Well, I don’t know to which “programers (sic) industry” you belong 0-0 knowledge. In my little corner of the computer world (Oracle DBA) different versions of UNIX are called operating systems and Windows 95 or Windows 98 is called an operating system. Though of course we have other, less flattering names to use when referring to Microsoft products. 
Still looks normal to me.
Normal USA use is to separate hours, minutes, and seconds with a colon, not a period.
I think the thought is that while it is tough to switch, it is only tough once, and only tough for us, whereas not switching is inconvenient and costly for everyone for ever. Do your grandkids a favour and the rest of the world too, do it cold turkey, do it tonight. Sticking it out has no advantages I can see since all trade with the rest of the world already is metric.
We really should have done it in the Y2K time frame, then we really would have had things to complain about for a while, but we would all be better off for it.
The idea that it is impossible to get people to switch is pretty interesting. It seems as though the 250+ million people in the USA are the only ones who are incapable of change in the entire world. If everyone else was able to manage it, what’s the big deal? I can’t imagine any arguments that would stand up to the evidence that so many others have made a switch without having their heads explode.
j-beda - Question…how do you propose getting the entire country to switch? Americans, as you may know, are pretty stubborn about certain things…I mean, look how long it took for pro soccer to catch on.
Also, please reread the rest of my post. Inches and feet are convenient for us. So are pounds. It’s easier to get an idea of how tall or long something is by two measurements (feet and inches) or three (yards) than by just one (centimeters or meters). Our “unusual” measurements were designed for practical use. We use metric where it is practical. Makes sense?
And how many Americans are actively involved in international trade? Enforcing metric for everyone, everything, and every place makes no more sense than making computer programming a requirement for high school graduation.
“But Darrell, it makes things INCREDIBLY AWKWARD and also wastes ENORMOUS SUMS OF MONEY!” Somehow, I doubt this. So international trade will require a dual system? Fine, use the dual system. I mean, one more frigging set of numbers on the box. If I were involved in this kind of marketing, I’d think no more of it than printing the instructions in four languages. Dual-system speedometers have been with us for decades and I don’t remember anyone complaining. (Because most roads in the US don’t lead to other countries, there’s no need for massive expenditures for extra speed limit signs.) Nearly every science book I’ve read has used both systems, and I don’t remember them being massively heavy or expensive (that would come later, and it had nothing to do with metric). The only times I never see dual measurements are for film, drugs, foot races, etc…again, where metric is better.
Want convenience? There are calculators which can instantly make the conversions. My father owns one right now.
So yes, metric should definitely be taught in schools, and it would benefit most people to know how to make the conversions. But scrap the old system? Forget it. It’s hard enough destroying the institutions we don’t want.
I personally disagree with this statement. I grew up in a country that used the metric system, and I have moved to the USA. I think that using metres and centimetres to measure length/height of common objects worked just fine and was not any less convenient that feet/inches/yards. It’s all what you’re accustomed to.
Just today I was in the supermarket trying to buy cereal. They had boxes of cereal and cereal in bulk. The boxes had 12oz sold at $2.99, the bulk kind was being sold at $3.29/lb. Which is cheaper? I can either take $2.99 divide by 12 and multiply by 16 to get the price per pound, or take $3.29 divide by 16 and multiply by 12 to get the price per ounce.
In metric, the box would be 400 grams sold at $2.99, and the bulk would be sold at $6.99/kg. To compare, I multiply $6.99 by 4 and move the decimal point around until I get it close to $2.99. Clearly 7*4=28 -> $2.80 is cheaper than $2.99.
The metric system lets me do the comparison without any division, and that’s much easier for me to do in my head. After all, I don’t really want to take a calculator to the supermarket and look like a cheapskate…
Quoth DKW:
I don’t know… How many wear sneakers, or drive a foreign car, or buy oil or any of its derivatives? Even cars alone would be a sufficient reason to switch: They have to be measured in some system, and the tools used to maintain the car must match the units. You then either have separate models for sale in the US and everywhere else in the world, or cars sold in the US with different measurements than everywhere else. And what if a person is trying to compare cars here and elsewhere? Suppose I read about some new European car that gets 20 kilometers to the liter… Is that good or bad? Let’s face it, it makes everything simpler if everyone is using the same measurements, so we might as well use the simpler measurements.
As for the claim that the American system is somehow easier, can you tell me off the top of your head how many cups are in a gallon? How about pints, or ounces? I didn’t even know how much a “tablespoon” was until just last year! On the other hand, I was able to easily convert between the various metric units in second grade.
Chronos - Once again, if you’re going to have a product that’s going to be sold in an international market, why not simply use both systems? Like I’ve seen for air conditioners, dishwashers, refrigerators, televisions, and all kinds of other appliances for many, many years? Why not give in and accomodate EVERYONE? Maybe two more pages in the car manual. Maybe another millimeter on the shoe tag. Multiply that by the total number of imports and it’s still just a drop in the bucket.
Again, a lot of these companies are already printing the instructions in multiple languages. Doesn’t seem to be a problem. Why would dual measurements?
Oh…16 cups, 8 pints, 4 quarts, and at 8 ounces a cup…128 ounces. Piece of cake. Of course, I’m not in the habit of constantly multiplying or dividing recipes to get different serving sizes, so this isn’t that big an issue anyway. If I did, then I’d definitely go metric. Which wouldn’t be a problem, since our scales use both systems. 
passerby - Er…whenever my family buys cereal, our main concerns are 1) What cereal we like, and 2) What’s on sale. But that’s just us.
What’s your objection to “looking like a cheapskate”, anyway?
Look, I understand all the arguments, and some of them are pretty compelling. But I just don’t see the benefits of a nationwide, all-encompassing, rigidly enforced switch to metric, and in any case I think we should consider other options first.
Isn’t anyone going to back me up on this? I’m astonished at the solidarity on the other side of this issue…
DKW, I can’t really add much to the points made above. But I think the reason many people favour a switch to metric is because in the long run it eliminates confusion for EVERYONE - americans travelling abroad, europeans coming to the USA, businesses, etc…
The long-term view seems to be that clearly having one set of measurements would be beneficial. What would you say if every state in the USA had its own system of measurements? At some point there is enough commerce / exchange between two different entities that having a common system of measurements is very useful.
Saying “how much international trade is there, really?” seems to me shortsighted in the 21st century. As far as calculators being instantly able to convert values, that’s true, but when I look around me, I don’t see that many people carrying calculators around with them. And to take the example of the grocery store, it’s easier to convert a per kg price to a per g price than it is to convert a per pound price to a per ounce price. So the common man (or woman) would benefit in his (or her) daily life from a simpler system of measurements.
DKW, not to be completely metric gung-ho, but it seems to me the main compelling reason to not change to metric is the bulk of people that are not comfortable with the new units. They have an easy grasp of measurements in the old system, and don’t in the new. That grasp of the measurements is only achieved through using them. It is something that would be easily switched through teaching the new system, and through usage. For school kids, it can be done by simply doing homework assignments with the new system (or both systems just for kicks). But the hard part is changing the comfort level of the multitudes who are past school, who are ingrained. They only usages they see is what is imposed by measurements they must make. Soda comes in 2 Liter bottles. There appears to be an effort to drive the smaller bottles to 1 Liter instead of 20 ounce, and perhaps one day we will see 1/2 Liter cans instead of 12 oz.
As for dual labelling, maybe it makes sense, especially when there is a large segment not used to the new system. But you’re still left with deciding whether you want the round measurements in the old or new system. Do you want 8oz (228.6 gm), or 230 gm (8.05 oz)? If you pick one, you are catering to keeping the old system active and hampering a switch. If you pick the other, you are encouraging a switch. Taking the long view of things, a switch is better for everyone.
That doesn’t mean we will necessarily give up traditional units for particular uses, for instance football field lengths. It just means those might become more obscure, and lost to tradition. So what?
Your argument seems to be “Fine, that all makes sense, but why do we have to make everyone do it?” Nobody is going to keep you from thinking in feet and inches if that suits you, but it makes sense that if the government wants to encourage change, at a minimum government signs (like traffic signs and distance markers) should reflect that.
What’s taught in schools at the moment?
From my limited research (I found the math curricula of 5 out of 50 states via an internet search engine, then I had to do some real work) I understand that both metric and standard US measurements are taught in elementary and high schools, but it varies from state to state.
Would a 5th grader be fairly comfortable with the idea of measuring in centimetres and millimetres, grams and kilograms?
Would this be the context in which to teach a 9th grader about accuracy and giving an answer to a sensible number of decimal places?
What proportion of metric material would kids consider OK?
What measurements would seem unnatural in metric to a US school student?
I think most of those questions can be answered only by professional metric-education workers, precisely because American education varies from state to state, and, within states, from town to town.
But I know that I’m of above-average intelligence, yet largely had to relearn metric when I got into high-school science. I got some metric material in elementary school (in Maine, over 40 years ago), but it didn’t stick.
That’s my real complaint about the US not going metric. The damned waste of education time, learning English measures that I never have gotten completely straight, and learning metric several times over because I wasn’t getting enough exposure to hold on to it. I’d estimate that a full two or three years of my early education in “mathematics” was sucked up by having to deal with the US not being metric.
Quick – how many tablespoons in a half-gallon? How many cubic inches in a dry pint? A fluid pint? Faugh!