The problem isn't how they describe the size of the data. It's that the data whose size they describe is completely irrelevant to the point they are trying to m

The problem isn't how they describe the size of the data. It's that the data whose size they describe is completely irrelevant to the point they are trying to make. I didn't say "well duh, Google has at least 5GB on you, that's a small number really". I said "well duh, of course Google has your gmails and Drive docs" - and they are as small or large as you make them, their size is completely irrelevant. I did snipe at the comparison to Word docs, not because it's a non-commensurable unit but because Word docs don't have a size - I can easily make a single Word doc 5GB large. But that was an aside quite irrelevant to my main point and maybe I should have omitted it.