How much Disk Space did you get back?

Discussion in 'macOS' started by K3mp, Aug 28, 2009.

  1. K3mp macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    May 4, 2008
    Location:
    S.E. Louisiana
    #1
    I went from 135GB free to 155GB free. Post your amount of recovered space also so we can compare them.
     
  2. quagmire macrumors 603

    quagmire

    Joined:
    Apr 19, 2004
  3. shakenmartini macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Apr 29, 2008
    #3
    I got 23 gigs back.

    I have been very impressed with the Dev builds I have been getting and the final was pretty darn good for a x.x.0 release from Apple
     
  4. bigjnyc macrumors 601

    bigjnyc

    Joined:
    Apr 10, 2008
    #4
    I think the bulk of that has to do with the SL displaying your hard drive space correctly. I dont really know the terminology for the formats what hard drive manufacturers display versus what operating systems display. I think only about 7gbs or so is due to the lighter OSX
     
  5. shakenmartini macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Apr 29, 2008
    #6
    Nope, the % fill of my drive is now different, 23 gigs less.

    The % fill will not change by calculating GB vs GiB. The 23 GiB difference is just that. A lot of this came because the upgrade obliterated a lot of perl module cruft in my old install.
     
  6. ahaley1986 macrumors member

    Joined:
    Feb 23, 2008
  7. CarlisleUnited macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Jan 30, 2007
    Location:
    Nederland
    #8
    178 to 201, I swear we were only promised 6, not that I'm complaining!
     
  8. deboni macrumors member

    deboni

    Joined:
    Jun 9, 2007
    Location:
    Oakland, CA
    #9
    more space

    I, too, saw a surprising gain in available disk space, but I can't say how much. I can say there's more there than there used to be. As a result, Time Machine is now laboring mightily to back up 8.6 GB to my Time Capsule.

    Also, I've noticed that the "grid" that icons align to on the desktop is repositioned, and seems to be a considerable amount of ongoing confusion of apps needing to use or do things to my keychain.

    We'll see how this all falls out. It definitely starts up faster than 10.5

    T
     
  9. rKunda macrumors 65816

    rKunda

    Joined:
    Jul 14, 2008
    #10
    Odd. I had 125.88GB used.
    After install, i had 126.13GB used.
     
  10. dukebound85 macrumors P6

    dukebound85

    Joined:
    Jul 17, 2005
    Location:
    5045 feet above sea level
    #11
    you do realize that SL counts bytes differently right?
     
  11. jav6454 macrumors P6

    jav6454

    Joined:
    Nov 14, 2007
    Location:
    1 Geostationary Tower Plaza
    #12
    Edit - After seeing iStat Pro readings (the base 2 count)

    I saw the actual reading. 91.4GB with Leopard and now I have 97.5GB with Snow Leopard. It was the full 6GB that Apple promised that I got back. I am not complaining.
     
  12. jaw04005 macrumors 601

    jaw04005

    Joined:
    Aug 19, 2003
    Location:
    AR
    #13
    Not to mention, it doesn't install the gigabytes of printer drivers by default like Leopard.
     
  13. kryptonianjorel macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Jul 3, 2009
    #14
    You people didn't gain more than the 7 GB promised :rolleyes:

    As stated above, its GiB vs GB. OSX USED to calculate in GiB (although you thought it was GB) It not calculates in GB.

    so, a KB is now 1000 B instead of 1024, and the same goes for MB and GB.

    Don't believe me? The 320GB Harddrive that always listed as "297GB" total will now list as 320 GB.

    Don't get excited, because now everything you install will take up more space than it says it will
     
  14. CarlisleUnited macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Jan 30, 2007
    Location:
    Nederland
    #15
    Booooooooooo!!! Got excited for no reason :( at least I will feel less ripped off when a 1TB drive barely gives me 900GB
     
  15. Thomas Harte macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Nov 30, 2005
    #16
    Prior to installation of 10.6, my Mac reported 32.32gb free. So, that's 34,393,292,800 bytes.

    Following installation of 10.6, my Mac reports 46.22gb free. So, that's 46,220,000,000 bytes.

    Hence, installing Snow Leopard gave me a net total of 11,826,707,200 bytes available on my hard disk that were not available before — i.e. 11.8 gb or 11.01gb in old money.

    Feel free to tell me why this is not more than the 7gb promised.
     
  16. Code001 macrumors member

    Joined:
    Jun 20, 2006
    Location:
    Florida
    #17
    :confused:

    [​IMG]
     
  17. stainlessliquid macrumors 68000

    Joined:
    Sep 22, 2006
    #18
    Snow Leopard frees up much less than 6. Leopard only took around 12gbs as a fresh install without crap you dont need like languages and printer drivers. Snow Leopard is NOT 6gbs with all the languages and printer drivers unchecked, its more like 10-11. In reality you only gain a couple GBs when you install the same things. People gaining over 20gbs are reading it wrong or had a whole mountain of crap building up over time which got deleted.
     
  18. JPark macrumors 6502a

    Joined:
    Jun 5, 2006
    #19
    I went from 139.33 to 139.36. I thought that was pretty weird that it stayed so close to the same, but after reading these other posts it sort of makes sense. 10.6 is reporting memory differently than it did previously, so I actually did save space. I just have no idea how much.
     
  19. kryptonianjorel macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Jul 3, 2009
  20. MBX macrumors 65816

    Joined:
    Sep 14, 2006
    #21
    I must say i preferred the previous way versus this fake available space.

    We all know if you have a 320gb hd it's probably 290 or 300 you're really able to fill.

    So why does Apple change it now?
     
  21. Eminemdrdre00 macrumors 6502a

    Eminemdrdre00

    Joined:
    May 10, 2008
  22. berkleeboy210 macrumors 68000

    Joined:
    Sep 2, 2004
    Location:
    Boston, Massachusetts
    #23
    How much Disk Space did you get back?

    I got about 25gb back on my MBP.
     
  23. Weepul macrumors regular

    Joined:
    Jan 13, 2008
    #24
    Are you sure the difference isn't due to Snow Leopard's counting HD size in base-10, not base-2?
     
  24. dukebound85 macrumors P6

    dukebound85

    Joined:
    Jul 17, 2005
    Location:
    5045 feet above sea level
    #25
    realize that SL counts space differently

    you really got like 6 back
     

Share This Page