Why do HD manufactures mislead us?

Discussion in 'Computer Information' started by Stan R., Nov 23, 2005.

  1. Stan R.

    Stan R. Guest

    Hello. I'm want to have a food discussion, to clear up somethings.

    I know there have been soem discussions on this in the past, but, I
    think some things just aren't clear.

    Whay exactly is it that HD makers use decimal to show their final
    advertised size, when your Pc, be it Windows, a UNIX based system, Mac,
    or other, show the final value from Binary (ie 1KByte = 1024 Bytes.)

    Why is it one has to go to the store, get what is advertised to be "400
    GB", set it up, only to find it's really 372.529 GB instead?

    (The MATH: 400,000,000,000 Bytes x (1024^3) = 372.529029846)

    Yes, the HD makers have been doing this for decades now, but I must ask,
    if any OS (or bios for that matter) reports drive sizes based on Binary,
    why can't HD makers do the same, instead of creating confusion?

    Does it not make sense to advertise the size as you would see it when
    it's connected to the computer?

    Again, I know this topic has bean hashed out in countless venues before,
    I just feel somethings need to be cleared up, because I honestly feel
    like we are getting more screwed as hard drives are getting larger.

    The way things are now, if they advertise 1000 gigs, you're only getting
    931.3~, that's almost a 70 gigs less then you'd think you'd be getting.
    Again, /is/ this really fair?
    Stan R., Nov 23, 2005
    1. Advertisements

  2. Stan R.

    Duane Arnold Guest

    Is there a box of Kleenex in the house?

    Duane :)
    Duane Arnold, Nov 24, 2005
    1. Advertisements

  3. Stan R.

    Brian Guest

    I think if you do a little more research on this topic you will find that
    the HD manufacturers are not "lying to you". The drives are actually the
    size stated but after partitioning, formatting and disregarding any bad
    sectors, the drives have information stored on them (or sectors disregarded)
    that decrease the initial size of the drive. In most cases the drives are
    actually larger than stated but cannot be formatted as such because of space
    required for indexing and boot records etc. If you are truely interested in
    this subject you should get the latest copy of upgrading and repairing PC's
    by Scott Mueller. It goes in-depth on this subject and how hdd size is
    Brian, Nov 24, 2005
  4. Stan R.

    VWWall Guest

    Stan is correct. The difference is the drive maker's use of 1K=1000,
    v.s. the computer reporting 1KB=1024. There's usually a little more in
    decimal size than the makers claim, and formatting has not made a major
    change in capacity since the early drives, where the users had to low
    level format the drive themselves. Sector interleave, anyone? :-(

    Do some research yourself and find just how little space is taken by the
    "format" done by any modern operating system. You'll be surprised!

    Read it again, Brian, or if it truly says what you stated, get a
    different book.
    VWWall, Nov 24, 2005
  5. Stan R.

    nos1eep Guest

    Ya got that right.

    nos1eep, Nov 24, 2005
  6. Stan R.

    Stan R. Guest

    I didn't say they were lying. I said it is misleading
    This may be true, but what I'm talking about, from a consumer'sAND
    computer user's stand point, is that you don't get what you _expect_
    based on whats written on the box. The bigger drives get the less you
    get compared to whats expected. To me it's always seemed like a
    marketing game. The HD makers know darn well that 1024 factor is the
    norm on computers, but they have always ignored this. Thats the problem
    I have with the whole situation. Instead of advertising in a way that
    would match what you really SEE when looking at the formatted drive
    (when the entire partition is used) they continue this path. I wonder
    how long they can keep it up.
    Stan R., Nov 24, 2005
  7. Stan R.

    Eckstein C. Guest

    Bollocks. You don't loose much space when formatting and partitioning.
    The fact the OP was making (and you conveniently snipped) was what was
    written on the box you get from your local computer store isn't what the
    average buyer *thinks* they are getting.

    Swindling, weather directly, or via a technical/marketing loop hole is
    still swindling.
    Eckstein C., Nov 26, 2005
  8. Stan R.

    ToMh Guest

    To me it's always seemed like a

    1024 is general1y only the norm for memory, which has to conform with the
    binary addressing. Disk drives have no such constraint and using binary
    addressing would make no sense. Look at file sizes on your computer, they
    are all decimal.
    ToMh, Nov 27, 2005
  9. Stan R.

    Fakename Guest

    They're expressed in decimal when you check their size, but they're
    stored on the hard drive in file clusters that are measured in BYTEs
    (ie, 1024 based). When you look at a file in Windows you may notice it
    will have the file size and then the "size on disk". The "size on disk"
    tells you how many clusters that file is using. (not in number, but in
    overall bytes consumed. Divide by your cluster size to obtain the
    number of clusters used.)

    So ALL hard drives do use the "binary based addressing" you're refering
    to. Even the file systems that do funky things with their cluster sizes
    (ie reiser 4, etc...) still allocate by cluster, not by raw file size.
    Fakename, Nov 27, 2005
  10. Stan R.

    Stan R. Guest

    Um, no. They are show in base 10, but KB = 1024 Bytes and so on. Open up
    a file over 1 KB or 1 MB and do the math your self.
    Stan R., Nov 27, 2005
    tyler.m.burns, Dec 22, 2005
    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.