aoa-150 hard drive size sb 160 but is 149

my computer states my hard drive is 149 gig but the specs (and the box) state it should be 160 gig.
I've already used partedit32 to show the hidden PQSERVICE partition and my total size is 149 gig.
Where is my other 11 gig ??
model number is aoa-150 1887

 

1MB on the box is 1000KB

1MB in windows is 1024KB

That's the way it is.

 

Duh! Thanks for the reply.

 

Do the math and those figures don't account for 11gig.

 

1kB = 2^10=1024 bytes
1MB = 2^20=1024*1024=1048576 bytes
1GB = 2*30=1073741824 bytes
160/1.074=149

so the numbers do add up
is it still false advertising? I would say so, but (almost) all manufacturers use the same "trick".

 

You should probably review your high school math notes regarding powers and basic order of operations.

 

I agree, but you see it's not my but it is the fault of calculators. They have caused me and others to not use their brains but use calculators and when you use a calculator that doesn't have the proper features then you don't get the proper results. :twisted:

 

Well, it's neither a trick, nor false advertising.

It's simply the difference between GIGAbyte and GIBIbyte, a common misconception about the naming of bits and bytes. For instance, one KIBIbyte (KiB) equals 1024 byte, whilst one KILObyte (KB) equals 1000 byte. This goes on with MEGAbyte (mB) vs MEBIbyte (MiB), GIGAbyte (gB) vs GIBI (GiB), TERAbyte (TB) vs TIBIbyte (TiB), and so on.

Hope that clears that up, but for more information check Wikipedia: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Binary_prefix

 

LOL.. isn't Kib = 1000bytes and Kilobyte= 1024 bytes?

 

No. Got that mixed up before as well, but it's quite easy to remember:

1) KILO is always 1000. As in Kilogram, or Kilometer.

2) The "bi" in "Kibi", "Mebi", etc. stands for binary, since it's a binary prefix.

 

However, in Windows, the OS still use Kilobyte as 2^10Bytes.

 

And if this was an A-Level IT paper you'd have just failed. I'm not saying you're wrong, i was just reading the post and remembered a mock paper where i wrote something similar and failed because "there are 1024 Kilobytes in a Megabyte, not 1000." :roll: And people wonder how i came out with the lowest grade in the class despite having all the answers in lessons...

 

I don't see where GhettoLevis states otherwise...

The problem is, is stated before, that there's a difference between the decimal system and the binary system. Back in the early days of computers, someone decided it might be convenient to use the decimal terms "kilo", "mega" etc. with computers to indicate NOT the decimal equivalent, but to indicate multiplication by a power of two (where kilo, mega etc. represents a decimal number in the power), because computers simply work with the binary system. Until the lower powers, this isn't very annoying. But for each increment of 1000 in the power, the delta with the decimal system increases with ~2.4%. So 1 kilobyte (KiB) is 2.4% more than a decimal kilobyte (1000 bytes):
1,000 vs 1,024 (2.4%)
1,000,000 vs 1,048,576 (4.9%)
1,000,000,000 vs 1,073,741,824 (7.4%)
So if WD advertises with a HDD-capacity of "1 TB" (decimal), you actually get 0,91 TiB (1*10^12 / 2^40), almost 10% less than a layman would expect! Plus formatting a drive in a OS also reduces the netto capacity of the disk, depending on the filesystem and cluster size. The mentioned 1 TB results in Windows to a size of 0.89 TiB.

 

Very good post Valcon.