Velocity Reviews - Computer Hardware Reviews

Velocity Reviews > Newsgroups > Computing > NZ Computing > Computer Makers Sued Over Hard-Drive Size Claims

Reply
Thread Tools

Computer Makers Sued Over Hard-Drive Size Claims

 
 
MarkH
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      09-26-2003
Brett Cooper <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in
news:(E-Mail Removed):

> On Thu, 25 Sep 2003 20:35:54 +1000, Jay <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:
>
>>asdf wrote:
>>
>>>
>>>
>>>

>>http://www.reuters.co.uk/newsArticle...yNews&storyID=
>>3470394&section=news
>>>
>>> Sounds good to me.
>>>

>>
>>Sounds really stupid to me.
>>

> The add where saying that the systems came with 150gigabyte hard disk,
> but only contained a 140gigabyte hard disk.


Personally I don't think that the lawsuit will work.

But I would like to see the HDD manufacturers change the HDD descriptions
to reflect accurately the true HDD capacity.

In computer terms kilo indicates 2 to the power of 10, not 10 to the power
of 3 like in other industries. Computers work in binary, not in decimal!

kilobytes = 2¹º bytes
Megabytes = 2²º Bytes
Gigabytes = 2³º Bytes

To a computer 1024 is a nice round number, 1000 is not as easy a number to
work with.



--
Mark Heyes (New Zealand)
See my pics at http://homepages.ihug.co.nz/~markh/
"There are 10 types of people, those that
understand binary and those that don't"

 
Reply With Quote
 
 
 
 
Steven H
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      09-26-2003
In article <bl095q$5e8$(E-Mail Removed)>, http://www.velocityreviews.com/forums/(E-Mail Removed) says...
> Brett Cooper <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in
> news:(E-Mail Removed):
>
> > On Thu, 25 Sep 2003 20:35:54 +1000, Jay <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:
> >
> >>asdf wrote:
> >>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>http://www.reuters.co.uk/newsArticle...yNews&storyID=
> >>3470394&section=news
> >>>
> >>> Sounds good to me.
> >>>
> >>
> >>Sounds really stupid to me.
> >>

> > The add where saying that the systems came with 150gigabyte hard disk,
> > but only contained a 140gigabyte hard disk.

>
> Personally I don't think that the lawsuit will work.
>
> But I would like to see the HDD manufacturers change the HDD descriptions
> to reflect accurately the true HDD capacity.
>
> In computer terms kilo indicates 2 to the power of 10, not 10 to the power
> of 3 like in other industries. Computers work in binary, not in decimal!
>
> kilobytes = 2¹º bytes
> Megabytes = 2²º Bytes
> Gigabytes = 2³º Bytes
>
> To a computer 1024 is a nice round number, 1000 is not as easy a number to
> work with.


personally i think the lawsuit should work it is False advertising

they are advertising capacaty in binary notation:

selling a 120 GB Hard Drive - thats Giga Byte (base 2 notation),
not Giga (which denotes base 10 notation) not anything else.

it is false advertising, and at least in NZ it is illegeal to do so -
CGA, Item not fuffilling what it is intended to do - that is be a 120
Giga Byte hard drive

--
================================================== =
Steven H
 
Reply With Quote
 
 
 
 
Jay
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      09-26-2003
Brett Cooper wrote:

> On Thu, 25 Sep 2003 20:35:54 +1000, Jay <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:
>
>>asdf wrote:
>>
>>>
>>>
>>>

>>http://www.reuters.co.uk/newsArticle...4&section=news
>>>
>>> Sounds good to me.
>>>

>>
>>Sounds really stupid to me.
>>
>>The claimants are must be real stupid.
>>Everyone, except them, knows what 1MB means.
>>They must have more money than brains.
>>But very soon they will have less money!
>>
>>Maybe they should sue sugar manufacturers because a 1kg bag of
>>sugar doesn't contain 1024 grams!

>
> True, but you are talking about grams, bytes are a little different.
> 1kbyte is the equivalent of 1024 bytes.


That is exactly where you are wrong.
1KB is 1024 bytes, 1kB is 1000 bytes, 1KiB is 1024 bytes.

> This be because when working with binary switches 1024 is a whole number.


You have you binaries mixed up. 1024 is a decimal number!

>
> The add where saying that the systems came with 150gigabyte hard disk, but
> only contained a 140gigabyte hard disk. It's like saying something is
> valued at $10oct which is octal for $8dec. People don't describe $'s in
> octal, and HD storage is not described in decimal. Clear case of big corps
> misleading the consumer.


kilo = 1000
Very simple.

 
Reply With Quote
 
Uncle StoatWarbler
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      09-26-2003
On Fri, 26 Sep 2003 02:44:10 +0000, MarkH wrote:

> But I would like to see the HDD manufacturers change the HDD descriptions
> to reflect accurately the true HDD capacity.


Several of them already have. The whole marketing megabyte things is
coming back to bite them now disk capacities are past 100Gb - it's not
like the dfference is a couple of Mb anymore.


 
Reply With Quote
 
Jay
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      09-26-2003
MarkH wrote:

> Jay <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in
> news:bl0r03$6nlo9$(E-Mail Removed)-berlin.de:
>
>>> This be because when working with binary switches 1024 is a whole
>>> number.

>>
>> You have you binaries mixed up. 1024 is a decimal number!

>
> No, 1024 is a decimal representation of a number that could be represented
> in any base you like. 1024 (DEC) is the same number as 10000000000 (BIN)
> or 400 (HEX) or 2000 (OCT).


And you are wrong too! Your "No" is quite inappropriate.
There is nothing wrong with what I said.
1024 *is* a decimal number and nothing else.

>
> Which number is more suitable for representing a big group of something:
> 10000000000 or 1111101000?
>
> Computers work with convenient numbers like:
> 0 - 255
> 1024
> 1048576
> 1073741824
>
> Just because they look cumbersome in Decimal notation does not mean that
> they aren’t much easier for the computer to work with than the numbers we
> prefer to use.


Thanks for the lesson, teach. But I know what a number is.
We are talking about hard disk sizes, so go and play teachers
in some other thread.

 
Reply With Quote
 
Jay
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      09-26-2003
Uncle StoatWarbler wrote:

> On Fri, 26 Sep 2003 02:44:10 +0000, MarkH wrote:
>
>> But I would like to see the HDD manufacturers change the HDD descriptions
>> to reflect accurately the true HDD capacity.

>
> Several of them already have. The whole marketing megabyte things is
> coming back to bite them now disk capacities are past 100Gb - it's not
> like the dfference is a couple of Mb anymore.


Totally wrong.
It is still the same percentage. The difference is the same.
Nothing is coming back to bite anyone anywhere for any reason whatsoever.


 
Reply With Quote
 
MarkH
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      09-26-2003
Jay <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in
news:bl1it3$7426d$(E-Mail Removed)-berlin.de:

> And you are wrong too! Your "No" is quite inappropriate.
> There is nothing wrong with what I said.
> 1024 *is* a decimal number and nothing else.


1024 is no more decimal than any other number! You are confusing a number
with the way the number is being described, 1024 is only one of many names
for that number.

Do you really think that referring to a number in decimal notation really
makes that number uniquely decimal? Having 1024(DEC) apples is no
different from 2^10 apples or 400(HEX), my point being that they are the
same number with only the notation being different.

1024 is many things, not just decimal number. Another way of describing
the number is 2 to the power of 10, this make it a good computer
alternative to the number 1000 we use for the term kilo (also referred to
as 10 to the power of 3).

The original point is that in computer terms 1024 bytes is used for a
kilobyte because 1024 is exactly 2^10, which makes it a good number for the
purpose that it is used. For HDDs the manufacturers have chosen to use the
decimal value of 1000 for Kilo because that gives a bigger number, despite
it being well established that a kilobyte is 1024 bytes.




--
Mark Heyes (New Zealand)
See my pics at http://homepages.ihug.co.nz/~markh/
"There are 10 types of people, those that
understand binary and those that don't"

 
Reply With Quote
 
Brett Cooper
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      09-27-2003
On Sat, 27 Sep 2003 00:36:19 +1000, Jay <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:

>MarkH wrote:
>
>> Jay <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in
>> news:bl0r03$6nlo9$(E-Mail Removed)-berlin.de:
>>
>>>> This be because when working with binary switches 1024 is a whole
>>>> number.
>>>
>>> You have you binaries mixed up. 1024 is a decimal number!


I didn't have my numbers mixed up.

>>
>> No, 1024 is a decimal representation of a number that could be represented
>> in any base you like. 1024 (DEC) is the same number as 10000000000 (BIN)
>> or 400 (HEX) or 2000 (OCT).

>
>And you are wrong too! Your "No" is quite inappropriate.
>There is nothing wrong with what I said.
>1024 *is* a decimal number and nothing else.
>
>>
>> Which number is more suitable for representing a big group of something:
>> 10000000000 or 1111101000?
>>
>> Computers work with convenient numbers like:
>> 0 - 255
>> 1024
>> 1048576
>> 1073741824
>>
>> Just because they look cumbersome in Decimal notation does not mean that
>> they aren’t much easier for the computer to work with than the numbers we
>> prefer to use.

>
>Thanks for the lesson, teach. But I know what a number is.
>We are talking about hard disk sizes, so go and play teachers
>in some other thread.


Get your head out of the sand and peek outside your square..
 
Reply With Quote
 
Ben Perston
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      09-27-2003
On Fri, 26 Sep 2003 21:43:59 +0000, MarkH wrote:

> The original point is that in computer terms 1024 bytes is used for a
> kilobyte because 1024 is exactly 2^10, which makes it a good number for
> the purpose that it is used. For HDDs the manufacturers have chosen to
> use the decimal value of 1000 for Kilo because that gives a bigger
> number, despite it being well established that a kilobyte is 1024 bytes.


I understand that there is a series of prefixes coined for exactly this
purpose... kibi-, mebi- etc. It's sorta stupid to use prefixes that
previously had precise definitions to denote something similar but not the
same.
 
Reply With Quote
 
Matthew Poole
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      09-27-2003
In article <bl3hnu$32l23$(E-Mail Removed)-berlin.de>, Jay <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:
>MarkH wrote:

*SNIP*
>1024 is a decimal number. It is not a binary number, and it is not
>a hex number.
>

*SNIP*

bzzzzzt, wrong answer. The only bases which could not have 1024 as a
valid number are binary, ternary and base 4 (dunno the name for that
system).
Once again you're talking out your Aussie arse, and making an ass of
yourself.

--
Matthew Poole Auckland, New Zealand
"Veni, vidi, velcro...
I came, I saw, I stuck around"

My real e-mail is mattATp00leDOTnet
 
Reply With Quote
 
 
 
Reply

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are Off


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
VOIP over VPN over TCP over WAP over 3G Theo Markettos UK VOIP 2 02-14-2008 03:27 PM
City sued over limits on photography (article from today's (NJ) Bergen Record) Bob Digital Photography 222 03-31-2006 03:23 AM
Re: Photographer sued by subject over long-distance street shot William Graham Digital Photography 22 07-29-2005 09:46 PM
Photographer sued by subject over long-distance street shot Mike Henley Digital Photography 137 07-19-2005 04:28 PM
getting sued over wedding pictures Ron Digital Photography 83 07-25-2004 01:22 AM



Advertisments