Computer Makers Sued Over Hard-Drive Size Claims

Discussion in 'NZ Computing' started by asdf, Sep 24, 2003.

  1. So it's nothing to do with it being 2^9 bytes then?

    As in 0000 0000 -> 1111 1111 binary inclusive.
     
    Uncle StoatWarbler, Sep 27, 2003
    #41
    1. Advertisements

  2. asdf

    Jay Guest

    bzzzzzzzzzt, wrong irrelevance.
    You forgot base 0. And a whole lot of languages that don't use
    arabic numerals. Not to mention my abacus.
    Get it right. Is it an arse or an ass?
     
    Jay, Sep 27, 2003
    #42
    1. Advertisements

  3. asdf

    Jerry Guest

    It isn't bullshit

    Memory size will be a power of two, it isn't practical to make a
    memory chip otherwise
    Hard drive size can be any number, and is usually expressed as a
    decimal number.
    Processor speed is expressed as a decimal number, I suppose next some
    idiot will claim that because it is in a computer the manufacturers
    have been cheating them.
    If you buy a computer cable of any sort, it will be sold in a length
    of decimal meters, or perhaps feet.
    hard drive size has no relationship to a power of two number, where a
    RAM chip always does.

    Jerry
     
    Jerry, Sep 27, 2003
    #43
  4. No, YOU are the one who said it's decimal. Nobody but you has insisted
    that 1024 is a decimal number.

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

    My real e-mail is mattATp00leDOTnet
     
    Matthew Poole, Sep 27, 2003
    #44
  5. Yes, fine, there are others. But they're all totally irrelevant to this
    discussion, since they can't present 1024 as a number in their own base.
    Ass as in donkey, and you're certainly that stubborn even when you're
    most demonstrably wrong, and arse as in English slang for posterior.

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

    My real e-mail is mattATp00leDOTnet
     
    Matthew Poole, Sep 27, 2003
    #45
  6. asdf

    MarkH Guest

    So, you finally get it, it’s about time.
    And yet are all the same number.
    Actually I was not saying that, I am saying that the number 1024(DEC) is
    actually the same as the number 10000000000(BIN). They are just
    represented in another form, maths is cool like that, you can represent
    numbers in so many different ways.
    No, I described it in decimal notation, I could have described it in many
    other notations but it would have still been the same number.

    If you have 9 apples and a friend has 011(OCT) apples and I have 1001
    (BIN) apples and John has 0x9(HEX) apples, then you would say that we all
    have a different number of apples. The fact is that we all have the same
    number of apples, but no need for facts to get in the way of what you
    believe.
    Oh god, I don’t think that I could stand some sort of stupid explanation
    of how 5 miles and 8.04672 Kilometres are different distances, one being
    miles and the other being kilometres. Please spare us all.

    How many different numbers on this list:
    1024
    1.024 x 10^3
    10000000000(BIN)
    02000(OCT)
    0x400(HEX)
    512 x 2
    256 x 4
    2048/2
    1000000000(BIN) + 1000000000(BIN)

    I believe that a byte can have values between 0 and 255, but you seem to
    think that that would not be possible because a byte’s value has to be a
    binary number. What you can’t understand is that 0-255 is actually
    00000000-11111111, you think that they are not the same numbers, you must
    find yourself confused and bewildered often.
     
    MarkH, Sep 27, 2003
    #46
  7. asdf

    Brett Cooper Guest

    This is the point that your missing, a kiloBYTE is not 1000(dec) bytes!
    like a kilometer isn't a kilomile, it's got a different base.
    The number was a decimal reference to point out the rounding features of
    the binary system. Do you get confused when asked which is heavier,
    1ton of lead or 1ton of flowers?
    do you mean bits per sec or bytes per sec, either why we are talking about
    the computer byte numbering system. One Gigabyte is 2 to the 30th power
    (1,073,741,824) bytes. One gigabyte is equal to 1,024 megabytes.
    Here are some pages to help you get passed your mindset. I hope they
    provided you with a better understanding of the subject.

    http://www.cknow.com/tutorcom/term06_bitsbytes.htm
    http://www.pcnineoneone.com/howto/bandwidth1.html

    Brett
     
    Brett Cooper, Sep 28, 2003
    #47
  8. asdf

    Brett Cooper Guest

    4bits is a nibble, I think..
     
    Brett Cooper, Sep 28, 2003
    #48
  9. asdf

    Brett Cooper Guest

    Sorry Jay,
    I didn't know you had problems,
    reading big sentences.
    Now I understand why
    you got mistaken..
     
    Brett Cooper, Sep 28, 2003
    #49
  10. asdf

    Jay Guest

    No it is not. 64MB is 64MB when expressed decimally. And 67.1MB is
    just 67.1MB when expressed decimally.
    Ah! So you are just mixing up your terminology. What you mean to say
    is that drives used to be specified in MiB but are now in MB.

    This has _absolutely_ nothing to do with decimal.
    But it is _everything_ to do with units of measurement.

    Please, don't start talking about decimal Mb because it is
    a load of nonsense.
     
    Jay, Sep 28, 2003
    #50
  11. asdf

    Jay Guest

    2^9 is also a decimal number I'll have you know.
    Mmmmm... looks like a binary number there.
    But I cannot understand what 255 (11111111 binary) has got to with 512.
     
    Jay, Sep 28, 2003
    #51
  12. asdf

    Jay Guest

    The point is that you are confused.
    A kilo is 1000, nothing else.
    The rounding features of the binary system?
    No, you are totally wrong.
    1GB is 1000000000 bytes.
    You are mixing GiB with GB. They are not the same thing.
    Just because you can produce a couple of web sites that have their
    facts wrong (or out of date) does not prove a case.

    I find the second one quite amusing because 1kbps is most definitely
    1000bps and not 1024bps. That's right - your 56kbps modem runs at 56000bps
    and definitely not 57344bps. That is because the encoding consists of
    7 bit pcm at 8000bps, and 7*8000 is 56000bps.

    So get your facts right!

    The world has moved on a bit since you acquired your knowledge.
    There are KiB and kB and they are *not* the same thing.
     
    Jay, Sep 28, 2003
    #52
  13. asdf

    Jay Guest

    A nibble isn't a base.
    Base 4 isn't 4 bits.
    4 bits has nothing to do with base 4.
     
    Jay, Sep 28, 2003
    #53
  14. asdf

    Jay Guest

    I'll quote what Jerry said:

    "HD storage IS usually described in decimal"

    And here is what I said to Brett Cooper:
    The fact is that 1024 is *not* a binary number let alone a particularly
    whole binary number (because 1101 is a whole binary number as is 1000).
    What Brett was trying to say was that 1024 is a power of 2.
    But he didn't have the right words in his vocabulary.
     
    Jay, Sep 28, 2003
    #54
  15. asdf

    Mainlander Guest

    Yes it is. It doesn't matter whether it is a multiple of two, power of
    two or whatever. The prefix kilo means 1000, mega means 1 million.
     
    Mainlander, Sep 28, 2003
    #55
  16. asdf

    Mainlander Guest

    Not power of 3 (base 3), power of 10 (base 10).

    Kilo means 1000, mega means 1000000, giga means 1000000000. Those terms
    were invented over 200 years ago for those meanings by the French in
    their metric system. If you want to define some base-2 quantities, define
    new prefixes.
     
    Mainlander, Sep 28, 2003
    #56
  17. asdf

    Mainlander Guest

    Rubbish.

    1 byte = 1 unit. Giga means 1,000,000,000, therefore 1,000,000,000 bytes
    is one gigabytes.
    Rubbish again.
     
    Mainlander, Sep 28, 2003
    #57
  18. asdf

    Mainlander Guest

    A kilogram is not 1024 grams.

    A kilometre is not 1024 metres.

    There is nothing inherently that says a kilobyte is 1024 bytes.
     
    Mainlander, Sep 28, 2003
    #58
  19. asdf

    Mainlander Guest

    quaternary probably
     
    Mainlander, Sep 28, 2003
    #59
  20. asdf

    Mainlander Guest

    Because that's the defined IBM standard for sector size. There's nothing
    that inherently requires it.

    The actual number of bytes in a raw sector is more because of extra bytes
    used by the hardware, and if they use encoding whereby each byte on the
    disk contains five or six actual data bits then that increases the actual
    byte count as well.
     
    Mainlander, Sep 28, 2003
    #60
    1. Advertisements

Ask a Question

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

You'll need to choose a username for the site, which only take a couple of moments (here). After that, you can post your question and our members will help you out.