Window is stealing my HD size

CJT wrote:

J. Clarke wrote:

snip
When federal agencies start manufacturing and selling data storage
devices
then that requirement might have some bearing. However at the present
time they mostly manufacture hot air and annoyance, as they have always
done, so I fail to see what bearing such requirements have.
snip

Who do you suppose is one of the biggest buyers of disk drives?

And of course if no drives are marked in "the proper SI units" the
government will simply cease to use computers, just as they ceased to use
gasoline because it is not sold in "the proper SI units" and computer
monitors because they are not sized in "the proper SI units" and ceased to
drive because the street signs are not marked in "the proper SI units" and
quit monitoring traffic speeds because the monitoring devices are not
calibrated in "the proper SI units" and ceased to fly because the
altimeters and airspeed indicators are not marked in "the proper SI units".

--
--John
to email, dial "usenet" and validate
(was jclarke at eye bee em dot net)

wrote:

Just got a Maxtor Onetouch III 500Gb

Probably 500 GB (byte, not bit).

Windows reports 465GB capacity (500,105,216,000 bytes), NTFS.

That could be spelled as 465 GiB (prefix G: 10^9, prefix Gi: 2^30).
Windows
is using a somewhat misleading terminology here -- see
http://physics.nist.gov/cuu/Units/binary.html (so much for the
relevance of
this

PartitionMagic reports 476,937.5Mb (4K cluster size), NTFS.

Probably it reports 476937 MB, but that would be better spelled 476937
MiB
(prefix M: 10^6, prefix Mi: 2^20 -- same misleading terminology, see
the
same link above...).

Calculate the numbers -- using the correct prefixes, it all matches.

It's difficult to understand why this confusion is continuing for such
a
long time. At least /some/ people seem to have fun with it

Gerhard

Previously J. Clarke wrote:
CJT wrote:

J. Clarke wrote:

snip
When federal agencies start manufacturing and selling data storage
devices
then that requirement might have some bearing. However at the present
time they mostly manufacture hot air and annoyance, as they have always
done, so I fail to see what bearing such requirements have.
snip

Who do you suppose is one of the biggest buyers of disk drives?

And of course if no drives are marked in "the proper SI units" the
government will simply cease to use computers, just as they ceased
to use gasoline because it is not sold in "the proper SI units" and
computer monitors because they are not sized in "the proper SI
units" and ceased to drive because the street signs are not marked
in "the proper SI units" and quit monitoring traffic speeds because
the monitoring devices are not calibrated in "the proper SI units"
and ceased to fly because the altimeters and airspeed indicators are
not marked in "the proper SI units".

That is utter BS, completely missing the point. And I think you know
it. The fact is that if there is a 'k' before th unit, you have every
right to expect it to be an SI prefix and _nothing_ else, unless it is
clearly marked as being something different. There are laws and
treaties about that. Local old units may or may not be allowed, but if
it looks like SI, then it has to be SI. Period.

Arno

Previously wrote:
wrote:

Just got a Maxtor Onetouch III 500Gb

Probably 500 GB (byte, not bit).

Windows reports 465GB capacity (500,105,216,000 bytes), NTFS.

That could be spelled as 465 GiB (prefix G: 10^9, prefix Gi: 2^30).
Windows
is using a somewhat misleading terminology here -- see
http://physics.nist.gov/cuu/Units/binary.html (so much for the
relevance of
this

PartitionMagic reports 476,937.5Mb (4K cluster size), NTFS.

Probably it reports 476937 MB, but that would be better spelled 476937
MiB
(prefix M: 10^6, prefix Mi: 2^20 -- same misleading terminology, see
the
same link above...).

Calculate the numbers -- using the correct prefixes, it all matches.

It's difficult to understand why this confusion is continuing for
such a long time. At least /some/ people seem to have fun with it

Simple: People do not like to admit they are wrong. And many do not
understand what the SI is and why it is important. If a HDD vendor
advertises 500GB and then gives you 450'000'000'000 Bytes, you can
return the product and they likely face a stiff fine. They cannot
claim that "their G" means 900M SI. The RAM vendors get away with
it first because it is not a measurement unit in their case, but
a "size class" and second because they give you more than advertised.

Arno

Arno Wagner wrote:
Previously J. Clarke wrote:
CJT wrote:

J. Clarke wrote:

snip
When federal agencies start manufacturing and selling data storage
devices
then that requirement might have some bearing. However at the
present time they mostly manufacture hot air and annoyance, as
they have always done, so I fail to see what bearing such
requirements have.
snip

Who do you suppose is one of the biggest buyers of disk drives?

And of course if no drives are marked in "the proper SI units" the
government will simply cease to use computers, just as they ceased
to use gasoline because it is not sold in "the proper SI units" and
computer monitors because they are not sized in "the proper SI
units" and ceased to drive because the street signs are not marked
in "the proper SI units" and quit monitoring traffic speeds because
the monitoring devices are not calibrated in "the proper SI units"
and ceased to fly because the altimeters and airspeed indicators are
not marked in "the proper SI units".

That is utter BS, completely missing the point. And I think you know
it. The fact is that if there is a 'k' before th unit, you have every
right to expect it to be an SI prefix and _nothing_ else, unless it is
clearly marked as being something different. There are laws and
treaties about that. Local old units may or may not be allowed, but if
it looks like SI, then it has to be SI. Period.

Thats overstating it, most obviously with ram.

Arno Wagner wrote:

Previously J. Clarke wrote:
CJT wrote:

J. Clarke wrote:

snip
When federal agencies start manufacturing and selling data storage
devices
then that requirement might have some bearing. However at the present
time they mostly manufacture hot air and annoyance, as they have always
done, so I fail to see what bearing such requirements have.
snip

Who do you suppose is one of the biggest buyers of disk drives?

And of course if no drives are marked in "the proper SI units" the
government will simply cease to use computers, just as they ceased
to use gasoline because it is not sold in "the proper SI units" and
computer monitors because they are not sized in "the proper SI
units" and ceased to drive because the street signs are not marked
in "the proper SI units" and quit monitoring traffic speeds because
the monitoring devices are not calibrated in "the proper SI units"
and ceased to fly because the altimeters and airspeed indicators are
not marked in "the proper SI units".

That is utter BS, completely missing the point. And I think you know
it. The fact is that if there is a 'k' before th unit, you have every
right to expect it to be an SI prefix and _nothing_ else, unless it is
clearly marked as being something different. There are laws and
treaties about that. Local old units may or may not be allowed, but if
it looks like SI, then it has to be SI. Period.

Fine, find me the statute or treaty that requires this. What I _know_ is
that when you Europeans start pontificating about American law I don't know
whether to laugh or cry.

--
--John
to email, dial "usenet" and validate
(was jclarke at eye bee em dot net)

J. Clarke wrote:

And of course if no drives are marked in "the proper SI units" the
government will simply cease to use computers, ...

Now, for some reason, (most? all?) drives /are/ marked in SI units. It
seems the drive manufacturers are a bit more, hm, money-smart than some
others and know how to sell their stuff to big customers

I believe you when you become a major supplier of harddisks to the US
federal government and don't mark them in SI units. Until then...

... just as they ceased to use gasoline because it is not sold in "the
proper SI units" and computer monitors because they are not sized in
"the proper SI units" and ceased to drive because the street signs are
not marked in "the proper SI units" and quit monitoring traffic speeds
because the monitoring devices are not calibrated in "the proper SI
units" and ceased to fly because the altimeters and airspeed indicators
are not marked in "the proper SI units".

Maybe not, but I didn't remember that the original question touched any
of these. The question was about whether there is a law that
establishes which units are legal -- and, you can jump up or down as
much as you want, there is a law in the USA (and in most other
countries) that does just this. It also provides for exceptions (which
one can easily establish by reading it), but that has nothing to do
with the question whether the law exists.

Gerhard

J. Clarke wrote:
Fine, find me the statute or treaty that requires this.

Already found. You read?

Try selling a disk (or a memory, since that has been brought up) with
fewer bytes than stated, interpreting the given size (e.g. 500 GB or
500 GiB) in SI units. Then you see the power of the law

What I _know_ is that when you Europeans start
pontificating about American law I don't know whether to laugh or cry.

Who's "you Europeans"? And I know that it's really much more sad than
funny when citizens of any country (and that includes the USA) don't
know about their law.

Gerhard

wrote:

J. Clarke wrote:
Fine, find me the statute or treaty that requires this.

Already found. You read?

Yes, I read absolutely nothing about any requirement that goods sold in the
Unites States be labelled in any particular fashion.

That's one of the reasons I'm laughing, you seem to think that the
government being required to do something places a constraint on entities
other than the government. It may work that way wherever you are but it
does not work that way here.

Try selling a disk (or a memory, since that has been brought up) with
fewer bytes than stated, interpreting the given size (e.g. 500 GB or
500 GiB) in SI units. Then you see the power of the law

What law? You still haven't shown me a law that has anything whatsoever to
do with the labelling of goods.

What I _know_ is that when you Europeans start
pontificating about American law I don't know whether to laugh or cry.

Who's "you Europeans"? And I know that it's really much more sad than
funny when citizens of any country (and that includes the USA) don't
know about their law.

I see. So you assert that there is a law and that I am ignorant because I
am unaware of it, but you still cannot cite such a law, instead referring
to another statute that has absolutely no bearing whatsoever on the
labelling of goods.

Looks like you're resorting to name calling when you can't back up your
argument with facts.

--
--John
to email, dial "usenet" and validate
(was jclarke at eye bee em dot net)

wrote:

J. Clarke wrote:

And of course if no drives are marked in "the proper SI units" the
government will simply cease to use computers, ...

Now, for some reason, (most? all?) drives /are/ marked in SI units. It
seems the drive manufacturers are a bit more, hm, money-smart than some
others and know how to sell their stuff to big customers

I believe you when you become a major supplier of harddisks to the US
federal government and don't mark them in SI units. Until then...

Now you are confusing an action which a company takes voluntarily for the
purpose of increasing sales with one that is mandated by law.

... just as they ceased to use gasoline because it is not sold in "the
proper SI units" and computer monitors because they are not sized in
"the proper SI units" and ceased to drive because the street signs are
not marked in "the proper SI units" and quit monitoring traffic speeds
because the monitoring devices are not calibrated in "the proper SI
units" and ceased to fly because the altimeters and airspeed indicators
are not marked in "the proper SI units".

Maybe not, but I didn't remember that the original question touched any
of these. The question was about whether there is a law that
establishes which units are legal -- and, you can jump up or down as
much as you want, there is a law in the USA (and in most other
countries) that does just this.

You keep asserting this. Repetition of assertions does not make them so.
If there is such a law, show it to me.

It also provides for exceptions (which
one can easily establish by reading it), but that has nothing to do
with the question whether the law exists.

Again, show me the law. And not the one about mom, apple pie, and the
Federal government.

--
--John
to email, dial "usenet" and validate
(was jclarke at eye bee em dot net)