Follow us on...
Follow us on Twitter Follow us on Facebook
Register
Page 1 of 5 12345 LastLast
Results 1 to 8 of 37
  1. #1
    Stridder44's Avatar
    Stridder44 is offline Universal Traveler
    Join Date
    Nov 2002
    Location
    Cali
    Posts
    661
    Thanks
    0
    Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts

    Computer makers sued over hard-drive size claims

    Check it here. Personally, Im glad they're doing it. I hope they win. It's lame for them to advertise something that isn't.
    http://www.realultimatepower.net/...Are you ready to get pumped!!?

  2. #2
    Krevinek's Avatar
    Krevinek is offline Evil PPC Tweaker
    Join Date
    Oct 2001
    Posts
    645
    Thanks
    0
    Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
    I hope it fails, and it will be an uphill battle. There is an actual REASON why this 'missing space' happens... It has to do with how OSes count Kilo, Mega, Giga, Tera, etc... and how drive manufacturers count Kilo, Mega, Giga, Tera. Drive manufacturing counts Kilo/Mega/Giga/Tera as factors of 1000 (10^3 is Kilo 10^6 is Mega, etc) which is accurate, but OSes count space different due to a trick to save CPU time on old machines. They count in factors of 1024 (2^10 is Kilo, 2^20 is Mega, etc). Because of this difference, what you see spewed back on the computer screen is less than what is written on the box you buy.

    To be honest, the wrong groups are being targetted with this lawsuit. Apple, Sun, Microsoft and others should be sued for making OSes that deceptively use 1024 when 1000 should be used for these standard prefixes. There have even been prefixes assigned for a counting system where Kilo = 1024 (Kibi, Mebi, Gibi, Tebi, etc)... but OS makers refuse to use them.

    The drive manufacturers are advertising it just fine... so are the computer makers. Especially if you are smart enough to read the fine print on what 1 GB really equals. However, the OS is the one giving the false reading.

    Essentially, it boils down to the fact that you ARE getting what you are told you are getting, but the OS is counting what you have in a different manner, giving the illusion of less space.
    iMac G5 2.0Ghz (10.4.x, Main System)
    MacBook 1.83Ghz (...Feburary)
    "Sometimes I drive to run from all my demons \ Sometimes I drive so I can be alone \ Sometimes I drive to see the world in different light \ Sometimes I drive for no reason at all" - Assemblage 23, Drive

  3. #3
    Ricky's Avatar
    Ricky is offline Registered User
    Join Date
    Aug 2001
    Location
    Bay Area, CA
    Posts
    2,068
    Thanks
    0
    Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
    I hope they win. It's false advertising, to tell you the truth. Yes, I am aware that HDs are measured in 1,000 MBs, but the average consumer doesn't. You can't make up your own non-standard unit of measurement.
    Mac Pro Xeon 4x2.66 GHz | OS X 10.4.7, WinXP | 3 GB RAM | 250 GB HD | 250 GB HD | 300 GB HD
    MacBook Core Duo 2.0 GHz | OS X 10.4.7 | 1 GB RAM | 80 GB HD
    Mac mini Core Solo 1.5 GHz | OS X 10.4.7 and Windows XP SP2 | 512 MB RAM | 60 GB HD | 400 GB HD
    Pentium 4 3.06 GHz | Windows XP SP2 and OS X 10.4.3 | 1.5 GB RAM | 100 and 120 GB HD

  4. #4
    Arden's Avatar
    Arden is offline Where mah "any" keys at?
    Join Date
    Dec 2002
    Location
    Spokane, WA
    Posts
    7,754
    Thanks
    0
    Thanked 1 Time in 1 Post
    Krev, you're facts are correct but your logic is flawed. It is because the OS reads a drive as a factor of 2, not of 10 (1024 is a factor of 2, 1000 is a factor of 10) that the lawsuit should win. Drive manufacturers should make their 150 GB drives 150 GB of 1024-byte KB, not 1000-byte KB... in other words, they should make them 161,061,273,600-byte drives, not 150,000,000,000-byte drives. This is something that has bugged me for a long time, and it's nice to see someone doing something about it.
    Systems:
    2.5 GHz MacBook Pro Core 2 Duo, 4 GB RAM, 320 GB hard drive, runs 10.6.8
    1.6 GHz iMac G5, 1.5 GB RAM, 120 GB hard drive, runs 10.4.11 (out of commission)
    iPhone 4, 16 GB, iOS 4.3.5

  5. #5
    GroundZeroX's Avatar
    GroundZeroX is offline Searching for logic
    Join Date
    Sep 2001
    Location
    Texas
    Posts
    205
    Thanks
    0
    Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
    I thought all of it had to do with how the file allocation tables are set up. When i was a Windows User, I remember getting more harddrive space out of a harddrive when going from Fat16 to Fat32. Thats because Fat16 only lets clusters of information in the size of I believe it was 16k. That means that if a file is like 36k, it would take up 48k. Fat32 made the data clusters smaller, allowing for much less data loss. I know conceptually a lot of this data is old, but back then, thats how it was explained to me that out of a whopping 2.0GB HD, only 1.8 was usable.
    Powerbook 12" 1.5GHz | 1.25GB | 100GB HD
    iTunes 2419 songs
    iPod 30GB Photo
    iSight

  6. #6
    Stridder44's Avatar
    Stridder44 is offline Universal Traveler
    Join Date
    Nov 2002
    Location
    Cali
    Posts
    661
    Thanks
    0
    Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
    I bought a 10 gig iPod, and found out it was only 9.2 gigs. Thats almost a whole gig difference! It is not right.
    http://www.realultimatepower.net/...Are you ready to get pumped!!?

  7. #7
    Pengu's Avatar
    Pengu is offline Digital Music Pimp
    Join Date
    Nov 2002
    Location
    Um.. Here.
    Posts
    1,593
    Thanks
    0
    Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
    The partition type will affect how much space is used as a minimum for each file. For instance, a HFS+ drive that is 2 Gig will show every file as being 4kilobytes or bigger. On a UFS drive of the same file, every file has a minimum size of 1 kilobyte. see how this could save you space? fat16/fat32 is the same sort of thing. so yes GroundZeroX, you are correct. But, the other issue is this:
    from apple.com
    1GB = 1 billion bytes; actual formatted capacity less
    The way computers work, they HAVE to use a binary system to store data. Why should apple go out and say, "this computer comes with a 18.6Gb HD", when every other compay using the EXACT SAME hard drive is calling it a 20 Gb hard drive. EVEN the manufacturers. And it is not misleading information. as shown above in the quote, apple shows, and i assume all other companies worth their salt show, that the FORMATTED capacity is less. If Joe Bloggs goes out and makes a computer system that works on a DECIMAL system, yippee for him, he can use a 20 Gb hard drive, and it will BE a 20 Gb hard drive.
    I don't know if any of the americans here, or anywhere are aware, but the rest of the world recognizes the US as the land of sueing one another. These idiots are just out to make a quick buck.
    Last edited by Pengu; September 19th, 2003 at 12:57 AM.
    PowerMac G5 Dual 2.0Ghz | 1Gb | 250Gb | Bluetooth | NVidia GeForce 6800 Ultra DDL 256Mb | 20" Cinema Display | MX1000 Wireless Laser Mouse | OS X 10.3.9

    PowerMac G4 400Mhz | 832Mb | 40Gb + 120Gb | OS X Server 10.3.8 - Web Dev, Proxy, Mail, NAT, Firewall, Backup

    Netgear Gigabit Switch | Sony Ericsson P910i Smartphone | iPod Colour 60Gb

  8. #8
    Arden's Avatar
    Arden is offline Where mah "any" keys at?
    Join Date
    Dec 2002
    Location
    Spokane, WA
    Posts
    7,754
    Thanks
    0
    Thanked 1 Time in 1 Post
    An HFS disk has a maximum of 65,536 allocation blocks. To find the minimum size of a file on an HFS disk, you have to divide the capacity of your drive by 65,536. Enter HFS+: now you can determine the minimum size of allocation blocks. With Apple's built-in tools, you're limited to 4 KB; with other tools, you can set the size of your allocation block anywhere from .5 KB to 8 or 16 KB (though why you'd set it to 16, I have no idea).

    This is still a different issue, though, than the original post. The topic isn't about the size of allocation blocks, but by the definition of a gigabyte. Computer makers typically define a gigabyte as 1000 megabytes instead of 1024 to make their drives look bigger, and hopefully this lawsuit will change that practice.
    Systems:
    2.5 GHz MacBook Pro Core 2 Duo, 4 GB RAM, 320 GB hard drive, runs 10.6.8
    1.6 GHz iMac G5, 1.5 GB RAM, 120 GB hard drive, runs 10.4.11 (out of commission)
    iPhone 4, 16 GB, iOS 4.3.5

 

 
Page 1 of 5 12345 LastLast

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •