Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question

Why do we get lesser memory space rather than the claimed one

Last response: in Storage
Share
April 1, 2011 8:36:49 AM

i had studied this during my 7th sem under OS but i seem to have forgotten what is the exact reason behind this:
when ever you purchase a memory stick..say a 500gb hdd or a 16 gb sdhc card...the actual size allocated for your usage is 470gb in 500gb hdd and 14.8 under 16gb sdhc card... whats the exact reason behind this... where does that 30gb and 1.2 gb get allocated to!?
a b } Memory
a b G Storage
April 1, 2011 9:49:27 AM

Because marketing people don't understand what they are doing:p  500,000,000 is how many? For a marketing person its 500Mil. But computers don't use a base 10 system, its a base 2. (Remember, there are 10 kinds of people in this world. Those that understand binary and those that don't.) If you only have 0 and 1 to work with, 500M comes out a bit smaller.

Its important to realize that the actual space goes nowhere. Its just a different way to count the same space.
m
0
l
April 1, 2011 10:27:04 AM

well....i am sry to say but ur answer is kinda wrong... i havent had the time to go back to my books till now...will do so in a couple of hrs and then get back to u..though, .i do like the idea of binary and decimal base... ur idea abt everything binary wid the computers is very true...
m
0
l
Related resources
Can't find your answer ? Ask !
a b } Memory
a b G Storage
April 1, 2011 10:45:06 AM

If you dont' know the answer, how do you know what I wrote was wrong? Just because it doesn't agree with what someone told you doesn't mean its wrong. Whoever told you something might have been wrong in the first place. For the record I never answer a question on here unless I'm 95%+ sure that I'm right. As far as I'm aware of, I'm correct on this. Feel free to check a book and reply, but I'd bet I'm right.
m
0
l
April 1, 2011 10:57:22 AM

lol...no dude..nobody told me anything before u...i had read it in college...n m quite sure thts not the exact explanation... i hope u r right but i will confirm only after i have read my books!!

cheers!!
m
0
l
April 1, 2011 11:13:07 AM

GB = decimal SI unit, 1,000,000,000 bytes
GiB = binary SI unit, 1,073,741,824 bytes

That's why you're sord of wrong 47. It's not the hard drive marketing getting it wrong per say. It's windows and other software that report it as GB when they should be reporting it as GiB.

If you want to look it up that's on you it's very easy to find.
m
0
l
a b } Memory
a c 113 G Storage
April 1, 2011 2:40:35 PM

rahulnahata said:
thaaaatsss it !!


That's pretty much what the other guy said also, why was he wrong and the second post right?

kingnoobe just explained it better.

Also don't forget when you partition and format a drive, you loose space to the file system, boot sector, etc... which means less usable space for saving files.
m
0
l
a b } Memory
a b G Storage
April 1, 2011 3:04:17 PM

Quote:
why was he wrong and the second post right?


Because I get no love:( (

I guess you guys haven't had a lot of business classes. We always picked on the marketing students.
m
0
l
April 2, 2011 9:20:21 AM

4745454b said:
Because marketing people don't understand what they are doing


I would say that the marketing people knows exactly what they are doing. They do deliberately use the amount GB and TB to make their drives look larger. It is correct, so there is no fraud, just using the confusion between GB and GiB.


It's windows and other software that report it as GB when they should be reporting it as GiB. said:

It's windows and other software that report it as GB when they should be reporting it as GiB.


But they are showing it correctly, in the amount of GB or TB it actually is. That is, the "real" GB or TB, not the strange incorrect computer business way of changing the standardized units into something else.

However, it could of course be good if the tools in Windows also showed the amounts in GiB for example.

m
0
l
a b } Memory
a b G Storage
April 2, 2011 10:05:16 AM

I actually figure its easier to advertise a 500GB drive instead of a 465 or whatever it is. Nice round numbers make it easier for us to compare things. I meant no disrespect to marketing people either. (assuming they understood what I wrote:p )
m
0
l
April 2, 2011 2:37:06 PM

The manufacturers define a kilobyte as 1000 bytes using a base 10 system whereas computers use a base 2 system with binary or 1024 bytes for a kilobyte. So for some quick and dirty math, take a drive size, say in gigabytes, of 500 and take it down to its size in bytes or rather multiply it by 1000 cubed which gives you its manufactured size in bytes. Take this number and divide it by the base 2 system for computers 1024 cubed and you'll have your actual usable space in gigabytes.

An example would be, a 500 gigabyte drive in manufacture would be 500,000,000,000 bytes, once formatted in a computer system this would be equal to 465.66 gigabytes. If you have a larger drive just drop it another 1024, aka a 2 terabyte drive, (2x1000^4) / (2x1024^4) = 1.82 terabytes (rounded up)
m
0
l
a b G Storage
April 2, 2011 3:29:39 PM

I think both "engineering" and "marketing" are to blame for the issue.

The first mistake was probably by engineering who decided to use the international system of units' prefixes (kilo, mega, giga, tera, ...) for something that isn't exactly the quantity that it's supposed to be. In the SI, "Kilo" means 1000, "Mega" means 1 000 000, "Giga" means 1 000 000 000 and "Tera" means 1 000 000 000 000, not more not less. When storage capacities were small, the divergence between the "base 2 approximation" and what the SI prefix was leading on was minimal and not that many people had PCs so nobody really cared. On a KB/KiB scale, the difference is only ~2.3%, but on the TB/TiB scape it reaches 9% and goes worst as things goes on; nice property of exponential functions :p .

Then came "marketing", their definition is actually the right one, but I'm sure being scientifically right isn't their motivation in the matter. Their mistake was probably to completely disregard the legacy usage of the terms (although wrong). They could just have switched to MiB, GiB and TiB and probably nobody would have been the wiser after a short while, but nobody wants to be the one selling 468GiB drives when the competitor sells 500GB (BTW, same reason why the XBox 2 is actually XBox 360, because XBox 2 seemed lesser than PlayStation 3 ... weird, but that is how the human mind works, also why prices are always like 299.99$ instead of 300$). Moreover, there could also be a legal issue involved, selling a 468GB drives could be considered false advertising as it's not the actually size of the drive (because of the SI thing), however, I've rarely seen people suing because they got more than they were contracted for.
m
0
l
April 5, 2011 5:29:51 AM

this is interesting....@ 4745454b.... no bro....u aint wrong....mine was a deliberate marketing plug tht i pulled to invoke more replies to have a broad view of the entire thing... cool... thanks everyone/...
m
0
l
!