When your right click on a drive in XP's windows explorer, and get these
different reported sizes, what is the story?

Example, for a 20 GB partition - rounded to 3 significant digits below:
(choose whichever I guess; the two listings below are seen next to each
other in windows explorer):

12. 4GB 11.5 GB used spaee (tot capacity adds up to
19.9 GB)
7.56 GB 7.04 GB free space (tot capacity adds up to
18.6 GB)
(tot = 19.9 GB) (tot = 18.5 GB)

and as yet a third variation reported in BING:

11.9 GB used,
7.22 GB free
(total = 19.1 GB)

Anyone have a good explanation for the differences? I assume part of it
might have to due with the defenition of the HD sizes, e.g.: 1 GB or 1.024
GB, for "1 GB size" - not sure?

or for a 40 GB example:

20.36 GB 18.9 GB used space
19.64 GB 18.2 GB free space
capacity:
40.00 GB 37.2 GB

Try run,type:cmd In cmd typeiskPart In DiskPart type:list disk type:
list volume type:HELP For all cmds.

"Bill in Co." wrote:

> When your right click on a drive in XP's windows explorer, and get these
> different reported sizes, what is the story?
>
> Example, for a 20 GB partition - rounded to 3 significant digits below:
> (choose whichever I guess; the two listings below are seen next to each
> other in windows explorer):
>
> 12. 4GB 11.5 GB used spaee (tot capacity adds up to
> 19.9 GB)
> 7.56 GB 7.04 GB free space (tot capacity adds up to
> 18.6 GB)
> (tot = 19.9 GB) (tot = 18.5 GB)
>
> and as yet a third variation reported in BING:
>
> 11.9 GB used,
> 7.22 GB free
> (total = 19.1 GB)
>
> Anyone have a good explanation for the differences? I assume part of it
> might have to due with the defenition of the HD sizes, e.g.: 1 GB or 1.024
> GB, for "1 GB size" - not sure?
>
> or for a 40 GB example:
>
> 20.36 GB 18.9 GB used space
> 19.64 GB 18.2 GB free space
> capacity:
> 40.00 GB 37.2 GB
>
>
>

That wasn't my question, nor does it answer it.

Andrew E. wrote:
> Try run,type:cmd In cmd typeiskPart In DiskPart type:list disk type:
> list volume type:HELP For all cmds.
>
> "Bill in Co." wrote:
>
>> When your right click on a drive in XP's windows explorer, and get these
>> different reported sizes, what is the story?
>>
>> Example, for a 20 GB partition - rounded to 3 significant digits below:
>> (choose whichever I guess; the two listings below are seen next to each
>> other in windows explorer):
>>
>> 12. 4GB 11.5 GB used spaee (tot capacity adds up
>> to
>> 19.9 GB)
>> 7.56 GB 7.04 GB free space (tot capacity adds up
>> to
>> 18.6 GB)
>> (tot = 19.9 GB) (tot = 18.5 GB)
>>
>> and as yet a third variation reported in BING:
>>
>> 11.9 GB used,
>> 7.22 GB free
>> (total = 19.1 GB)
>>
>> Anyone have a good explanation for the differences? I assume part of
>> it
>> might have to due with the defenition of the HD sizes, e.g.: 1 GB or
>> 1.024
>> GB, for "1 GB size" - not sure?
>>
>> or for a 40 GB example:
>>
>> 20.36 GB 18.9 GB used space
>> 19.64 GB 18.2 GB free space
>> capacity:
>> 40.00 GB 37.2 GB

Bill in Co. wrote:
> That wasn't my question, nor does it answer it.
>

I don't think anyone has ever cared enough to work it all out.

I'm more interested in knowing why Belgium is so far away.

To be next to Holland?

Reminds me of my insurance agent's advice on saving on my premiums. He
pointed out that since most accidents happen within 5 miles of home, the way
to save on the premiums is to move further away.

"HeyBub" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
news:(E-Mail Removed)...
> Bill in Co. wrote:
>> That wasn't my question, nor does it answer it.
>>
>
> I don't think anyone has ever cared enough to work it all out.
>
> I'm more interested in knowing why Belgium is so far away.
>

LOL!! That is GOOD!!

Colin Barnhorst wrote:
> To be next to Holland?
>
> Reminds me of my insurance agent's advice on saving on my premiums. He
> pointed out that since most accidents happen within 5 miles of home, the
> way
> to save on the premiums is to move further away.
>
> "HeyBub" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
> news:(E-Mail Removed)...
>> Bill in Co. wrote:
>>> That wasn't my question, nor does it answer it.
>>>
>>
>> I don't think anyone has ever cared enough to work it all out.
>>
>> I'm more interested in knowing why Belgium is so far away.

OK, and maybe that's it.
Thanks for letting me know.

HeyBub wrote:
> Bill in Co. wrote:
>> That wasn't my question, nor does it answer it.
>>
>
> I don't think anyone has ever cared enough to work it all out.
>
> I'm more interested in knowing why Belgium is so far away.

Colin Barnhorst wrote:
> To be next to Holland?
>
> Reminds me of my insurance agent's advice on saving on my premiums. He
> pointed out that since most accidents happen within 5 miles of
> home, the way to save on the premiums is to move further away.
>
>

I once had a cop tell me that most accidents happen within 300 yards of an
unsanitary taco stand...

Do you know how to tell when a cop has been eating donuts again?

..dezalg era seye siH

"HeyBub" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
news:(E-Mail Removed)...
> Colin Barnhorst wrote:
>> To be next to Holland?
>>
>> Reminds me of my insurance agent's advice on saving on my premiums. He
>> pointed out that since most accidents happen within 5 miles of
>> home, the way to save on the premiums is to move further away.
>>
>>
>
> I once had a cop tell me that most accidents happen within 300 yards of an
> unsanitary taco stand...
>