jameshanley39@yahoo.co.uk wrote
> Rod Speed <rod.speed....@gmail.com> wrote
>> jameshanle...@yahoo.co.uk wrote
>>> Rod Speed <rod.speed....@gmail.com> wrote
>>>> jameshanle...@yahoo.co.uk wrote
>>>>> Jethro <Wil...@somewhere.org> wrote

>>>>>> I notice there is always a great disparity between stated hard
>>>>>> drive capacity and actual usable capacity after formatting.

>>>>>> Is there a chart or other paper anywhere showing maybe comparisons of
>>>>>> this between drives, and maybe an explanation of why and how it happens?

>>>>> the relationship between a megabyte( 2^20) and an approximation
>>>>> of the megabyte, (10^6), is a factor of 1.048576.

>>>>> Meaning that to get from one to the other, you multiply or divide by
>>>>> 1.048576 A megabyte is 1,048,576 bytes. The Approximation is 1,000,000.

>>>>> Somtimes one is called the binary megabyte and the other
>>>>> the decimal megabyte, but it's not a different number system.

>>>> It is actually, different base.

>>>>> The approximation or decimal megabyte is just using 10^ instead of 2^.

>>>> So its a different number system.

>>> No,

>> Fraid so.

> what is the point your style?

What is the point of yours ?

> I go on to explain why it's not a different number system.

And I went on to explain why its not and rubbed your nose in what a number base actually is.

> You just deny everything.

Bare faced lie.

>>> 2^x cannot even be binary. The number 2 doesn't even exist in binary.

>> Utterly mangled and completely irrelevant to which base is used.

> I am clear in telling you what I mean.

Pity that is utterly mangled and completely irrelevant to which base is used.

>>> Perhaps the term base has 2 meanings.
>>> Base^Exponent, and base as in number system.

>> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Number_system

>>> But Binary - as far as I know - only applies to number systems, and
>>> that is the term I use here. It is in that context that I use the word base.

>> And you can have any base you like in that context.

> Yes, and in that context you can't write 2 and call it binary.

Wrong. That is the common description of a base 2 number system.

> I don't know what from that wikipedia article contradicts me.

Its rubbing your nose in the fact that you havent got a clue about what a number system actually is.

>>>>> The 10^6 figure is a smaller unit.. So more of it are used to
>>>>> equal a corresponding amount of the the 'binary megabyte', which
>>>>> is a larger unit. "they say" that Hard Drive marketting people use
>>>>> the 'decimal megabyte' because it sounds better, larger numbers.

>>>> Only the pig ignorant fools. Its the SI standard, legally required in many countrys.

>>> Were they to not use the SI standard, and to use
>>> [what you deny to be] the standard meaning in computing,

>> The binary form is nothing like the standard meaning in computing.
>> The decimal form is mostly whats used in computing, most
>> obviously with cpu speeds, comms speeds, etc etc etc .

> I don't mean that the binary form is used in all aspects of computer talk.

It isnt used when stating the capacity of the hard drive either.

> My email address has the numbers 3 and 9 in it, yet it
> isn't jameshanley00111001 (those are two nibbles).

Irrelevant to how the capacity of hard drives is universally stated.

>> Its only MEMORY that has an intrinsically binary organisation
>> where the binary form is in fact commonly used.

> I know a little about addressing memory and
> nothing about addressing data on a hard drive.

Each sector has a logical block number. Nothing
intrinsically binary in the organisation of the sectors.

> Perhaps there's some kind of binary thinking in the organisation
> of one that isn't in the organisation of the other. But addresses are
> stored in binary, whether in memory or on a hard drive. In Bytes.

Irrelevant to the LBA which is just a linear number of the sectors on the drive.

>>> then I am not convinced that they'd be sued for
>>> understating the specification of their product.

>> More fool you.

> Were it to happen, I wouldn't be "fooled". Fool implies victim.

No it doesnt. Its just a foolish conviction in this case.

> I couldn't care less. I may be amused though.

Irrelevant to whether that conviction is foolish.

>>>> Its the binary gigabyte that makes no sense with something
>>>> like a hard drive which isnt intrinsically binary organised.
>>>> And the 1.44MB floppy is actually a weird binary/decimal hybrid.

>>> I haven't read about how they organise their data, but
>>> electronics knows HIGHS and LOWS, ACTIVE or Not.
>>> At the lowest level, it appears to me to be binary.

>> The lowest level is completely irrelevant. Clearly cpu speeds have never been
>> stated using binary multipliers, even tho they are certainly digital devices.-

> neither cpu speed nor multipliers are measured in Megabytes.

The Mega and Giga PREFIXES are used when stating the cpu speed.

> (And I suppose that neither are even stored in binary, except perhaps
> for the sake of the human techie to see those values in the BIOS)

> I was referring to Megabytes.

What was being discussed was the Mega and Giga PREFIXES.

> Not to all numbers used while discussing computers

Pathetic.