External Hd 500gb Is Actually 465gb ?

Discussion in 'Mac Accessories' started by connoisseur, Mar 11, 2008.

  1. connoisseur macrumors member

    Joined:
    Mar 7, 2008
    Location:
    VIRGINIA
    #1
    Long time WD external HD user i own 4 never had any issues
    I bought a Hitatachi 500GB external yesterday for $99
    connected the usb it reads 465Gb where did my other 35gb go..........?

    DO IT TAKE 35GB TO FORMAT
     
  2. TEG macrumors 604

    TEG

    Joined:
    Jan 21, 2002
    Location:
    Langley, Washington
    #2
    Please do some research before posting these questions.

    Your hard drive space is still there, it is just that the Marketing Machines and Computers calculate your size differently. To Marketing, 1KB = 10^3, 1MB = 10^6, 1GB = 10^9, whereas the computer says 1KiB = 2^10 (1024), 1MiB = 2^20, and 1GiB = 2^20. This is due to the computer using binary numbers and with the values being close it was decided to do this instead of wasting extra space to calculate the values. Your drive is 500 GB, but only 465GiB, it is the same value, only calculated differently.

    TEG
     
  3. CanadaRAM macrumors G5

    CanadaRAM

    Joined:
    Oct 11, 2004
    Location:
    On the Left Coast - Victoria BC Canada
    #3
  4. connoisseur thread starter macrumors member

    Joined:
    Mar 7, 2008
    Location:
    VIRGINIA
    #4
    thanks i did the search thing first couldn't find my answer but you guys really came through thanks again
     
  5. trav1085 macrumors newbie

    Joined:
    Oct 8, 2006
    #5
    Uhhh you mean 45GB, why didn't anybody else point this out, or did they think it was a clear typo?
     
  6. atluten macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Mar 24, 2008
    #6
    I think 35 is the correct number here. 500-35=465
     
  7. Apple Ink macrumors 68000

    Apple Ink

    Joined:
    Mar 7, 2008
    #7
    As a rule of a thumb.... actual HDD capacity = Advertised Capacity - 7% to 10% of Advt Capacity!
     
  8. viggen61 macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Jul 24, 2002
    Location:
    New Jersey
    #8
    While the decimal vs binary argument has some merit, there is also the "Unformatted" vs. "Formatted" capacity. The box gives the "unformatted capacity" (look for the asterisk and fine print). Get Info will show you the "formatted" capacity.

    Just like CRT TV sets. The "screen size" is not the same as the "viewable area".

    Look at the disk in Disk Utility. It should show you the raw capacity as something over 500 billion bytes, but then the formatted capacity will be less. Different formats can also take up slightly different amounts of space. But I wouldn't base the choice on that...

    :apple::apple:
     
  9. andyblila macrumors 65816

    andyblila

    Joined:
    Jul 8, 2008
    Location:
    On My iPhone, or my iPad?
    #9
    Welcome to MR! In case you failed 1st grade Math 65 + 35 =100 and 65 + 45=110!
     
  10. Michael CM1 macrumors 603

    Joined:
    Feb 4, 2008
    #10
    This "mislabeling" is as old as the itty bitty "pre-cooked weight" on hamburgers.

    I think Mac OS will use numbers like 512MB and 1GB to display RAM (it doesn't go all specific like the BIOS of a PC does), but it doesn't mask hard drives. Why manufacturers are able to get away with such rounding is beyond me. They should have to put how much you actually have if you plug the sucker up. Yes, it might mess up the pretty "500GB" on the box, but I think we can get used to it. We buy 16.9 fluid ounces of water and numberous decimals of chips.
     
  11. Chundles macrumors G4

    Chundles

    Joined:
    Jul 4, 2005
    #11
    It's not the manufacturers fault.

    If I had gone through my degree calling 1024 joules a kilojoule I would have been laughed out of university.

    It's the computer makers faults for allowing SI prefixes in situations where it's not appropriate.
     

Share This Page