Hey LaCie, where the hell are my 16GB's ??? :mad:

bigbadbill

bigbadbill

Flaccid Member
Just added a 250 GB LaCie HD to my system and was shocked by how much disk space I was shorted — it only has capacity for 234GB. Now I know that every HD you buy doesn't quite offer what the box promises in disk space, but come on – 16 Gig's???

We're talking disk space, Stop exaggerating! ;)

BTW- the HD works great!
 
Isn't it because of the calculation:
1000mb = 1gb
but actually it's 1024mb = 1gb

Still, this should make 244gb for your disc. Where are the remaining 10gb? Hmmmmm. My 80gb has 76gb. Multiplicated with 3 gives me 12gb less. So, it seems to be normal, but beside the 1024 thing I can't tell you why. ;)
 
Don't be mad, Everything's there in the math
The math goes like this:
1024 Bytes = 1 KB
1024 KB = 1 MB
1024 MB = 1 GB
So 1 GB = 1,073,741,824 Bytes (or 1 billion Bytes = .93 GB)
therefore, your usable space of 234 GB = 251,255,586,816 Bytes
Just 1.255 billion Bytes more than you were expecting?
(If your HD was truly 250 Billion Bytes, then you would have 232.8 GB available, check the math)
Is this a good way to express the hard drive size? Probably not, but all drive manufacturers do this the same way.
 
Expect some sort of lawsuit sooner or later over the advertised space of hard drives -- just like they did with monitors some years back (that's why you see the "16 in. viewable" specification on 17" monitors).
 
They SAY actual formatted capacity less. If you can find a way to use a hard drive that doesnt use 1024 bytes as the basis of measurement, you'll get "more"
 
There already is a lawsuit, but it is aimed at computer makers. The only people responsible for the mess would be HD manufacturers and OS writers. Although, personally I believe the OS writers are more at fault, because they were the ones to start using the whole 1024 Bytes = 1 Kilobyte nonsense.
 
the formatting process uses very little space on the drive, perhaps a few MB
All you need is the computer and the OS to display the drive size in Bytes (the way the HD manufacturer advertises) and that will be a consistent amount.
It'll be worse with TeraBytes (by the same math 1.1 Trillion bytes = 1 TB), that's 99.5 GB difference.
I hope they come up with a better way of displaying HD space.
 
Krevinek said:
Although, personally I believe the OS writers are more at fault, because they were the ones to start using the whole 1024 Bytes = 1 Kilobyte nonsense.
Click to expand...

You let those whiney users in and the whole neighborhood goes to pot. :mad: Computers are binary devices and as such 1024 is exactly the right thing to use. Going base ten would make you life much harder as you need to keep track of lots of irrelevant digits because you could not use the naturally round numbers.
 
because they were the ones to start using the whole 1024 Bytes = 1 Kilobyte nonsense.
Click to expand...

Ok. first off, i think you need to understand about how computers work. Everything works on bits. either 1 or 0. So a 1 bit number can be 0 (0) or 1 (1). a 2 bit number can be 0 (00), 1 (01), 2(10) or 3 (11). the maximum number per bit-count is almost never divisible by 10 (until you get really big). this is why we have 64, 128, 256, 512, RAM instead of "round numbers." Hence, a byte is 8 bits, a kilobyte is 1024 bytes (kilo meaning 1000, and 1024 being the closest binary number to 1000) a megabyte is 1024 kilobytes, etc. So if you want to blame someone, blame the guy who thought computers had to be either on or off. oh wait. thats right. it works quite well. its just stupid people who can't read the small (or often not that small) print. if anyone should be sued, why not the drive makers. they COULD make a drive that is actually 1024*1024*1024 etc, so that a 100 gig drive would actually be 102400 megabytes.
 
drives use a certain percentage for formatting. this includes the volume info. so to be able to keep track of a certain amount of usable space, it needs to have a certain amount of format space. the larger the drive the larger the format space. what's so hard to figure about that? you haven't ever seen a drive that says it has all the advertised space available once it's formatted, so why get freaked out cause it's a 250 gb drive? :rolleyes:
 
In the beginning I was very surprised about my DVDs where I had 4.3gb instead of 4.7gb. ;) This is really confusing. I think they should get away from the 1000mb=1gb thing.
 
edX said:
drives use a certain percentage for formatting. this includes the volume info. so to be able to keep track of a certain amount of usable space, it needs to have a certain amount of format space. the larger the drive the larger the format space. what's so hard to figure about that? you haven't ever seen a drive that says it has all the advertised space available once it's formatted, so why get freaked out cause it's a 250 gb drive? :rolleyes:
Click to expand...

Actually, most of the 16GB difference lies in the fact that HD manufacturers use 1000 B = 1KB, 1000KB = 1MB, 1000MB = 1GB, etc for their capacities. Every OS on the planet counts it as 1024 B = 1KB, 1024KB = 1MB, 1024MB = 1GB, etc. This is a problem as when you reach multiple GBs of data, this difference becomes VERY noticable. The poster is getting about 250 billion bytes of data like the HD manufacturer claims, but the OS is reporting that 250 billion bytes in a different manner, causing confusion.
 
edX said:
drives use a certain percentage for formatting. this includes the volume info. so to be able to keep track of a certain amount of usable space, it needs to have a certain amount of format space. the larger the drive the larger the format space. what's so hard to figure about that? you haven't ever seen a drive that says it has all the advertised space available once it's formatted, so why get freaked out cause it's a 250 gb drive?
Click to expand...
Actually, most of the 16GB difference lies in the fact that HD manufacturers use 1000 B = 1KB, 1000KB = 1MB, 1000MB = 1GB, etc for their capacities. Every OS on the planet counts it as 1024 B = 1KB, 1024KB = 1MB, 1024MB = 1GB, etc. This is a problem as when you reach multiple GBs of data, this difference becomes VERY noticable. The poster is getting about 250 billion bytes of data like the HD manufacturer claims, but the OS is reporting that 250 billion bytes in a different manner, causing confusion.

:D It can't be said enough! ;)
 
It wouldn't matter anyway, because if the OS used the notion that 1 megabyte = 1,000k, your system would report the "true" amount of space on the drive (meaning a 250GB drive would format out to be damn close to 250GB), but you'd still be able to fit the same amount of data on the drive as if the system were reporting 1 megabyte = 1,024k. The difference would be that your files would be larger/smaller -- you're not getting stiffed any space on the drive, it's just being reported to you in a fashion that differs from the label on the box, which is misleading. It's been this way for years and years and years, so the only people surprised by this are those new to computers.
 
ElDiabloConCaca said:
So the only people surprised by this are those new to computers.
Click to expand...

Well I've been an Apple user since my Apple IIe and I do know that disk space isn't "all it's measured up to be" -- BUT 16 GIGS!?!?

I was surprised...
 
16 gigs is a lot, but on my 60GB hard drive, it formats out to 55.89 GB. That's 4.11 GB that's "missing." For your drive, roughly four times the size of mine, I would expect to be "missing" 16.44 GB (4 * 4.11 GB), which is right on target with what you're experiencing.

It sucks, yes, but it's something we have to get used to until they change the way hard drive capacities are advertised.
 
The conversions in bits/bytes/MB/GB are irrelevant. The point is that hard drive space is advertised in clear, readable type claiming a size which cannot be reached due to formatting. Manufacturers/resellers IMO should be required to list unformatted and formatted sizes right next to each other.

Just like diagonal monitor measurements are now required to be clarified. And they shouldn't stop there. I'd like to see hard drive performance specs listed as "theoretical" and "realistic". They only list theoretical, which is a joke as we all know.

Initially, I was against the lawsuit, which I did follow briefly. But now that I'm buying 200+ GB drives and can actually make use of those "missing" 10+ GB (nearly an hour of DV footage), suddenly it doesn't seem like such a bad idea. I'm not asking for much, just say "Lacie 250 GB drive. [240 GB available after OS X formatting]." or something like that.
 
We'll just have to accept that the bigger the drives get, the bigger the difference will be. And that users who seemingly have not heard of the fact that a MB is _not_ 1000 KB will spring to our boards and publish their anger. I wish some harddrive manufacturer would have some humour and pack a page to the drive that reads: "If you want to make use of the full XY GB, try to write shorter letters with MS Word or read that line on the box again about capacity."
 
Just for the record — from the box:

"NOTE: 1GB = 1,000,000,000 bytes; total accesible capacity varies depending on operating environmet."

guess i was warned ...

BUT 16 GIGS !?!?

$#@&%!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top