i was wondering, i just got a brand new hard drive that is anothe
160gb however i only can have upto 149 gbs

is there a reason its not available? this is a secondary hd =

"MaxwellKempf" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
news:(E-Mail Removed)...
>i was wondering, i just got a brand new hard drive that is another
> 160gb however i only can have upto 149 gbs?
>
> is there a reason its not available? this is a secondary hd =\
>

Drive manufacturers advertise their drives in decimal numbers. Computers see
binary. 149 is the actual size of the drive.

See;
http://wdc.custhelp.com/cgi-bin/wdc....cGFnZT0x&p_li=

-same link shorter-

http://tinyurl.com/3an62
--
D

I'm not an MVP a VIP nor do I have ESP.
I was just trying to help.
Please use your own best judgment before implementing any suggestions or
advice herein.
No warranty is expressed or implied.
Your mileage may vary.
See store for details.

Remove shoes to E-mail.

MaxwellKempf wrote:

>i was wondering, i just got a brand new hard drive that is another
>160gb however i only can have upto 149 gbs?
>
>is there a reason its not available? this is a secondary hd =\
>
>
>
With XP, if you bring up WinExplorer, then right-click on the HD, then
click on Properties, you will see the Capacity listed both ways:
in real Bytes and in what M$ calls GBs (but which are more correctly
known as GiBs).

HD vendors use the internationally recognized definitions of K = 1,000;
M = 1,000K = 1,000,000; GB = 1,000M = 1,000,000K = 1,000,000,000.

M$ uses the computer-industry de-facto standard of KB=1,024B; etc. This
common, but erroneous, definition has never caused much confusion for
sizes of RAM (at least with binary CPUs), but it continues to cause
confusion when applied to sizes of HDs.

Note that M$ does not apply this K=1,024 notion to other parameters; they
know that 1KB/s = 1,000B/s, and that 1KHz = 1,000Hz, etc.

--
Cheers, Bob

A Byte is 8 bits. A KiloByte is 1024 Bytes, a MegaByte is 1024 KiloBytes, a
GigaByte is 1024 MegaBytes. Although metric systems us powers of 10 & 1000
in such contexts, binary systems do not. In the computer industry binary
rules, especially in regards to memory addressing, and always has done. It
is disingenuous of peripheral suppliers to use measures not suited to the
binary aspect of computing.

It's not MS that are trying to confuse - it's the whole history of computing
that confuses you. Memory addressing is binary, cpu processing is binary -
to make storage an exception is daft.


"Bob Willard" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
news:(E-Mail Removed)...
> MaxwellKempf wrote:
>
>>i was wondering, i just got a brand new hard drive that is another
>>160gb however i only can have upto 149 gbs?
>>
>>is there a reason its not available? this is a secondary hd =\
>>
>>
> With XP, if you bring up WinExplorer, then right-click on the HD, then
> click on Properties, you will see the Capacity listed both ways:
> in real Bytes and in what M$ calls GBs (but which are more correctly
> known as GiBs).
>
> HD vendors use the internationally recognized definitions of K = 1,000;
> M = 1,000K = 1,000,000; GB = 1,000M = 1,000,000K = 1,000,000,000.
>
> M$ uses the computer-industry de-facto standard of KB=1,024B; etc. This
> common, but erroneous, definition has never caused much confusion for
> sizes of RAM (at least with binary CPUs), but it continues to cause
> confusion when applied to sizes of HDs.
>
> Note that M$ does not apply this K=1,024 notion to other parameters; they
> know that 1KB/s = 1,000B/s, and that 1KHz = 1,000Hz, etc.
>
> --
> Cheers, Bob

Mac wrote:

>A Byte is 8 bits. A KiloByte is 1024 Bytes, a MegaByte is 1024 KiloBytes, a
>GigaByte is 1024 MegaBytes. Although metric systems us powers of 10 & 1000
>in such contexts, binary systems do not. In the computer industry binary
>rules, especially in regards to memory addressing, and always has done. It
>is disingenuous of peripheral suppliers to use measures not suited to the
>binary aspect of computing.
>
>It's not MS that are trying to confuse - it's the whole history of computing
>that confuses you. Memory addressing is binary, cpu processing is binary -
>to make storage an exception is daft.
>
>

Uh, having lived through a lot of it (I took my first programming course at
what's now called UIUC in 1961), I don't think that the history of computing
confuses me at much as it amuses me.

To quote from http://physics.nist.gov/cuu/Units/binary.html

In December 1998 the International Electrotechnical Commission (IEC), the
leading international organization for worldwide standardization in
electrotechnology, approved as an IEC International Standard names
and symbols
for prefixes for binary multiples for use in the fields of data
processing
and data transmission. The prefixes are as follows:


------------------------------------------------------------------------
*Prefixes for binary multiples*
------------------------------------------------------------------------

* Factor * *Name * *Symbol * *Origin* *Derivation *
2^10 kibi Ki kilobinary: (2^10 )^1 kilo: (10^3 )^1
2^20 mebi Mi megabinary: (2^10 )^2 mega: (10^3 )^2
2^30 gibi Gi gigabinary: (2^10 )^3 giga: (10^3 )^3
2^40 tebi Ti terabinary: (2^10 )^4 tera: (10^3 )^4
2^50 pebi Pi petabinary: (2^10 )^5 peta: (10^3 )^5
2^60 exbi Ei exabinary: (2^10 )^6 exa: (10^3 )^6

------------------------------------------------------------------------
*Examples and comparisons with SI prefixes*
one *kibibit* 1 Kibit = 2^10 bit = *1024 bit*
one *kilobit* 1 kbit = 10^3 bit = *1000 bit*
one *mebibyte* 1 MiB = 2^20 B = *1 048 576 B*
one *megabyte* 1 MB = 10^6 B = *1 000 000 B*
one *gibibyte* 1 GiB = 2^30 B = *1 073 741 824 B*
one *gigabyte* 1 GB = 10^9 B = *1 000 000 000 B*

------------------------------------------------------------------------


{I apologize for sticking non-text in a NG, but the above table looked awful
in text.}

You may want to read the entire page at the URL above. Very clear, and
brief.

--
Cheers, Bob