctly states that the sale of products in non-SI units is illegal
and then bring a lawsuit against the offenders.
Now isn't there a law in the EU somewhere that recognizes that a unit
of measure legal in one country is legal in all. Since the inch is
legal in the UK it can also be used elsewhere in the EU. This year a
German court overturned a lawsuit against a UK company (Mangers)
selling spirits in gills (marked as 71 mL) in Germany. The lawsuit I
believe was brought on by the German agency responsible for making
sure alcoholic beverages are in legal sizes. The court rules that
since the gill was legal in the UK products in that size could not be
excluded from selling in Germany.
Your officials may be operating within the law. If you don't think
so, then make an issue of it.
>
> --
> Yucca,http://www.cs.tut.fi/~jkorpela/
Andreas Prilop
> Since the inch is legal in the UK it can also be used elsewhere in the EU.
Quite wrong! Council Directive 80/181/EEC, Article 1 (b) states:
those listed in Chapter II of the Annex only in those Member States
where they were authorized on 21 April 1973 and until a date to be
fixed by those States
--
Solipsists of the world - unite!
Jukka K. Korpela
It seems that the deadline will be removed. That's at least what the
Commission has proposed; see
http://ec.europa.eu/enterprise/prepack/unitmeas/uni_ms_en.htm
On the other hand, the inch, as well as the Russian verst (a historical
unit) and jukantuuma (a unit that I just invented), _are_ allowed in the EU,
as long as they are used as "supplementary indication" according to Article
3 of the directive. The Article requires: "The indication expressed in a
unit of measurement listed in Chapter I [i.e., in SI units and some
additional units] shall predominate. In particular, the indications
expressed in units of measurement not listed in Chapter I shall be expressed
in characters no larger than those of the corresponding indication in units
listed in Chapter I."
Needless to say, the condition is often ignored. And nobody really pays
attention to it when expressing the size of a monitor in inches.
So it is legal to specify the power of an engine in an advertisement in
(some) horsepowers, or in andreaspowers if you like, as long as you announce
the power in watts (or multiples of the watt) with at least the same
visibility. Similarly, you can use the inch as long as you don't announce
anything commercially relevant in inches only, or in inches more visibly
than in meters.
The use of "supplementary indications" is allowed till the end of 2009. Not
surprisingly, the Commission wants to have this deadline removed, too.
--
Yucca, http://www.cs.tut.fi/~jkorpela/
Stan
> Now isn't there a law in the EU somewhere that recognizes that a unit
> of measure legal in one country is legal in all. Since the inch is
> legal in the UK it can also be used elsewhere in the EU. This year a
> German court overturned a lawsuit against a UK company (Mangers)
> selling spirits in gills (marked as 71 mL) in Germany. The lawsuit I
> believe was brought on by the German agency responsible for making
> sure alcoholic beverages are in legal sizes. The court rules that
> since the gill was legal in the UK products in that size could not be
> excluded from selling in Germany.
>
> Your officials may be operating within the law. If you don't think
> so, then make an issue of it.
The UK defence must have rested on the right for EU member states to
export to other member states without any barriers to trade. It
probably had nothing to do with the legality of units (it was marked
in ml so no problem in that sense). The German agency would probably
have argued that the 71 ml bottle is not on the list of German
prescribed quantities (a separate form of legal control which is meant
to protect the consumer from variations in quantity of packaged
products not being sufficiently distinct in apparent size).
This should not be confused with the legal control of commodities that
are priced and sold per unit of measurement. It's difficult to see how
cross border disputes within the EU can arise over this aspect of
trade because all EU member states are obliged to enforce the use of
metric as the primary unit.
Phil hall
None of this
bystander
wrote:
> Andreas Prilop wrote:
> > On Wed, 26 Nov 2008, Euric wrote:
>
> >> Since the inch is legal in the UK it can also be used elsewhere in
> >> the EU.
>
> > Quite wrong! Council Directive 80/181/EEC, Article 1 (b) states:
>
> > those listed in Chapter II of the Annex only in those Member States
> > where they were authorized on 21 April 1973 and until a date to be
> > fixed by those States
>
> It seems that the deadline will be removed. That's at least what the
> Commission has proposed; seehttp://ec.europa.eu/enterprise/prepack/unitmeas/uni_ms_en.htm
The inch is, and will remain, a legal unit permitted in the UK for
"Road traffic signs, distance and speed measurement", and for nothing
else.
might...@hotmail.com
wrote:
How often in the course of the day does the average German encounter
the inch or zoll? How comfortable is the average German with the inch
or zoll? How well do they understand it? How many have complained
because they felt that the unit caused them to make a wrong decision
or the size of the product was different then they thought?
Janis Papanagnou
>
> How often in the course of the day does the average German encounter
> the inch or zoll?
While the more popular TV sets are typically measured in cm, computer
monitors are still labelled in inch, though mostly using the pictogram
alike " symbol (e.g. 24") instead of the written word (e.g. 24 Zoll).
Pipes (e.g. for water) are also named in fractions/multiples of Zoll.
> How comfortable is the average German with the inch or zoll?
In the past (though my memories go back no more than 40 or so years) the
word "Zollstock" (the stick/staff to measure length) was quite common,
despite having the metre (and cm and mm) as primary units in the country.
Some of those staffs had two scales, metres (Meter) and inch (Zoll).
Another area where inch seems still common, at least in spoken language
(not sure about standards), are the (water/gas) pipes/tubes diameters.
> How well do they understand it?
I think we have to differentiate specialized folks (who have to do with
monitors, pipes, etc., in their daily work) and the average German (as
you called it) who generally uses items described solely metric.
In case of monitor such a 24" is a lable that will be seen in relation
(larger/smaller/a bit larger/much larger/...), but it's practically
unnecessary to know the exact cm value.
> How many have complained
> because they felt that the unit caused them to make a wrong decision
> or the size of the product was different then they thought?
My guess would be; close to none.
Janis
Janis Papanagnou
> On Sun, 18 Jan 2009 09:16:11 +0100, Janis Papanagnou wrote:
>
>>>How many have complained
>>>because they felt that the unit caused them to make a wrong decision
>>>or the size of the product was different then they thought?
>>
>> My guess would be; close to none.
>
>
Yeah, I noticed that with several US brands, but is that common
for other, non-US jeans brands as well?
> and, as usual for clothing, some
> people do believe that a certain inch size should fit, but no longer
> does ;-)
>
> Jeans sizes in inches are a much more reasonable idea than common German
> sizes for clothing which have no real relation between an acutal unit
> and a certain number.
Indeed.
> Maybe they had once ago, but they are adjusted now
> again and again to fit current trends and expectations.
>
> Personally, I would prefer a reasonable metric system here everywhere,
> such as trousers, shoes etc. You got those for hats and shirts by collar
> size.
The clothing sizes hereabouts, in Germany, are a horror! The
inventors should be shepherd in a madhouse. Really.
And many EU countries have their own numbers, all differing.
But I seem to recall to have seen "EU" sizes in underwear, IIRC;
maybe that's a first step to standardization. Though I don't
know whether those numbers have anything in common with metric
units; I fear they don't.
Janis